Meeting (2018-01-09) - PI Meeting


Meeting (2018-01-18) RAs meeting

 Meeting Outcomes:

(jump to notebook added after meeting at bottom of page)

 

Meeting time: Tuesday, January 9, 2018, 10:15 a.m. Pacific Meeting Zoom URLhttps://ucsb.zoom.us/j/891738874
  • PIs: Alan Liu; co-PIs: Jeremy Douglass, Scott Kleinman, Lindsay Thomas
  • Project Manager: Samina Ali

 

 

 
  • UCSB RAs:
    • Rebecca Baker (English)
    • Nazanin Keynejad (Comp. Lit.)
    • Somak Mukherjee (English) -- Winter 
    • Giorgina Paiella (English)
    • Aili Peeker (English)
    • Jamal Russell (English)
    • Tyler Shoemaker (English)
    • Xiuhe Zhang (Film/Media) 

 

  • [Word embedding workflow team in formation] 
  •  U. Miami RAs:
    • Samina Ali (English, U. Miami)
    • Tarika Sankar (English, U. Miami)
    • Annie Schmalstig (English, U. Miami)
 
  •  CSUN RA: Sandra Fernandez 

Next meeting (?):  

 

 


Purpose of today's meeting

 

1. Administrative Issues

 

2. Planning for Upcoming Postdoc Search Process 

 

Each file will receive two “blind” readings (where the readers do not see each other's reports), followed by a third reading by the search committee chair Alan (who will see the two previous reports). The procedure is as follows:

 

1. Readers evaluate files in the online system and add comments according to the evaluation rubric and ranking scale (to be created roughly in accord with the UCSB English Department's “Stage A Consideration” evaluation form (Stage A Consideration.DOC) and with the Office of Equal Opportunity's request for a "rubric")

 

2. In evaluating a file, readers first do an initial screening to eliminate clearly unqualified candidates. Files rated “0” by one reader will be eliminated, except as overruled by the search committee chair [e.g., in cases where a “0” seems to reflect ambiguity about whether an application “fits” the job description].

 

3. By [date TBD] the search committee meets to discuss the files and cut the pool down to approximately 10-12 to interview. This discussion is facilitated by a ranked, ordered list of files based on averaging the scores assigned by readers. The usual procedure during the meeting is to see if there is a natural break in the order roughly 12 files down, and to adjust individual files up or down. Also, there is normally a stage of the discussion when committee members are invited to make arguments for a small number of files that may not have landed above the cut-off threshold but deserve a reconsideration (such files should have received at least one score of  “5” from a reader).

4. Interviews to be scheduled in late Feb-early March by Zoom. (Interviewing questions TBD) 

 

 

3. Summer Research Camps

 

 

 

4. Advisory Board Meeting

 

 

 


 

Meeting Outcomes

 

1. Administrative issues:

 

2. Workshops

 

3. Postdoc Search Process

 

4. Summer Camp (Alan revised after the meeting "Planning Document for Summer 2018 Research Camps, v. 2")

 

5. Advisory Board Meeting             

 

6. Ingest and Manifest/Virtual Workspace Manager Development

 

7. Miscellaneous: