Mid-Year Report and Annual Reports
ARLIS/NA Summer Educational Institute for Visual
and Image Management Implementation Team
February 10, 2005
Trudy Jacoby, ARLIS/NA Co-chair
Maureen Burns, VRA Co-chair
firstname.lastname@example.org , 949-824-8027, 949-824-4298 (fax)
Burns, University of California, Co-chair
Eileen Fry, Indiana University,
Development and Future Local Arrangements
Trudy Jacoby, Princeton University,
Mark Pompelia, Rice University, Print
and Web Design
Corey Schultz, Stanford University,
John Taormina, Duke University, Local
Karin Whalen, Reed University, Budget
and Future Local Arrangements
Ann Whiteside, University of
Virginia, Instructor Liaison
The purpose of the SEI is to provide information professionals with valuable training and education in the area of visual resources and image management. Under the direction of the Executive Boards of the Art Libraries Society of North America (ARLIS/NA) and the Visual Resources Association (VRA), the Implementation Team (IT) is charged as the management group for the Summer Educational Institute (SEI) providing or coordinating administration, local arrangements, registration, scheduling, fundraising, publicity, curriculum, instruction, and teaching materials.
Before the new leadership was even in place, John Taormina at Duke University was beginning preparations to host the SEI 2005. He is in charge of local arrangements (as well as sharing the experiences of 2004). Confirmed the venue at Duke University and scheduled the SEI for July 5-9, 2005.
Successfully transitioned to new
co-chairs with the support of the local planner (and Mary Wasserman, past
co-chair) who shared information and experiences from the 2004 SEI.
Formed an Implementation Team with veterans of 2004 and new members from both ARLIS/NA and VRA. Developed a budget proposal accepted by ARLIS/NA and VRA. Assigned roles to each IT member and started communication amongst the group with background information from 2004, the first year of the SEI.
Agreement was reached that there
does not need to be a separate SEI development function, but it would be better
to coordinate with the ARLIS/NA and VRA Development Committees. This may be revisited.
Developed and launched the web site (design and development by Mark Pompelia) providing background and logistical information about the 2005 SEI. Communicated with people on the SEI 2004 waiting list and set up priority registration period one week in advance of open enrollment.
Designed an “application” form to
collect information about potential SEI future sites from interested
Commenced SEI 2005 registration reaching the break-even point in eight days (37 confirmed as of 02/04/2005).
SEI 2004 instructors were asked for
e-mail feedback about last year’s experiences to gauge their interest in
teaching again and/or changing the curriculum. Reviewed the evaluations and calculated
class ratings providing the IT with summary information to inform curriculum and
The SEI-IT is presently in the
process of discussing and deciding upon the curriculum and instructors for
2005. Ann Whiteside is poised as
liaison to lead the group of instructors in refining and developing the courses
and teaching materials.
Planned and will be facilitating
SEI-IT meetings at both the ARLIS/NA and VRA national conferences.
Consider publicity for the SEI 2005
if it has openings or develop a waiting list if the SEI 2005 fills
Continue to move forward with SEI
2005 planning and implementation.
Work with local planner and Duke
Conference Services to make lodging information available to attendees allowing
for accommodation reservations and travel planning.
Include any additional information
necessary for the attendees on the Web site.
Continue to use the 2004
evaluations to develop local planning and program improvements.
regularize the efforts needed to obtain
sponsorship and funding for various elements of the 2005 SEI in collaboration
with the two existing
organizational Development Committees.
Complete the final daily schedule and
continue to develop the curriculum and course materials with the
Determine the venues for the SEI over
the next two years and consider continuity questions.
Consider long term goals and report on future planning issues, including curriculum adjustments for future.
Discuss whether there should be both
an implementation team and a joint planning body.
Board Action Requested:
Encourage the Development Committees of both organizations to assist with sponsorships and funding (or make decision to leave this function with the IT).
Institute for Visual Resources and Image Management
In 2002 an ARLIS/NA-VRA Joint
Education Task Force (JETF) was formed and charged to “develop an infrastructure
and curriculum for a week-long summer institute of continuing education in image
collection/visual resources management; to negotiate instructors and teaching
materials for the institute; and to arrange its first venue and program schedule
at Rice University (Houston, Texas) for early summer 2003.” The first formal
meeting of the JETF took place at the joint ARLIS/NA-VRA conference in St. Louis
in 2002. Subsequent meetings occurred at VRA conferences in Houston (2003) and
Portland (2004) and ARLIS/NA conferences in Baltimore (2003) and New York
In 2003 it was decided to change
the original venue from Rice University to Duke University since the VRA
conference was held in Houston in 2003 and ARLIS/NA’s 2005 conference would also
be in that city. The Department of
Art and Art History at Duke University, the home department of Co-Chair John
Taormina, agreed to host the first institute and also agreed to contribute
$1,000 in sponsorship. The
institute’s inaugural offering was also changed to Summer 2004, to allow for
further curriculum development.
A joint agreement between the two
organizations was signed in September 2003. The dates for the SEI were set for
July 7-10, 2004. It was decided that the institute would accept 20-45
registrants. An implementation team of eight members was created to be the
management group to deal with administration, registration, scheduling,
fundraising, publicity, print and web design, instructor liaison, and local
arrangements. The original Joint Education Task Force would continue in an
advisory role. Board liaisons to both organizations were also
In January 2004 the SEI website was
developed and launched. Online registration opened on Monday, February 9, 2004.
We reached our limit of forty-five students within eight working days. A waiting
list was then started, which resulted in an additional fifty-four applicants.
The waiting list was closed May 26, 2004. Subsequently, five registrants
cancelled and five replacements were contacted from the first eight people on
the waiting list.
From January through March,
instructors were chosen and specific syllabi were prepared and shared among
them. From April through June local arrangements were finalized, course content
was refined, and instructional materials were prepared for inclusion in a 3-ring
binder, which was distributed to every student and instructor. The binder
contained fourteen sections corresponding to course modules and held 235 pages
of handouts, PowerPoint printouts, worksheets, class exercises, articles, and
bibliographies. Additionally, the
students received the ARLIS/NA-VRA Guidelines to the Visual Resources
Profession and two publications generously donated by the Getty, Introduction of Art Image Access and Introduction to Imaging. A local Duke
folder, a packet of vendor brochures, and an SEI memento folder were prepared
and distributed to each student and instructor.
The final daily schedule (see
attached) consisted of an introductory module, 26 teaching modules, three
discussion modules, and a closing “graduation” module was refined during the
last months before the institute. In addition, the 4-day workshop included a
daily morning and afternoon break, a lunch hour, and an opening reception. Each
day generally ran from 8:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., admittedly a long day, but the
result of losing the original fifth day of the institute through a decision made
by the Boards.
The inaugural Summer Education
Institute launched at 9:00 a.m. on Wednesday, July 7, 2004 on a hot, humid,
sunny Southern day during which the heat index reached 105 degrees. Although
some local arrangements issues and some tweaking and rearranging of the
curriculum need to be addressed—both expected occurrences in such a new
venture—attendees’ expectations were clearly met or exceeded. From all
accounts—registration figures, sponsorship, weeklong comments, student
evaluations and post-institute feedback, instructor comments—it is fair to say
that the first offering of the Summer Educational Institute was a huge success.
There was an obvious pride in this group being the first graduating “class” of
the institute. Already, “reunions” at the VRA Miami and ARLIS/NA Houston
conference have been suggested.
We had, overall, a very positive
and enthusiastic response from the forty-five attendees and eleven instructors
during the four days of the SEI.
The group was very much engaged during the classes and breaks, they asked
questions and also commented and contributed to discussions. There were a few logistical issues that
came up with travel and dining, and those were taken care of with expedience by
John Taormina and Duke’s Conference Services.
Evaluations were distributed to the students that asked them to rate the course modules, local arrangements, and general experience based on their expectations.
We have received twenty-three evaluations and
are in the process of reviewing them.
Again, in general, they have been very positive. We will summarize the evaluations so the
2005 Implementation Team and instructors can use them in planning for next
A certificate of completion was given to each
attendee, and certificates of recognition were given to instructors. Instructors also received an honorarium
for teaching, based on $100 per instructional hour
1. Attached is the SEI budget with the
actual figures that we have to date. Outstanding expenses include the cost of
the lunches for students and instructors (awaiting invoice from Duke Conference
Services); Duke Conference Services’ fees; cost of fifty-five copies of Guidelines for VR Profession (awaiting
invoice from ARLIS/NA); instructor expenses beyond honoraria (awaiting all
reimbursement forms); and some small items in existing categories. We have come
in under-budget in almost all categories. We did have to rent a shuttle bus for
Saturday morning ($225), which was unplanned, and the instructor mini-van for
the week cost more than budgeted. However, barring extremely high and
unanticipated instructor travel expenses, we are in very good shape and look to
see a profit of over $10,000.
2. In addition to the
$1500 each organization put into the SEI, outside funding was obtained from
three departments at Duke University (Department of Art and Art History, Office
of Interdisciplinary Studies, Perkins Library), the Art Institute of Chicago,
two anonymous donors (one an Implementation Team member, one a student in the
Institute), and vendor Two Cat Digital. The present budget, with actual figures
inserted, can serve as the model for 2005. It may not be necessary to obtain any
additional funding if the attendance figure of 45 is met again (which it should
be with the wait list so long). This could serve as the sustainable model and
eliminate the need to fund-raise year-to-year, as the institute moves to other
institutions. If outside funding is desired, we recommend that both
organizations’ Development Committees become involved and representatives sit on
the Implementation Team. This would allow easier coordination with other
fundraising activities of the organizations.
The following are recommendations
of the Co-Chairs related to achieving sustainability in the planning structure
of the SEI from year to year.
A. Future Venues and Local Arrangements.
1. We recommend that venues be determined two
years in advance in order to secure space for classrooms, housing, and
dining. Universities become booked
up very quickly for summer programs.
2. We also request the SEI happen earlier, in
3. John Taormina is willing to have
the 2005 SEI at Duke University, if space is available. This will allow for continuity as we
work on how to structure planning for SEI in a sustainable manner.
4. Both Boards will please approve
having the venue at Duke at this meeting, if they agree on Duke, so John can
make arrangements soon.
5. Please note if the Boards agree to have it
at Duke, John will participate in the 2005 SEI as the local arrangements person,
but is unable to serve as Co-Chair again.
6. One suggestion for a 2006 venue is Indiana
University because it is in the Midwest and not near current conference
venues. It also has a Library
1. The Duke University Office of Conference
Services was quite helpful, and future SEI planners should investigate how that
type of campus department would support local arrangements at a given
1. Both John Taormina and Mary Wassermann
have served as Co-Chairs since the 2002 St. Louis Conference. The St. Louis
Conference was the official starting point for the SEI, where the first meeting
of the Joint Educational Task Force on Continuing Education, charged with
planning and implementing the inaugural SEI, was held.
2. John will continue through summer to wrap-up the 2004 SEI and, from the Fall 2004 on, will be assisting as the local arrangements person for Duke if Duke is the 2005 venue.
3. A new VRA 2005 SEI Co-Chair should be
appointed by the VRA Board for Fall 2004.
4. Mary Wassermann would like to rotate off
as Co-Chair by Fall 2004 as well, and is willing to assist a new ARLIS/NA
Co-Chair and the team in an advisory capacity in the planning process for 2005
until the 2005 ARLIS/NA conference.
5. Ideally, a new ARLIS/NA 2005 SEI Co-Chair
will be appointed by the ARLIS/NA Board for Fall 2004.
There are planning documents we will pass along to new Co-Chairs, with
recommendations on how they should be adapted and used. These are:
7. It is recommended (as in items 3 & 5) that each organization, ARLIS/NA and VRA, select Co-Chairs to work together on SEI planning. This is for several reasons:
1. Conference-to-conference appointments do not fit in well with the cycles of SEI.
One other suggestion has been to have two-year appointments, with one
Co-Chair from one organization serving their first year with a second-year
Co-Chair from the other organization.
Both Co-Chairs should not be expected to attend both ARLIS/NA and VRA
conferences if they cannot receive funding from their institutions.
Dissolution of the
ARLIS/NA-VRA Joint Educational Task Force on Continuing Education (JETF)
The Co-Chairs recommend the current Joint Educational Task Force be
dissolved, since the job of this JETF, as outlined in the Charge, has been
The following are recommendations from the
2004 SEI Co-Chairs for the 2005 and subsequent Summer Institutes.
1. An Implementation Team (SEI-IT) should be
set up to handle planning for 2005, using the existing planning documents for
2. The SEI-IT should be comprised of individuals from both organizations.
3. The team will need to address the following:
4. A few of the individuals from the 2004 IT
are interested in serving again; John and Mary can provide their names.
5. Each Board should also appoint Board
6. Please note, the roles of instructors and
the SEI-IT are distinct from one another
7. An e-mail list should be set up for the
team; this was invaluable in maintaining continuous communication.
8. Meetings should be held at each
9. Additionally, Co-Chairs should meet in the
fall, at the venue if possible, with the local arrangements person, since the
local person will no longer also be a Co-chair. Travel and accommodation expenses should
be incorporated into the SEI budget.
1. The Co-Chairs recommend a new agreement be drawn up and signed no later than October 1, 2004, for the 2005 SEI.
The Co-Chairs would like to thank both Boards for the opportunity to represent ARLIS/NA and VRA as the two organizations sought to develop and implement such a much-needed educational workshop as the Summer Educational Institute on Visual Resources and Image Management. We would also like to thank the members of the Joint Educational Task Force and Implementation Team, the instructors, the first class of the inaugural institute, and our donors for their dedication, interest, and involvement. It has been an honor and a pleasure to serve both organizations in this capacity.
ARLIS/NA Co-Chair, SEI
Philadelphia Museum of Art
VRA Co-Chair, SEI