Executive Committee Minutes

ACIS -- Marquette, Milwaukee5 June 2002

President Gillespie called the meeting to order at 4:45 pm.

Present:Michael Gillespie, David Gardiner, Monica Brennan, John Harrington, Fitz Smith, Philip Freeman, Jim Rogers (ex officio), Ed Madden, Bob Savage, Margot Backus, Nancy Curtin, Tim Meagher, Charlotte Headrick, Kathryn Conrad.

I.Officers’ reports

President: Michael Gillespie thanked the officers and the executive as a whole for their work over the past year.

Vice-President:John Harrington reported on the Book Prizes.The recommendations from Miller's report have been realized in this year's solicitation process; and over the next year or two,the committees will have a better sense of the cycle of journal schedules for the publication of announcements.The question was raised whether ACIS should invest in paid advertisements to help solicit more submissions.Gillespie suggested that if the chairs of any of the book prize committees would like to place an advertisement, they should do so and submit the receipts to the Treasurer.Rogers suggested an advertisement/ announcement in the TLS; Curtin suggested one in the ILS. 

Harrington also reported on the possibilities for future sites of the ACIS national, and encouraged everyone actively to solicit sites.The site for 2004 and 2005 are not yet decided.Offers and suggestions already proferred: Michael Kennealy has suggested a joint CAIS/ACIS conference; Neil Sammells has suggested a meeting at Bath Spa, jointly with the British Studies meeting; Jim Doan has suggested an ACIS scheduled directly before or after the IASIL meeting, in Galway or at another Irish site. Gillespie encouraged everyone to consider a variety of sites, particularly in places in which the organization has not yet or recently met (South, West Coast, etc).

Secretary: Katie Conrad encouraged members of the executive to examine their listings in the Guide to Irish Studies in the United States to be certain that they are current.She also reminded representatives to post conference announcements directly to her.

Treasurer: David Gardiner thanked the officers and provided the end of year fiscal report.

·(Summary: ) Gardiner presented the proposed budget.He noted that ACIS resources have increased, despite the drop in our stock holdings.He reported that the member database was trimmed after he sent a first-class mailing and received hundreds of dead letters with no forwarding addresses.After the purge of expired memberships (Approximately 400 members), we are actually back to 1200 members in good standing.Gardiner stressed the necessity of regularizing the renewal process.

·Gardiner raised the question of whether we should consider moving our Smith Barney account from a mutual fund to a safer money market account. Michael suggested that the last year was an unusual one for the markets and suggested that we not move precipitously.Conrad suggested examining the rest of the history of the account’s performance before making any changes.Curtin asked where the budget surplus goes; Gardiner replied that our surplus goes to our Geddes Savings and Loan account.

·Curtin brought attention to the increased expenditures on the AHA meeting.Savage explained that the ACIS/AHA part was held on site, in the program, and thus cost more than the allotted amount.Curtin and Meagher suggested that such a format increases ACIS exposure at the AHA and might thus justify an increased expenditure for the AHA and MLA gatherings. Curtin suggested a budget line of $1000/each. Gillespie suggested that the executive approve this budget, allow the History and Literature representatives check on the costs, and then, if necessary, go into cybersession to approve new budget.

Motion: To approve the Treasurer’s Report.

Motion approved, seconded.Motion approved unanimously.

·Gardiner presented a detailed proposal for outsourcing the maintenance of the membership list to Priority Data Systems.Such a move would ensure regularity, professionalism, and consistency of the lists, and the costs were well within the Treasurer’s current budget.The renewals would still come in to the Treasurer, who would "batch" renewals for processing by Priority.One benefit would be regularizing the renewal dates.The Executive approved of the move.Harrington suggested that perhaps the Treasurer should outsource even more, especially dues collection. Gillespie encouraged further examination of the possibility of outsourcing dues collection.

Regional Representatives

New England: not present; no report.

MidAtlantic:Monica Brennan present.No report.

Midwest: Jim Rogers:Regional:this year St Louis; next year, Moorhead State University.

South:Ed Madden: The next ACIS Southern meeting will be at the University of Tennessee-Chattanooga.The theme will be “Modern Ireland and the Persistence of Memory.”

West:Charlotte Headrick reported for Nora McGuinness.TacomaWA was the site last fall; Santa ClaraUniversity (with other universities’ support) will be the site this fall. The call for papers is on the ACIS website.

[See http://www.acisweb.com/cfp.html for conference information]

Discipline Representatives 

Arts (Headrick), Celtic Studies (Freeman), History (Savage), and Social Science (Meagher) representatives reported that they were in the process of reading submissions for book prizes.

The Irish Language representative was not present, due to an Aer Lingus flight delay.

Literature: Margot Backus reported that the ACI/MLA party was organized jointly with the Joyce foundation; Gillespie reported it as successful.She also reported that her committee is reading for the book prize.There will be two ACIS panels for next year’s MLA: "Ireland 1930-1960:Censorship and Parochialism?"and "Representations of Northern Ireland"; she reported excellent submissions and papers.

Graduate representative. Fitz Smith; no report.

II. Old Business

A.Election Committee (See below, *)

Motion:To accept Election Report.

Moved, seconded.Motion passed unanimously.

B. Nominating Committee:

John Harrington proposed that he,Katie Conrad and Jim MacKillop will comprise the Nominations Committee.

Motion: To accept the proposed Nominating Committee.

Moved, seconded.Motion passed unanimously.

Harrington encouraged everyone to solicit nominations for the next election cycle.

III. New Business

A. History Report (See below, **)

If Report approved, the membership will approve the $5000.

Motion to approve the Report of the Ad Hoc Committee to Recommend a New ACIS History.

Motion approved, seconded.Motion approved unanimously.

B.ACIS 2003

James Rogers reported on the progress of next year's meeting. [see http://www.acisweb.com/cfp.html]; he recommended that members start thinking now about panels and encouraged that disciplines not often represented be solicited for submissions.

Backus suggested a return of the living book review, which was successful and met with general approval. 

The meeting was adjourned at 6:05 pm.

Respectfully submitted,

Kathryn Conrad

*Election Statement for the Executive Meeting:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
At the ACIS Executive Committee meeting on June 9, 2001, PresidentMichael Gillespie asked the Election Committee (John Harrington, Vice President and Chair, Nancy Curtin, and Ed Madden), to propose a motion
concerning Joint Memberships in ACIS.

Currently, fees for Joint Memberships (termed "couples" on the membershiprenewal form) are $35 per year, and Memberships are $30 per year.  The intention apparently was to control printing costs by avoiding duplicate
mailings, and so to reflect that organization saving in the discounted membership fee for a second person.

The Treasurer David Gardiner estimates that there are approximately 50 Joint Memberships in ACIS in 2001-2002.

The question has arisen of whether Joint Memberships are entitled to one or two votes in ACIS elections.  The number of votes concerned is substantial: 50 Joint Memberships, if awarded duplicate votes, represent
an additional 50 votes, or a substantial percentage of recent counts of votes cast.  Further, Joint Memberships are poorly defined: they could be construed to be entitled to more than two members and so more than two votes.

The Election Committee recommends that one membership, of whatever kind, represent one vote in ACIS elections.

John Harrington (Chair)
Nancy Curtin
Ed Madden

**REPORT OF THE AD HOC COMMITTEE TO RECOMMEND A NEW ACIS HISTORY

BACKGROUND AND CHRONOLOGY

At the ACIS conference at Fordham University in June 2001, President Michael Gillespie asked Nancy Curtin, Larry McCaffrey, Maureen Murphy, and Robert Rhodes (as chair) to serve as an ad hoc committee to write

a proposal for a new ACIS history and to report to the Executive Committee on the committee's deliberations and conclusions.

There have been four relatively brief previous histories, all by Larry McCaffrey. The first was for Irish Historical Studies (September 1967); the second appeared in the Michael Funchion-edited Irish-American Volunteer Organizations (1983); the next was for The Irish Literary Supplement (Spring 1988); and the last appeared in The Encyclopedia of the Irish in America (1999).

On 20 June 2001Rhodes e-mailed Gillespie to ask about a specific charge to the committee. Did he visualize, for example, a comprehensive history ? One in which the emphasis fell on individuals? Or scholarship ? Would it

cover internal cotroversies ? On 25 June, Gillespie replied succinctly: "I have no preconceptions about how the history project should be structured," a view that Rhodes relayed to committee members on 20 July, adding that it was a "reply which allows us to go as we think we should" and that from a conversation with Michael in New York he inferred that a grander history than earlier ones was the goal.

In the same message to committee members, Rhodes posed several questions about the intended audience for the proposed history, a scholarly versus a popular version, the responsibility of ACIS to locate source material for the writer, for example, and added that he would not expect responses until the fall. On 20 September, Rhodes again asked Michael Gillespie for his views on the direction he thought the history might take, and Michael replied the next day: "[The history] should be a book-length account from inception to present. It should be in a format that allows for easy updating. My idea is to publish both a hard copy version to be sent to every member and an e version, which perhaps would be place on our website, to be undated regularly. --I think that the great events approach to history would work best for our chronicle. I feel that things like the fight over. ..need to be recorded but in a non- partisan fashions. --Individuals like. ..and others who have contributed greatly should be given full credit. ...This should be an account of the organization and not of personalities. 

The following day, the chair reminded committee members of Gillespie's earlier response and advised them of his most recent reply; he also posed again questions he'd asked over the summer; and he requested early responses to

the several items on the table for discussion. With a paucity of responses, he again requested responses in early December, a message that elicited discussion among committee members.

DISCUSSION

The first major consideration was the potential audience for the history. Committee members agreed that, as one member put it, the history should not be "an internal, family history," another saying that "an in-house history"

would have a limited audience and speculating further that not many ACIS members "know or care about the organization's history." One committee member opined that "If someone would write a thorough history of the advance of Irish Studies over the past four decades, ACIS would get the credit it deserves." Another concurred: ". ..I would be interested in the rather heroic rise of Irish Studies in the United States in the last four decades and ACIS's role in that history."

On 19 December, Rhodes e-mailed committee members to summarize these views on the history's potential audience, adding that from this determination much else would flow. On 8 January 2002, the chair again asked for responses to help move our assignment to a conclusion, and with a number of replies by mid-February, the committee arrived at the consensus position we now report to the Executive Committee.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The committee believes that a narrowly conceived in-house history of ACIS would have a very limited audience. On the other hand, and considering the significant role ACIS has played in the development of Irish Studies in the United States and abroad, the committee recommends a history that will tell the story of the dramatic rise of Irish Studies with ACIS occupying the central role as exemplar.

It should be the responsibility of the Executive Committee --more specifically, a sub-committee composed of the Executive Committee's discipline representatives --to conduct a search for a suitable author, who need not

necessarily be a professional historian, for the history through notices in the ACIS Newsletter, the Irish Literary Supplement, ~, the American Historical Review, and other appropriate outlets. Preferably, the selected

writer will have substantial personal and professional history of association with ACIS.

Insofar as possible, the writer should be assured of the complete cooperation of former and current ACIS officers, national and regional. ACIS should offer as much access as possible to its archival resources wherever they're

located, and should identify individuals and organizations that might have such materials. Additionally, as one committee member put it, ACIS should "facilitate when possible contacts with other programs or organizations."

ACIS should agree that the writer will have control over questions of coverage and characterization; that ACIS waives any claim to final approval of the manuscript; and that while ACIS will help in the search for a publisher,

the author has first and final say on the choice of a publisher. As for material inducements, the selected writer should receive up to $5,000 to be disbursed as he/she wishes, e.g., to cover research expenses, as subvention for the publisher, or simply as compensation. Furthermore, the author should be assured that financial inducement does not carry with it any claim of approval of the manuscript.

Finally, the committee has no specific proposal to make about discounted copies of the published history for ACIS members, though, of course, it recommends that members be given some inducement to purchase copies.

ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

In a 27 July 2001 e-mail to committee members, Larry McCaffrey raised an issue which the author of the history may find it necessary to confront': II. ..we have to face the question has ACIS accomplished its interdiscip-

linary mission or has it become just another academic organization [?] Unfortunately, I believe that it has failed to integrate the various Irish Studies disciplines."

Without addressing directly the questions asked by Larry, committee members did have some perceptions about what has or has not happened about "inter-disciplinarianism" at ACIS conferences. McCaffrey, Murphy, and Rhodes

shared to different degrees the sense that over the years panels of speakers and their audiences had grown more specialized, historians, for example, speaking largely to other historians and sociologists to sociologists

rather than, as they recalled, speakers of various disciplines speaking to audiences with varied disciplinary interests, a practice, they believe, that more completely met the interdisciplinary ideal than specialized sessions. Rhodes characterized this as a price ACIS has paid for some kinds of success: With increasing numbers of members, literary scholars speaking to literary scholars, for example, was perhaps inevitable.

Nancy Curtin had a different perspective: When she started attending national conferences in the mid-1980s, she "found the organization very balkanized into its little disciplinary enclaves. ...I think that changed dramatically

in the late 1990s and now ACIS conferences strike me as the very height of interdiscipliriarity. ...So what some of you regard as deterioration, I found a stark improvement. I expect an historian of ACIS will note these varying

generational responses."

Respectfully submitted,

Nancy Curtin

Larry McCaffrey

Maureen Murphy

Robert Rhodes, Chair

10 March 2002