I can only speak personally. I found it not only exhausting but painful. I ran-and run from any mention of the Planning Council. From a professional point of view the planning council and the fine representation with which it began was great. How the time of the Planning Council is used is the issue. The council got tied down with little bits of minutia-word picking doing little exercises that did not seem to warrant......forget it.  I am ready to put the last experience behind me and try again.
Richard A. Womack Ed.D.
Chair, Education Division
----- Original Message -----
From: Dana Lee Ling
To: Charles Musana ; Robert Churney ; Dr.Richard Womack ; Jonathan Gourlay ; Spensin James ; Ringlen Ringlen ; Jean C. Thoulag
Cc: pennyw@comfsm.fm ; Kalwin Kephas ; Eddie Haleyalig ; comfsmyap@comfsm.fm ; lmaradol@comfsm.fm ; Maria Dison ; Susan Moses ; Howard Rice ; Dale Griffith ; Mariana Ben-Dereas
Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2003 11:06 AM
Subject: [selfstudy] Request for a quick vote on reticence to re-enter missionstatement redevelopment

A  reviewer has cited a lack of evidence for the third sentence below:

There has been no periodic review of the mission statement that this author can document. Many of the original participants in the process are still centrally involved in the College. The original process was so thorough, and, in some cases exhausting, that there has been a reticence to re-enter the process too quickly.

I have decided, rather than strike this statement, to ask you to vote on whether you agree that there has been reticence to re-enter the process too quickly:

___ Agree with statement, we have been reticent.
___ Disagree with statement, there is no such reticence.

One can reply via email - save paper and kill electrons instead!  Thanks!

Optional further reading:

The statement is an assessment I made as a result of a lack of review of the mission statement since 18 March 1999 except for a single suggestion made in what appears to be the last Planning Council meeting of 22 may 2002.   I take the absence of review a reticence to re-enter the process.  I also felt the process was exhausting, with meetings breaking up more due to people needing to be elsewhere than due to any set time limit for discussion.  Attendance faltered according to various minutes as the work asked more of people than they could give, especially among the community members of the planning council.  I know I was not alone in 1999 with those perceptions, hence the statement I made regarding reticence.
Dana Lee Ling
Associate Professor
Chair Division of Natural Science and Mathematics
College of Micronesia-FSM

Go Sharks!