November 2006 online board meeting considered the following
nine items and ten resolutions, and the following voting resulted:

Item #1- approval of the minutes of July 2006 meeting.
Unanimous approval.
===========================================================
Frank Geerling:
Seems clear although I wasn't in yet ;-). One question about "Reappointment
of Poi Kee Low as Board member'. I see in the lines below, that he is now
again proposed as removal for absence. But I cant imagine that he was able
to join a board meeting in between his re-election and his proposed
removal? If that indeed is the case then I would give him for this moment
the 'benefit of the doubt' and inform him of the current board meeting.
===========================================================
John Petroff:
Poi Kee Low will be invited to rejoin the board of directors, notwithstanding
the current removal. Thanks Frank for noticing the discrepancy.
===========================================================

Item #2- evaluation of PEOI's promotion using listservs, blogs and the like.
===========================================================
Kenneth Barden:
I think the use of listservs and blogs can be very useful and am supportive.
===========================================================
Mihai Caramihai:
I think that the blog idea is good because there are some advantages
of blogs:
1. Blogs are probably the easiest way to develop a website.
With blog software, it literally takes minutes to have a professional
looking site up and running.
2. Blogs are easy to create: we don't need expensive or complicated web
editors or web design software to create a blog.
3. Blogs are easy to maintain: blog software allows posting online
from different locations
4. Blogs are search-engine-friendly: since blogs assign each post
an individual URL address, each of them will have it's own, separate
web page. Moreover, since blogs tend to be updated regularly, search
engines will crawl them often (search engines love fresh content),
adding your new posts to their index.
===========================================================
Edna Eufemio:
It is good to make the promotion of PEOI a collective and participatory activity.
I suggest that if anyone is familiar with the concept of Search Engine Optimization
(SEO) or other online strategies to promote the site, they may be worth exploring.
A cursory search of these strategies led me to this site :
http://www.wilsonweb.com/articles/checklist.htm.
Of course we cannot discount the email method as well as the use of marketing
collateral materials that we send out to schools.
===========================================================
Frank Geerling:
I'm very much interested if it is possible to get an idea about the
responses/reaction or get other indications about the results of this
action?
Because the amount really is impressive, and I am wondering how the target
group responded. Perhaps we could also have a look at the text or
perhaps make a standardised text that we could use as an 'elevator pitch' to
explain in short what PEIO is all about and what 'could be in it'
for the reader. Perhaps my promotional lines as send somewhere in the past
are usable here, John?
===========================================================
Thirumagal Kanagasabai:
Promoting PEOI through listservs, blogs and etc. is an excellent idea. I'll make
sure to follow Shahid Ali Panhwer's exmaple and promote PEOI at every oppurtunity.
If people have their own websites they can also put a link to PEOI's site. They can
also talk about PEOI on blogs and request to add PEOI link to listservs. If you
also have network groups online, such as yahoo or google or MSN or etc., you can
promote PEOI through there to your friends and colleagues.
===========================================================
Lyn Mackay:
I put a post on the discussion forum (Forum group discussion #2 Board of Directors)
===========================================================
MIKE PALMER: I SEE HUGE POTENTIAL FOR PROMOTION HOWEVER I THINK THERE
IS A CRITICAL NEED TO ADDRESS THE STRUCTURE OF THE WEBSITE AS HAS BEEN
DISCUSSED IN THE LAST FEW BOARD MEETINGS. THE ENGINEER IN ME WOULD LEAN
TOWARDS FIXING THE PRODUCT BEFORE AGRESSIVELY PROMOTING IT IN THE
MARKET.
===========================================================
Allison Raymond:
Y, but am still wary that it will get a large response
===========================================================

Item #3- promotion of PEOI's translators on PEOI's home page.
===========================================================
Kenneth Barden:
I like both methods of doing this.
===========================================================
Mihai Caramihai:
I think that PAGE TRANSLATOR from Google can be a good idea.
Google has created a good set of tools to allow to translate any
web page from one language to another. PAGE TRANSLATOR automatically
create the web page from source langage in the target language
– in html (isn’t a script)! The price is –5.95$, and I consider
is a good price.
===========================================================
Edna Eufemio:
It has been suggested before that PEOI features the volunteers
(either new volunteers or outstanding volunteers). One of suggested means
was through a periodic newsletter devoted for them. To have them featured on the
homepage is also good. However, considering that this can be one way for the
volunteers to find gainful employment, how about providing the email address or
online contact address of the volunteer for the information of anyone who wishes
to get his services? (Perhaps an address that is meant for that purpose in case
there arises an issue or a PEOI email address?)
Can we also feature the volunteers in the other languages in the same fashion
(with photo and a short write-up)?
===========================================================
Frank Geerling:
Both are good idea's!
I also have a proposal. I would propose to add a 'mission statement' or
another kind of outline of PEIO on this first page.
I think that has two advantages:
1. everyone who enters the homepage can read directly what PEIO is and what
it stands for
2. I understood (but I am sure there are specialist here who can support or
deny it) that search crawlers like Google also use the text on homepages
to build up their reference databases.

I see that there are differences between the different language sites. Is
this an intermediate situation? Because I would propose to have the
'sites' identical in lay-out. And on the Russian pages I get error's (I
think on the Banner's?)
===========================================================
Thirumagal Kanagasabai:
This is excellent. No further comments.
===========================================================
Lyn Mackay:
I think this is and excellent idea.
I also really like the picture and introduction of new volunteer on
the Homepage. I think it adds colour, vibrancy and adds a personal touch
===========================================================
MIKE PALMER: NICE TO SPOTLIGHT A FEW PERSONS NOW AND AGAIN - THE BOX
HIGHLIGHTING KRISHNA SEEBURN WORKS WELL. I STILL HAVE TO POINT OUT THE
WEBSITE AS A MAJOR ISSUE. THE BOX IS ON THE HOMEPAGE BUT IT SEEMS WE
HAVE TWO STYLES MIXED IN THE WEBSITE AT PRESENT AND THE NAVIGATION IS
LESS THAN INTUITIVE - I ONLY JUST LEARNED ACCIDENTALLY THAT YOU CAN
RETURN TO HOME BY CLICKING ON THE LOGO.
===========================================================

Item #4- review of methods and content of feedback from students
and volunteers.
===========================================================
Kenneth Barden:
I support this as described in the agenda.
===========================================================
Mihai Caramihai:
See above #2: the blog can be a solution. Moreover, free on
line polls and surveys
(e.g. http://www.sparklit.com/) cand be an improvement
===========================================================
Edna Eufemio:
I agree with having a feedback forum with limitations. My view is that there should
be some sort of filtering or screening of feedback that can be publicly viewed.
I am referring to any possible feedback that may be prejudicial to the organization
or to the authors or volunteers and may diminish our promotions efforts.
===========================================================
Frank Geerling:
The proposed method for student and volunteer feedback, to set up a forum
discussion identical to others currently used at PEOI,
seems a good idea to me.
I think you should facilitate a forum per training then? Also the idea that
anyone can see the feedback and post entries into it seems workable to me.
I would not want to limitate access but would advise a moderator, so that
excessive discussions can be prevented.
We can also see if it works without limitations and if problems occur we can
change that later on.
===========================================================
Thirumagal Kanagasabai:
Maybe students and volunteers could also be asked to complete a
feedback survey and these feedback can be analyzed by a committee.
Surveys can be sent through e-mail as a word document and they can
fill it electronically with their comments/score and send back.
On-line forums are great but we can't assume that all students and
volunteers will use the forums. If we send the feedback survey in
e-mails, we will be at least giving them the option of providing
their opinions. Also, I find it much easier to complete survey
then to contribute to forums. However, a committee must be sent
up to develop the surveys and analyse the data once the surveys
are returned to PEOI.
===========================================================
Lyn Mackay:
I find this a little difficult to read in its present format.
However, it is very interesting to read through.
===========================================================
MIKE PALMER: THE DESCRIPTION HIGHLIGHTED IN THE SEPT2006 NEWSLETTER
SOUNDS GREAT. WITH FEEDBACK CENTRALISED IT WILL BE EASIER TO IDENTIFY
THE GREATEST OPPORTUNITIES TO ENHANCE THINGS AS WELL AS ENSURING
TRANSPARENCY.
===========================================================

Item #5- discussion of PEOI's 2005 Annual Report and the strategy
that it reflects.
===========================================================
Kenneth Barden:
This has my support.
===========================================================
Mihai Caramihai:
A possible answer to the risks pointed out in the Annual Report
can be the recognition of PEOI certificates. A procedures development
of on-line courses and an accreditation by an American and / or an
international body can bypass these problems. Of course,
accreditation means money: I think that is the real problem.
Sponsors – that’s good answer, but the development of a project
in the field can be the real one!
===========================================================
Frank Geerling:
Student market:
I suppose this is true for the’ developed countries, but in developing
countries, I think the aim is much more on getting a properly paid profession.
This also means that studies which give a high “return on education” will be the
most interesting. (Like you can see in Accounting rather than Economics!)
Still I would try and seek and aim at specific target groups as related to my statement above,
and find the means to engage them.
Couldn’t we let them register, by giving some advantages? Or perhaps by stating that
registering has benefits for the organization as a whole?
I really think we should aim most at this kind of education! I think that practical
usability is vital for getting people to our courses.
I would like to set targets for 2007 and make some sort of marketing plan how reach these
targets. Actions like the postings or use the current group of volunteers to spread the
word to direct acquaintances. (Make a standard text for this?) Is there already an idea
about the number of registrations for 2006?.

Funding permanent staff:
I really agree here. It would be great and perhaps even necessary to make sure that the
PEIO role can continue in the long run. To be able to make this happen I think you
need structural sponsoring of some kind. And for that, I think you need a clear business
and marketing plan.

Wed site appearance:
Actually this is one point were I disagree. I think you should do a few things to
seriously improve the chance of being found AND to make it easier to see through
the structure of the site.

As I see it, the further improvement of the website and speeding up the development
of training (and finishing it) are very important. Also making sure we are reaching
the target group and being able to offer them better chances on the market are very
important points.

Further improvement of website:
* Add mission statement to the homepage. So far two board members responded
and they both were very positive.
* Make the structure of the site more logical. Even experienced internet users
who I asked to have a look at it, had problems seeing through the structure
and were unable to get a view on the idea behind it! So they stopped looking
after only a few minutes…(I myself still have some difficulties remembering were
to look for information… ;-) ). Perhaps the combination of aims and target groups
of the current site, which on the one hand gives a lot of information, but on the
other hand is also aimed at registering training, progress etc. makes it to difficult.
* An idea on this: Define a new site, additional to the current one.
Make this a glossier site (not a heavy site by any means, but just more modern)
aimed at presenting the general PEIO information, marketing, sponsoring etc;
the more commercial side of it. Leave the complete course part as it is on the
current site, and see if ‘the cleaning’ can result in a better structure here as well.
An alternative an be to restructure the current site in that way?

2. Speeding the development
As I see it, the best opportunity lies in using training material already available
on the market such as MIT material. It seems much easier to me to translate
and add to current material then to define it from scratch. I think it therefore
would be wise to have a look at the Curriculum that PEIO would like to offer
and with what reasons (ask the current students what they want to do most?!)
and then look at where we can find the best material from the different sources
that you mentioned. (I think I can get some Curriculum information about ICT
roles and function from Capgemini so if that would be useful in your opinion
please tell me.)
I also think that looking at our target group, the main focus should be on the
practical usability of the courses rather than reaching University degrees.
Perhaps this could also make the development less demanding?
Perhaps we can also have a look at the process itself, and ask for suggestion of
the current group of volunteers what they feel is successful develoment now,
and what can be improved (and in what way!).

3. Reaching the target group/ marketing
Make a small plan How to reach What groups. Using the ideas of Postings, using
the current Volunteer, using our student population, via international Organization
or any other means. Focus on the “Whats in it for Them” to make sure that we
deliver the right message(s).

===========================================================
Lyn Mackay:
The gender differences are interesting - perhaps the gender difference
in students might change with the introduction of different subjects/courses
My view is that a form of recognition for completion of PEOI courses
is something that needs to be a priority in 2007
===========================================================
MIKE PALMER: WITH RESPECT TO -

A- BUSINESS MODEL
HAS ANY PROGRESSS BEEN MADE IN SECURING ACCEDITATION? IF ONE COURSE
CAN ACHIEVE ACCREDITATION, IT CAN ACT AS A TEMPLATE FOR OTHER COURSES IN
A PROGRAMME ... IF ONE PROGRAMME CAN ACHIEVE ACCREDITATION, IT CAN ACT
AS A TEMPLATE FOR OTHER PROGRAMMES.

B- STUDENT MARKET
STATISTICS ARE FUNNY THINGS, SO I ASK (A) IS THE NUMBER OF REGISTRANTS
NOTED AS 1457 A CUMMULATIVE FIGURE OR NET NEW REGISTRANTS IN 2005? OF
THOSE REGISTERED, HOW MANY ACTIVELY PURSUED SOME TRAINING? TO
COMPLETION? WHAT ARE THE BARRIERS TO CONVERTING REGISTRANTS TO ACTIVE
REGISTRANTS? (B) DEVELOPING COUNTRIES ACCOUNT FOR 70% OF REGISTRANTS
... IS THIS 70% OF COUNTRIES REPRESENTED OR 70% AT THE INDIVIDUAL LEVEL?
MY IMPRESSION HAS BEEN THAT MUCH OF THE INTEREST HAS COME FROM WESTERN
ECONOMIES WHERE ACCESS TO INTERNET MAY BE MORE PREVALENT. HOW CAN WE
ADVERTISE TO COMMUNITY RESOURCE CENTRES IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES?

E- OPEN EDUCATION MARKET
PEOI LEADERSHIP OR PARTICIPATION IN COLLABORATIVE NGO GROUPS COULD HELP
TO ESTABLISH STANDARDS FOR CONTENT PACKAGING, DELIVERY, AND LEARNING
ASSESSMENT. IT COULD ALSO ENABLE CONTENT SHARING SUCH THAT, FOR
EXAMPLE, PEOI COULD DEVELOP "FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING" AS AN AREA OF
EXCELLENCE AND CONTENT SWAP WITH ANOTHER PROVIDER FOR "MECHANICAL
ENGINEERING" CONTENT.
===========================================================

Item #6: Appointments of new members

Y N A
7 4 2 2006-11 # 1 appointment of Patsy Wilcher as board member
8 5 - 2006-11 # 2 appointment of Holly Carless as board member
9 4 - 2006-11 # 3 appointment of Xiaoyu Chen as board member
10 2 1 2006-11 # 4 appointment of Krishna Seeburn as board member
3 9 1 2006-11 # 5 appointment of EYASSU YETBAREK as board member

The following three individuals are new members of the board of directors:
- Patsy Wilcher
- Holly Carless
- Xiaoyu Chen
- Krishna Seeburn

Item #7- removal of non-participating board members:
13 - - 2006-11 # 6 removal for absences of Deborah Barantchouk as board member
13 - - 2006-11 # 7 removal for absences of Poi Kee (Frederick) Low as board member
13 - - 2006-11 # 8 removal for absences of Siddhartha Maheshwari as board member
13 - - 2006-11 # 9 removal for absences of Melissa Lee Price as board member
13 - - 2006-11 #10 removal for absences of Peter Short as board member

Item #8- election of chairman of the board.
13 - - 2006-11 #11 award to Kishori Mundargi for writing Programming in C course
13 - - 2006-11 #12 award to Minh Vo for writing two courses in pharmacology
13 - - 2006-11 #13 award to Lourdes Sada for coordination of Spanish team

Present at and participating in November online board meeting:

1-Kenneth Barden
2-Mihai D Caramihai
3-edna eufemio
4-Frank Geerling
5-Johannes M. Glas
6-Kavery Sachdeva Handa
7-Thirumagal Kanagasabai
8-Kimberly Louis
9-Lynley Mackay
10-Michael Palmer
11-John Petroff
12-Allison Raymond
13-Romina Sengara

Present at and abstaining in November online board meeting:

1- Rinku Bhattacharya abstained
2- Shahid Ali Panhwer abstained

Missing votes:

1- Jeanne M. Henry, second absence
2- Carol Law,first absence
3- Simon Rosin, first absence
4- Nazim Syed, second absence
5- Minh Vo, first absence
6- Peter Wells , second absence
7- Adele Wong, second absence

Vote bulletins were sent to:

Board member list as of November 1 2006
1- Kenneth Barden
2- Rinku Bhattacharya
3- Mihai D Caramihai
4- edna eufemio
5- Frank Geerling
6- Johannes M. Glas
7- Cauvery Sachdeva Handa
8- Jeanne M. Henry
9- Thirumagal Kanagasabai
10- Carol Law
11- Kimberly Louis
12- Lynley Mackay
13- Shahid Ali Panhwer
14- Michael Palmer
15- John Petroff <petroff@pronetisp.net>
16- Allison Raymond
17- Simon Rosin
18- Romina Sengara <
19- Nazim Syed
20- Minh Vo
21- Peter Wells
22- Adele Wong