Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Speakers vs refreshments
So, my first question. We've been paying about $50 a talk for catered refreshments. They are rather nice, but the question has been raised whether we might be better off using the money to pay travel for at least a few invited speakers, rather than relying entirely on research and personal trips to provide speakers. If we decided to allocate money to pay for speakers, we'd also need to decide who should decide on the invitations. What are your thoughts: should we leave well enough alone, or change?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
First off I think that paying for a limited number of speakers would be extremely useful. The number of speakers I think to start with should be about 2/semester. Say Early October, November/December, February and March/April.
We should plan that the speakers not be the same week as other large colloquia. For example the Big Apple Colloquia, Asimov Debate, or even the Frontiers of Astrophysics (Hayden Talks).
Who should decide? I would suggest that nominations be made and that a small committee make the decision. Perhaps 2 Curators and a member(s) at large (other members of the department). The nominations could take place twice per year. Once in August and again in January.
I think a nomination should not only include the invited name but a paragraph as to why this particular person should be considered. In other words what research/ results make them a good choice.
Of course you don't need to pay the Hayden lecturers, as we already do that, as part of the Hayden Programs.
Post a Comment