Institutional members – NOT

Proposed Article IV Membership and Dues

Section 1. Composition. Any individual or institution who supports the purpose and mission of AAUW may become a member of AAUW. The provisions set forth in this section are the sole requirement for admissibility to membership.

I’d delete the “or institution”. We’ve gone a long way to keeping it simple. Let’s do that!

I’d add a separate article that says that institutions may affiliate with AAUW (as “partners”? some other word?) and give the board the authority to define the terms of such an affiliation. [Businesses as well as educational institutions, etc.] But I’d remove institutions from any notion of “membership” except, perhaps, to say that a requirement of the affiliation is that the primary contact must be a member (in the ordinary, people, sense).

I’ve seen conflating institutions and people get us into hairy issues with how the data is stored on members. In my experience, C/U representatives  (the people) are the ones who can provide real benefit to the organization — through the branches, through their other contacts on campus, etc. — and we need to connect with them as people, not just through their institutional affiliation. For instance, it needs to be clear that C/U representatives can join branches — this gets less clear if it is “Mega State University” instead of “Professor Jane Doe” who is called the “member”.

8/18 update: Other open discussions are occurring on the web. No need to keep this “private”.

Changes to the AAUW bylaws

A proposed set of bylaws for the new AAUW (formed when the Association and the Foundation combine their assets and efforts as of July 1, 2009) was distributed through e-mail chains last week. It, along with a form for member comment, should be on the web site this week.

While I will be making formal comments through the form, I’ll also be using this site to work through some of my questions about the new bylaws — but most of those articles will be visible only if you register for this site. All are welcome — my goal is just to keep these comments out of search engines and such.

Watch this space for more details.

Script to work with list of members in Facebook group

Okay, I’m now the administrator of a largish Facebook group and facing the problem of finding a particular member when I want to add them as an admin. The following script may be helpful to convert the list of all members to a delimited text file that can be imported to Excel, and used for that purpose or other metrics.

Notes:

  • You can get the list of all members from the “edit officers” page.
  • My version of Excel (2002) isn’t working too well with non ASCII characters in names. If anyone knows a UTF-8 converter that could be used here (to, say, remove diacritical marks and such — we’re not dealing with huge amounts of non-ASCII data), please let me know.
  • There’s nothing but name and network here. But if you’ve got another list of stakeholders, it might be able to match your Facebook supporters with that.
  • Networks don’t show for some folks. It may be a problem with people who are in more than one network — haven’t really investigated.


# convert list of members (most recent to earliest) from a facebook group
# format
# First{additional} Last {(Network)}
# to the format
# Number:First{additional}:Last{:Network}
# where number is earliest to most recent


sed 's/make officer//' | # delete cruft
sed 's/^ *\* //' | # delete more cruft
awk '{printf "%s\t%s\n", NR,$0}' | # number lines
sort -nr | sed 's/^[0-9]*.//' | # print in order of last to first then delete numbers
awk '{printf "%s:%s\n", NR, $0}' | # renumber in the order folks joined the group, with number as first field
sed 's/ \([A-Z][^ ]*\) (/:\1:/' | # if a network, put separators before last name and network
sed 's/ \([A-Z][a-z]*\)$/:\1/' | # if no network, put separator before last name
sed 's/)//' # delete trailing ) for lines with a network

Using Facebook for AAUW

These documents were publicized through standard AAUW channels about a month ago. There may be some interest from folks who aren’t in that loop.

Dear AAUW Webmanagers and AAUW Newsletter Editors:

I am pleased to announce the release of the second paper in the series “Facebook for AAUW”.

The links for these papers are:

#1: http://docs.google.com/View?docid=ddzhjjgr_41fmk9jr
#2: http://docs.google.com/View?docID=dg5fnwtg_0c7srw2wx

The first document addresses “what is Facebook” and gives brief instructions on how to get started. The second document is a more in depth discussion of why AAUW members are finding Facebook a good platform for connecting with each other and how they are using it to advance the mission.

The documents have been authored collaboratively by a completely unofficial group of members from across the country who came together in Facebook. Many of them have found Facebook a comfortable place to exchange information on a wide range of topics — personal and professional as well as AAUW. We invite you to join us to find out if Facebook would be a way to expand your network and amplify your voice.

The documents are written for the “digital immigrants” — those of us over a certain age who may want some background information before jumping into this new environment. However, if you’d rather just explore on your own, feel free to skip the papers and go straight to exploring Facebook. Once you’ve joined, please do also join the AAUW group that you’ll find at http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2419848109

At least one state convention will be using this information as part of one of their workshops. You may wish to use the link to the AAUW group or these documents on your web sites or in your newsletters to let your members know that there is an AAUW presence there.

Thanks, all.

-Nancy

Questions on changes to LAF

Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 13:19:07 -0400To: Jill R. Birdwhistell
From: Nancy Shoemaker <nancy.shoemaker@aauwnc.org>
Subject: Remaining LAF questions

Jill –

I think you’re the right person to receive these remaining questions about LAF from AAUW NC. If not, please forward.

I’ve read all the information sent to the state presidents at least twice –
o April 4 Q&A
o April 9 LAF Express
o April 24 Updated talking points

I understand the new focus moves from “sex discrimination in higher education” to the broader “sex discrimination in the workplace.” I agree that the shift from plaintiff support to support for “world changing” cases makes sense and may allow us to increase our impact. I also agree that, for instance, the 4/4 Q&A discussion of “why we still need donations to LAF” needs to be reframed, but I think that can be done by concentrating on what’s being accomplished rather than highlighting that it will be staff who will accomplish it.

Questions whose answers might help bring members support:

1. What, specifically, will be funded under the new model? [It’s somewhat easy to see that there are costs involved in mobilizing the members to support the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, but if her case had still been in the courts, what expenses would we have to demonstrate/publicize our support for the case? ]

2. What is AAUW’s added-value in the coalition of groups that form around a particular case? What expertise do we need to bring to the table? our research? will we have any legal staff (or contractors) preparing briefs? is this support an expense in #1?

3. It may have been a minor part of the LAF program, but under the plaintiff-support model, there was always the possibility that members would be asked to sit in court rooms to demonstrate the organization’s support. Would this be part of the new model, or is there any way for the “average member” to expect to support these cases other than through donations?

4. How will the advisory board that determines that a case is of national significance be selected? [I heard staff and ??? — making recommendations to the board. Certainly one would expect that outsiders would be needed — but are there a few folks from our current membership to be involved? as on the model of the EF review panels? Will there be an open call for volunteers for the panels? I’d suggest that transparency in selection of cases — though it may be less of an issue than when selecting plaintiffs under the old model — can be an excellent complement to transparency in financial reporting.]

5. Are there other ways that members will participate in the new model?

The AAUW NC Summer newsletter will go to press at the end of May — I’m hoping to have a few crisp paragraphs to explain this change to the members. I’ve probably got the information I need, but will look for other information that engages the “community” part of the value promise (as well as the “breaking barriers” piece).

Thanks so much for all you’re doing to advance equity!

-Nancy