2/20/02 Meeting Minutes

Minnesota Professional Development Council

February 20, 2003

12:15 p.m. – 3:15 p.m.

Junior Achievement Center (Maplewood, MN)

Attendees: Judy Canney (MN Community Technical College), Katie Connor (MnAEYC – Professional Development Program), Cindy Croft (Project Exceptional – Concordia), Peggy Cunningham (DHS – Licensing), Sue Dion (Concordia University, MnSACA), Deborah Fitzwater-Dewey (MnAEYC), Claudia Freund (Resources for Child Caring), Dawn Goldschmitz (Development Corporation for Children), Michelle Hahn (Healthy Child Care Minnesota), Sandy Heidemann (The Saint Paul Foundation), Marie Johnson (Community Action Council, MN CCR&R Network), Michael Luft (MnAEYC – Professional Development Program), Heidi Malloy (Metropolitan State University), Wendy Nielsen (Resources for Child Caring), Barbara O’Sullivan (MN Dept of Education), Valerie Peterson (MN CCR&R Network), Michelle Thole (MLFCCA), Kathy Wilken (MLFCCA), Mary Wynne (MN CCR&R Network)

I. Welcome & Introductions

Michael Luft, the meeting facilitator, called the meeting to order. He introduced Sue Dion as the meeting Chair. The meeting began as each Council member shared a story of something that gave him/her hope in this scary time of budget cuts and a looming war in Iraq.

II. Review Draft of Historical Document (Michael Luft)

The point of writing this document for the PD Council would be to have a historical reference as well as a starting point for new members. After spending 10 minutes reading and editing for clarity, the Council shared their comments and corrections, which will be given to the Welcome & Orientation workgroup for further updating. The W&O workgroup will bring an updated version of the historical document to a future meeting for approval. The final document will become one piece of the Welcome & Orientation packet for every member of the PD Council.

III. Structure Workgroup Report (Michelle Thole)

A. Voting Process

• The Structure workgroup recommended the Gladiator consensus process for voting. Council members would vote thumbs up (yay), down (nay), or sideways (neutral).
• If everyone member votes thumbs either up or sideways, then we move on with the decision.
• If any member votes thumbs down, then the Council addresses any and all concerns. If after a second vote, there are still negative votes, then the decision is returned to workgroup.
• We should call this voting process the “Russell Crowe” or just “Crowe” vote.

§ Vote: Thumbs Up on the “Crowe” vote process.

B. Getting Commitment

• The Structure committee proposed having an application process to be on the PD Council.
  • Council members would commit to serve on the Council for a specific amount of time.
  • Our goal would be to gather large, diverse representation in every sector of the early childhood education and school age care field.
• Upon discussion the group suggested:
  • Those who are not accepted should be told how they can still be involved in the work of the Council. They could still serve on workgroups. They would be told to use a Council member to voice their ideas and concerns at the Council meetings.
  • The Council should not be exclusionary. The Council should carefully articulate that it’s goal is to be inclusive.
  • Having representatives from different sections of the field would encourage balance within the Council.
  • The Council should look at the skill sets that are represented, and not focus only on organizational representation.
• Questions:
  • If someone was interested in the Council, but not sure whether they wanted to participate, could he/she join for a short time?
  • What if the Council does not have full representation? What if the Council wants to have representation from 15 different groups, but can get only 10 groups to participate?

C. Evaluating Progress

• The Structure workgroup distributed a workplan template for use by each workgroup.
  • Workgroups would use this workplan template to record their progress. This would provide a standard method to express workgroup progress to the larger PD Council.
  • Chairs from each workgroup should make sure that their workplan gets on the web too.
• Upon discussion:
  • MnSACA uses a similar reporting process for their workgroups, and it’s been helpful in viewing progress at a glance.
  • The Structure group should give an example for each column in this template, because some of them are questionable.

IV. Vision & Strategies Workgroup Report

A. States’ Overview and Gap Analysis (Michael Luft)

• Handout – “Review of Other States’ Professional Development Systems”
  • Michael overviewed the professional development systems of Oklahoman, Wisconsin, New Mexico, New Jersey, and Montana with the Council.
• Handout – “Status of Minnesota Career Development System Elements”
  • From the Wheelock College Report on 2001 Early Childhood/Scool-Age Care Development Survey and comments from the Structure and Vision workgroups.
  • This piece may be added to the Welcome & Orientation packet.
  • On website
  • It’s a snapshot of where we stand as a state and how we compared to other states.
  • Please send any additional comments on this document to Katie Connor at kconnor@aeyc-mn.org or 651-646-8689.
• Discussion:
  • There was some concern that health and safety were not included as a component of a career development system.
    • These components were identified by Wheelock College.
    • Health and Safety are a large part of the Core Competencies.
    • We could have drop-downs under each element that would be more specific to Minnesota’s components.
  • There should be a listing for each element of who is spearheading each effort and contact info to get more information.
• The Vision and Strategies workgroup will continue to work on this document.

B. Vision and Purpose Statement of Council (Marie Johnson)

• Handout – Mission and Vision Statement for the PD Council
• Vote – The Council chose to use the word “youth” instead of “SA/OST” (School-Age Care/Out of School Time)
• Vote – The Council accepted the Mission statement as put forth by the Vision & Strategies workgroup.
• The Council discussed and made changes in the Vision statement as put forth by the Vision & Strategies workgroup.
• Vote – The Vision statement development is on the right track, but still needs more work from the Vision workgroup.

C. Gallery Walk of Workgroups (Mary Wynne)

• The Vision & Strategies workgroup came eight potential workgroups for the Council.
  1. Resource Development and Communication (Website, Data Systems, Print Materials, Plan for Dissemination and Maintenance)
  2. Training and Trainers (Training Approval based on Core Competencies, Trainer Credential, Trainer Registry based on Trainer Credential)
  3. Core Competencies (Complete Core Competency document and make user friendly)
  4. Advocacy, Legislation, and Funding (Legislative statute for Minnesota Professional Development Council)
  5. Practitioner (Registry, Compensation)
  6. Articulation (With-in Higher Education System, Credit for prior learning to include non-credit training)
  7. New Program Development (For Example – Apprenticeship Program)
  8. New Member Orientation and Structure

• The Council split into groups of 4 people and discussed each of the 8 potential workgroups. The small groups discussed whether they thought that each of the 8 suggestions should be a focus area for the Council at some point. Then, the small groups decided which of the 8 suggestions should be a priority for the Council. Finally, the small groups offered their comments for each of the 8 suggestions.
• The small groups voted that the following topics should be considered priorities for the PD Council: #1,2,3,4,7,8
• The Vision workgroup will consider the comments that the small groups made for each topic. At the next Council meeting, we will vote on which topics we believe should become Council workgroups.
• Upon Discussion
  • We should determine lead organizations for projects that have already started.
  • There should be better descriptions for each workgroup, so that Council members know which group they would like to join.
    • Focus of workgroups will come from their members.
  • Questions were raised about the usefulness and effectiveness of pursuing a mandate.

V. Increasing Participation and Setting Next Council Meeting Date

VI. Meeting Review –What went well, what would we like to happen next time

• Things moved quickly and smoothly this time
• We should receive paperwork beforehand to have time to look over it before the meeting.
• The amount of pre-meeting work done was impressive and helpful.
• Workgroups were well prepared.
• Dramatic change and progress from the first Council meeting.
• Respectful work and communication.
• Task-oriented.
• Renewed energy
• There should be phone calls to those people who were at the first meeting, but not this one. Welcome & Orientation workgroup should work on this.
• Recruit for workgroups.
• There should be more structured rules on motions being brought forward and being voted on.

The next meeting of this group will be:

Tuesday, March 18, 2003

12:15 p.m. – 3:15 p.m.

Ramsey County Public Library

2180 Hamline Avenue North, Roseville, MN