Once again we had to change the agenda since the Parent Committee participants were not as yet selected. We went on with "Where do we go from here?" This presentation was made by Eli Reyes. Eli summerized how all education programs were currently being administered and presented three methods to administer education programs. They are: 1. local; 2. a combination of local and regional; and 3. a regional concept. Attachment #4 addresses these concepts. Many questions and answers were generated until we recessed at 5 p.m. The meeting was called back to order at 9:15 a.m., Wednesday, January 21, 1976, at which time we continued to discuss the pros and cons of a regional concept. Many questions were asked regarding what technical assistance would be provided, who would approve programs, who would hire, what would be the best, etc. The answers to all these questions from our staff was "this is what we are asking you, you give us a direction and we will develop the detail and present it for your approval." After a short break we went back to presentations from five Parent Committee members. The five volunteers were Clarissa Evens, Petersburg; Anne Johnson, Sitka; Walter Johns, Angoon; Mary Paddock, Haines; and Richard Stokes, Wrangell. Each outlined how their Parent Committee was formed, what projects they initiated, how they felt their programs were going, problems they had, and how they addressed the problems. This session generated many questions and answers from other Parent Committee members. The interplay was excellent. Our staff tried to note the problem areas brought out by this session. Remember, these are staff observations: 1. Where to get supplies. 2. Nepotism. 3. Job descriptions. 4. Administration. 5. Late starts. 6. Parent Committee do not understand responsibilities. 7. Communities do not know where to obtain information. 8. Not enough parents are interested in serving on Parent Committees. 9. Not enough technical support. 10. Not enough resource people visit communities. 11. Not enough training. Further, it came out, Parent Committees were formed the following ways: 1. Hearings were held, meetings publicized, elections held. 2. Those who showed up for the meetings were appointed. 3. A meeting was held and the Parent Committee was elected from those attending. Next we were fortunate to have Don Boselovic of the U.S. Office of Education, Washington, D.C. available to present more information on the Indian Education Act. He provided us with the following deadlines for Title IV: Part A: Deadline in Washington, February 27, 1976. If not in the office by that date, the proposal must be "registered mail" no later than February 23, 1976 ($35 million available). Part B: Deadline in Washington, March 3, 1976 ($16 million available). Part C: Deadline in Washington, March 3, 1976 ($4 million available). About 11:30 a.m., Don Barrett, Supervisory Employment Assistance Officer, made his presentation on Career Education. It included a twenty-minute film outlining the concepts of Career Education. Don then went on to explain that Southeast Alaska Agency is currently working towards this concept as we are convinced that it will provide our people a better service. Since it was then about 12:15 p.m., no question and answer period followed. We recessed for lunch. The afternoon session was called to order at 1:30 p.m., at which time we continued to discuss the pros and cons of regionalization. About 2 p.m. the Parent Committee members agreed to have a committee meeting to decide issues. Attachment #5 are the minutes of the meeting recorded by Maxine Richert. The committee adjourned at approximately 4 p.m. After the meeting we had a staff meeting to review what had happened. This is what we concluded occurred: 1. It was the consensus of the group that Central Council take steps necessary to regionalize all education programs in Southeast Alaska. 2. It was the consensus of the group that they organize into an Indian Education Committee with one representative from each community to provide guidance to the CC. 3. It was the consensus of the group that the CC do all in its power to see that the Indian Education Committee is provided funding to exist. Attachment #6 is a summary of the evaluation form completed by all the participants excluding staff. All representatives deserve to be commended for their active participation in the meeting. The attendance was excellent. There were no dropouts! JOSEPH G. WILSON. Attachments: 1. Attendance roster. 2. IEM packet (not to participants). 3. Agenda (not to participants). 4. Management charts. 5. Minutes of Parent Committee meeting. 6. Evaluation summary. Name ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 3 Southeast Alaska Indian Education meeting, Ketchikan, Alaska, Jan. 20-21, 1976 Tuesday, Jan. 20, 1976: 9 a.m.-Opening remarks_ 9:15 a.m.-Introductions__. 9:30 a.m.-Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (1) --. 9:45 a.m.-School financing (2). 10 a.m.-College student assistance (3). 10:15 a.m.-Johnson O'Malley Act (JOM) (4 and 5) 10:30 a.m.-Coffee break. 10:45 a.m.-Adult vocational training (6) and adult education (7)_. 11:15 a.m.-Indian Education Act (IEA) –. 11:30 a.m.-Education needs survey (ENS) 12 noon-Lunch. 1:30 p.m.-ENS analysis___ 2 p.m.-ENS group discussion____ 3:15 p.m.-Coffee break. 3:30 p.m.-JOM and IEA parent committees.. Joseph G. Wilson. Eli Reyes. John Hope. Felipe Tagaban. Francis Dunne. Felipe Tagaban. To be selected from participants. Eli Reyes. Southeast staff. Don Barrett. Group. |