How do you think we should organize selection of AERA conference proposals for the CH SIG?

This page is dedicated to:
Michael Cole (UCSD) -- an US develop-mental psychologist,  a founder of a cultural psychology, XMCA email forum, 5th Dimension project, LCHC, and the Mind, Culture, and Activity international journal, and our CH SIG. Cole has introduced the garden metaphor for the notion of culture.

hits since January 8th, 2004

[Here is space for info about more scholars who highly influenced the Cultural-Historical SIG. Please send this info (name, photo, link, and brief info) to Eugene Matusov]

This is how our legal Constitution answers this question:

"Article XI. Section 8. Selecting the Annual SIG Theme

The Annual SIG Theme will serve as an organizing principle for planning the business meeting and for guiding the selection of an invited speaker. Nominations for the Theme may be made by any member of CHSIG. The Theme will be determined by a majority vote. In order to promote participation in CHSIG under the broad scope of its mission, the Annual SIG theme will not be applied for soliciting or reviewing the quality of proposals."

"Article XI. Section 9. Reviewing and Selecting proposals.

Review and Selection of proposals for presentation at AERA will be conducted by blind peer review. A call for reviewers will be made to the full membership by the Program Officer. The Program Officer will select reviewers from among those responding to the call. The Program Officer will distribute proposals to reviewers matching their expertise as much as possible. The top rated proposals will be assigned to the available slots."

Official draft of the CH-SIG Constitution

How would you answer to this question? (write at the very bottom of the page) 

Read People's Comments

Write YOUR Comments

What do you think? How would you answer to this question? Please provide your comments below...