Welcome to the American Academy of Religion's new website. Founded in 1909, the AAR is the world's largest association of academics who research or teach topics related to religion.

http://www.aarweb.org/Meetings/Annual_Meeting/Program_Units/Resources_for_Chairs/handbook.asp

Program Unit Chair Handbook

2007-2008

  1. Introduction
  2. Program Unit Chairs and the Program Committee
  3. Program Units Defined
  4. Program Unit Leadership
  5. Program Unit Chair's Responsibilities: An Overview
    1. Starting a program unit
    2. Organizing program unit sessions
    3. Reporting on program unit activities
    4. Applying for renewal or change of status
    5. Communication
  6. Organizing Annual Meeting Sessions
  7. The Annual Meeting Cycle: An overview
    1. Preparing your Call for Papers Copy
    2. Evaluating, Accepting, and Rejecting Proposals
    3. Dealing with Multiple Submissions
    4. Conducting Cosponsored Sessions
    5. Policies concerning Participation in the Annual Meeting
    6. Preparing Program Session Materials
    7. Preparing Session Requests in the Session Entry Database
  8. Submitting Annual Program Unit Reports
    1. Describing a Year's Activities
    2. Making Changes in Leadership
  9. Applying for Renewal or Change of Status
    1. Rationale
    2. Reviewers
    3. Assumptions
    4. Procedures
    5. Program Unit Chair's Responsibilities
    6. Criteria
    7. Previewing the Reviewer's Report
    8. The Program Committee Meeting
  10. Reimbursement Policy
  11. Suggested Good Practices
  12. A Word of Thanks
  13. Additional Meetings
  14. Proposing a New Program Unit: Six Questions for Prospective Program Unit Chairs
    1. How do new program units get started?
    2. Is a new program unit the best option?
    3. How do you decide which type of program unit is appropriate?
    4. What must be included in a proposal to establish a new program unit?
    5. Does your proposal make a case for initiating a new program unit?
    6. Are there other policies that play a role in establishing a new program unit?
  1. Introduction

Program unit chairs provide the leadership needed to conduct the AAR’s Annual Meeting. Without you, there simply would not be an Annual Meeting. We in the executive office are grateful for your service on behalf of the AAR and the field. This handbook is designed to bring together the information you need to fulfill your responsibilities. It offers general guidelines and information on how the process works. We hope it will help you fulfill your critical role within the AAR. Please let us know how we might improve this handbook in anyway.

  1. Program Unit Chairs and the Program Committee

Program Committee Charge

The Program Committee, a standing committee of the Board of Directors, oversees the AAR Annual Meeting.

Charge: The Program Committee oversees the Annual Meeting Program. In addition to setting program policies, this work entails designing and reviewing the overall program structure; establishing types, categories, and regulations governing program units; approving the formation and renewal of program units; and advising the executive director and the Director of Meetings and Marketing on important programmatic aspects of the meeting. Composition: Executive director (chair), president, president-elect, vice president, secretary, JAAR editor, and three at-large members.

Term: Ex officio in the case of elected officers and the JAAR editor; three years renewable once, for others.

Program Committee Goals

Although the committee’s main responsibility is preserving the quality of the Annual Meeting by evaluating and selecting program unit proposals, its regular review of the whole program allows it to act in other ways that enhance the meeting’s quality. In its role as a facilitator of quality scholarship, the committee’s goals include

  1. seeking out important discourses that are missing from the current program;
  2. watching for lines of inquiry that have reached a natural end;
  3. nurturing new conversations;
  4. supporting ongoing discourses; and finally,
  5. keeping the “kaleidoscope” turning by promoting interaction among different units.

The committee reviews the annual program unit reports submitted by program unit chairs and confirms new unit chairs. (Steering committee members are appointed by the program unit chairs and their appointments reported to the Program Committee. Even so, all individuals on steering committees must be current AAR members). Because the reports provide the basis for the Program Committee’s assessment of the Annual Meeting, they should give the committee a good description of the program unit (e.g. how many came and how good the presentations were) and an account of where that unit fits in the wider discourse. In making a case for a program unit, chairs should articulate how the work of their unit contributes to the field and where it is likely to go in the future.

The committee meets in mid-December to review the previous Annual Meeting, program unit reports, and calls for papers; and to consider proposals for new program units and initiatives for the next Annual Meeting.

  1. Program Units Defined

There are four types of program units. The role for each type is defined relative to the others, so that taken together they provide a coherent framework. For this reason, program unit chairs ought always to view their unit and its activities in relation to the other program units and activities that take place at the Annual Meeting.

Sections are the most inclusive units of the AAR Program, encompassing various research projects within a broadly defined, enduring field. The purpose of sections is twofold: to provide a forum for dialogue and exchange among differing approaches and projects in the field and to provide opportunities for the discussion of work that does not fall within the agendas that find other expressions in the Annual Meeting program. The section structure is intended to provide significant time for presenting research in the major subfields of religion. Sections are evaluated every five years and are judged according to two main criteria: (1) inclusiveness and/or breadth of their discussions within the overall field and (2) success in achieving critical encounters. Sections meet for three, four, or five sessions during the Annual Meeting, as determined by the Program Committee for each term.

Groups are for exploring and developing focused areas of study and methodology. Thus, groups are more narrowly focused than sections. While groups might have subgroups conducting highly specific conversations, a group will generally have a coherent focus that keeps the discussion available to all group members. Groups are approved for five-year terms. Renewals are contingent on making the case that the group’s work needs to continue. Some groups may complete their work in five years; others may continue indefinitely. Groups meet for one, two, or three sessions during the Annual Meeting, as determined by the Program Committee for each term.

Seminars are highly specific projects driven by a collaborative research agenda leading toward publication. The main role of this unit is to foster such collaborations and to do so, where possible, in a public setting that allows auditors to gain insight into the project, the process, and the people involved. Seminars continue working throughout the year, via exchange of papers, bibliographies and correspondence. Seminars meet for one session at each Annual Meeting for a period of five years. Seminar participants (up to twenty) pre-circulate papers and come to the seminar’s Annual Meeting session ready to discuss them, papers should not be read during the session. Auditors who are not among the seminar’s participants are welcome. Seminars are not renewable.

Consultations are for nascent discourses seeking to establish a constituency and create a framework for thinking about a specific set of problems. With a life span of three years, renewable once, such units frequently lay the groundwork for more detailed reflection if the questions and issues warrant continued discussion. Some consultations may complete their work in three years. Renewals are contingent on making the case that the consultation’s work needs to continue; alternatively, consultations can apply for group status at the end of the three year term. At the conclusion of the second term, consultations seeking group status must undergo an external review. Consultations meet for one session during the Annual Meeting.

  1. Program Unit Leadership

Each ongoing program unit has a chair or co-chairs and a steering committee who oversee the program unit’s activities.

All program units have program unit chairs and steering committee members who are confirmed in their appointment by the Program Committee.

Each unit nominates and selects its own leaders. Units should describe briefly to the Program Committee the process by which the selection was made. This policy is meant to foster a broadly participatory process.

Like program unit chairs, all steering committee members must be current AAR members before proposal evaluations begin in the spring.

Any current AAR member may serve on the steering committee of a program unit, but no more than two in any given year. Any current AAR member may not serve as chair of more than one unit at a time.

Ordinarily, students may not chair program units. If a program unit wishes to nominate a student, a compelling written rationale must accompany the nomination, further the student must have completed their qualifying exams and be ABD. Similarly, students may serve on steering committees only if they have met the above qualifications.

Structures

What follows is the typical pattern. Program units may request exceptions:

Sections: chair or co-chairs and five steering committee members who serve three-year terms, renewable once.

Groups: chair or co-chairs and five steering committee members who serve three-year terms, renewable once.

Seminars: chair or co-chairs and five steering committee members who serve a term concurrent with the term of the seminar.

Consultations: chair or co-chairs and five steering committee members who serve three-year terms, renewable once.

  1. Program Unit Chair’s Responsibilities: An Overview

This section contains an overview of the program unit chair’s responsibilities. Sections 6, 7, and 8 provide more details to help program unit chairs fulfill their duties.

  1. Starting a program unit. Typically, the person who assumes the leadership in submitting the original proposal to institute a new program unit becomes the unit’s chair if the unit is approved. This typically entails conversations with members interested in the topic, the formation of a proposed steering committee, and the writing of the proposal, which is then submitted to the Program Committee. (See Section 12, Proposing a New Program Unit.)
     
  2. Organizing program unit sessions. The program unit chair oversees the whole process, from submitting the unit’s call for papers to evaluation of proposals and final selection of presenters. The AAR encourages all units to use anonymous review of proposals. Program unit chairs, with their steering committees, play a leadership role by highlighting special topics, setting up sessions of invited guests, or experimenting with the format of sessions. (See Section 6, Organizing Annual Meeting Sessions).
     
  3. Reporting on program unit activities. The program unit chair reports annually to the Program Committee about the unit’s activities. This report should provide detailed information including names of new steering committee members and proposed program unit chairs. The Director of Meetings and Marketing provides an online form for this report in late October. (See Section 7, Submitting Program Unit Chair Annual Reports).
     
  4. Application for renewal or change of status of program unit. Groups and sections seeking renewal or a change in status must undergo a rigorous review process. This review occurs automatically every five years and includes:
  1. a self-review by the unit, including documentation of the unit’s activities, an assessment of the unit’s effectiveness and importance, and needed improvements.
  2. a written proposal requesting renewal or change of status, including a clear rationale, defined analytic focus, articulated methodology, and set of goals.
  3. an evaluation by an external reviewer selected by the Program Committee.

Consultations seeking a change of status to group must submit to the Program Committee a proposal presenting a clear rationale, defined analytical focus, articulated methodology, and set of goals.

At the end of the initial three-year term, a consultation can submit a formal request for renewal as a consultation by outlining the consultation’s focus, need for renewal, methodology(ies), goals, and new objectives. Following the second three-year term, a consultation must either complete its work or seek a change to group status. An external review is required in addition to the change of status request. The review must be requested from the program unit chair(s) prior to the final year of the second three-year term.

So that the Program Committee can respond to the request during its annual December meeting, it is the program unit chair’s responsibility to see that all of the forms, procedures, and deadlines in this process are followed. (See Section 8, Applying for Renewal or a Change in Status.)

  1. Communication. Increasingly, communication amongst program unit chairs, participants, and the executive office is conducted via email. Regular use of email and the internet will be assumed and necessary for all program unit chairs.
  1. Organizing Annual Meeting Sessions

The Annual Meeting Cycle: An Overview

This section provides an overview of the steps involved in the Annual Meeting cycle. Detailed instructions about the steps pertinent to a program unit chair’s responsibilities appear in subsequent sections.

  1. Preparing Your Copy for the Call for Papers
    Immediately after the Annual Meeting, program unit chairs write reports to the Program Committee. Reports are due in the executive office the first week of December. These online reports must include copy for the next Call for Papers. This copy is usually drawn from conversations with the steering committee and from the business meeting at the previous Annual Meeting. It should begin with a statement of the unit’s objectives and include an outline of the themes or topics the unit is most interested in for the upcoming meeting.
     
  2. Annual Meeting Program Director Produces and Sends out the Call for Papers
    The executive office posts the Call for Papers at www.aarweb.org and sends a print copy to all current members by the end of January as part of the Religious Studies News. The Call for Papers also includes the Program Participant Form, which members must include with their proposals, unless using the online paper/panel system (OP3).
     
  3. Director of Meetings and Marketing sends Planning Information to Program Unit Chairs
    This information includes practice forms and instructions you need to organize your sessions and prepare your Program Book copy. The information is sent and posted online by mid-February.
     
  4. Proposals are Submitted by Individual Members or as Pre-Arranged Sessions
    Proposals are due to program unit chairs by March 1, and may be submitted in one of five ways: surface mail; fax; e-mail; e-mail with attachments; or via OP3. A complete proposal includes
  1. a description of the proposed paper or panel;
  2. a program participant form for each person; presiders (required) and respondents (if any) included; or a Pre-Arranged Session participant form; and
  3. an abstract of the proposal for the Book of Abstracts.
  1. Evaluating Proposals
    Each program unit has its own process for evaluating proposals; some use OP3 while others circulaate proposals via e-mail, fax, or surface mail. The AAR strongly urges that program units use some form of anonymous review. While it may sometimes happen that anonymous review processes result in conflict with the AAR’s inclusiveness policy, the Program Committee’s opinion is that usually this is not the case. The committee is also comfortable with a variety of ways of “correcting” for the happenstance of anonymous review. Some unit chairs, for example, take the initiative in inviting members to participate; some send with the proposals a separate sheet of proposers; some review the results of the anonymous review and then hold a conference call or live online chat with their steering committee to make some adjustments for the sake of broadening the range of presenters.

To allow adequate time for program units to evaluate proposals, there will be a proposal review period until March 15.  No proposals may be accepted or rejected during this time. In instances where an identical proposal was sent to two separate units, program unit chairs are encouraged to consult with one another on the unit's plans to accept or reject it.  People are permitted to state the preference of which unit accepts the proposal when the proposal is submitted.  After March 15, acceptance and rejection notices may be sent.  The Program Committee encourages you to work in partnership with other porgram unit chairs. 

  1. Notification
    By April 1, program unit chairs must notify members who submitted proposals whether or not they are on the program. This is especially important because members sometimes must decide between more than one invitation. To speed the process and ensure that program unit chairs can establish their program efficiently, it is imperative that invitations and rejections go out on time. OP3 largely automates this process. If your program unit does not use OP3, we urge the use of e-mail.
     
  2. Members Respond to Invitations
    Members who have submitted proposals to only one program unit are expected to respond quickly to an invitation. Those who have submitted proposals to more than one program unit must be given sufficient time to check with other program unit chairs.
     
  3. Program Unit Chairs Send Program Book Copy to the Director of Meetings and Marketing
    Program Book copy, participants’ abstracts, and room setup requirements are due from the program unit chair to the executive office by April 7 through the online Session Entry database.

Materials due by the April deadline include:

  1. Program Book copy describing each session
  2. room set up and equipment needs
  3. program participant information for each person including presiders and respondents
  4. paper and panel abstracts, if any
  5. hard-copy participant forms if the proposal was not submitted via OP3
  1. Producing the Annual Meeting Program Book
    The Director of Meetings and Marketing organizes the program and prepares the Program Book (April–July). The Program Book is posted on the AAR website in early August and is mailed to all members in September. The Program Book supplement (Annual Meeting At-A-Glance) is available on-site at the meeting. Room locations are listed in the online Program Book and the At-A-Glance.
     
  2. Annual Meeting
    At the Annual Meeting, program units conduct regular sessions, hold business meetings within the time frame of a session, review goals, and set an agenda for the next year’s Call for Papers.

Preparing Your Portion of the Call for Papers
Copy for the Call for Papers must be submitted in the online Program Unit Report.

Sections have a 275-word limit. Groups and consultations have a 125-word limit. The contact information does not count towards the word limit. Seminars should not issue a solicitation for papers in their Call. Rather they should describe the ongoing work of the seminar and provide contact information for joining.  For example:

Constructions of Ancient Space. Jon L. Berquist, Chalic Press, jberquist@aol.com. James W. Flanagan, CaseWestern Reserve University, jwf2@po.cwru.edu. The theme is “Critical Spatiality and/in Representations of the Past, Present, and Future.” Seminar members are invited to submit proposals relating to the above theme. Issues such as time and space, modes of communication, and applications of critical spatiality to specific topics and issues fall within the seminar’s interest. Members submitting should contact co-chairs jberquist@aol.com or jwf2@po.cwru.edu. All accepted materials will be posted on the Web at http://www.guildzone.org well in advance of the meetings. Online discussion among members will commence not later than early September 2004. Papers will not be read at the Annual Meeting.

The following two examples should help you in preparing your copy:

Study of Islam. Nelly Van Doorn-Harder, Department of Theology, Valparaiso University, Valparaiso, IN 46383-7493, USA; pieternella.hardervandoorn@valpo.edu. Omid Safi, Department of Philosophy & Religion, Colgate University, 13 Oak DR, Hamilton, NY 13346, USA; osafi@mail.colgate.edu. The Study of Islam Section encourages paper proposals in all areas of Islamic studies, but successful proposals will reflect theoretical and methodological sophistication and self-awareness, as well as innovative examination of Islamic societies and texts. As in all years, we welcome submissions dealing with the Qur’an, Islamic law, Sufism, gender and sexuality constructions, engagement with modernity, and other areas of general interest. When submitting your proposals online to the OP3 system, prearranged paper sessions (with separate abstracts for each individual paper) are generally preferable to prearranged panels. All prearranged sessions should take gender and seniority diversity into account when organizing presenters; respondents are essential. Innovative, interactive formats and multimedia presentations are welcome. Although we look forward to prearranged paper sessions in the areas outlined below, individual scholars are also encouraged to submit their proposals. This year we are especially interested in papers or panels on the following: moving beyond the “Clash of Civilizations” theory; comparisons between Judaism and Islam, especially law; the pedagogy of teaching the Qur’an (this can include topics from the classical tradition, educational approaches, teaching of the Qur’an in a specific geographical area, or trends of learning); African-American Islam; the prophet Muhammad (historical approaches, textual sources, poetry, Sufi expressions, modern developments); the creation of Muslim identity through learning processes; religions in South Asia.

Anthropology of Religion. Rebecca Norris, Department of Religious Studies, Merrimack College, 315 Turnpike ST N, Andover, MA 01845, USA; W: 978-837-5000, ext. 4521; rebecca.norris.1999@alum.bu.edu. We encourage submissions from scholars of diverse traditions, regions, and eras who use anthropological theory or method. This year, we particularly invite papers on the intersection of cognition, culture, and cosmology as well as proposals that draw on psychological anthropology. We also plan to co-sponsor two sessions focusing on Latin America: 1) with the Native American Traditions in the Americas Group and the Religion, Medicines, and Healing Consultation, we invite proposals that include ethnographic approaches to healing practices, medicines, and Native religious traditions in Latin America (especially papers on peyote and other plants used for ceremonies and healing); 2) with the Mysticism Group, we invite proposals on mysticism, trance, and possession in the Americas.

Call for Papers copy must be received by the Program Unit Report deadline each year. The chairs of the unit should be listed as the contacts. If there are others a potential proposer should contact, note them in parentheses following the topic.

Evaluating, Accepting and Rejecting Proposals
There is no single procedure or guideline for evaluating, accepting or rejecting proposals. In most instances, program units design processes to fit their specific needs, locations, and goals. Typically program unit chairs share copies of proposals with steering committee members who suggest rankings and groupings. It is usually the chair’s responsibility to respond to applicants, put the package together into a coherent program, and submit the results to the Director of Meetings and Marketing through the online session entry form.

It is imperative that all applicants be notified about the status of their proposal by the April 1 notification deadline. To facilitate the notification process, we urge the use of e-mail.

The AAR encourages program units to use some type of anonymous review process. Many program units follow procedures similar to those used by journals and book publishers. Since access to the program can be a political and economic issue as well as an academic one, it is very important that members trust that all proposals are treated impartially.

Organizing a Prearranged Session
It is also appropriate for a program unit’s leaders to arrange an Annual Meeting session with invited speakers or panelists. Some units accept session proposals from members that have been prearranged in their entirety. If your unit is interested in doing a prearranged session, please be sure to look over the paragraph on Special Invitations.

Dealing with Multiple Submissions
The policy concerning multiple submissions is as follows:

To foster broad participation and to facilitate the work of unit chairs, the Program Committee allows but does not encourage multiple submissions of proposals. The limit on such submissions is two. These may consist of the same proposal submitted to two different program units or of any combination of different proposals. Each proposal must include a Program Participant Form that indicates the names of other program units receiving proposals from the applicant. Although failure to disclose multiple submissions may result in the rejection of all submissions, disclosure of multiple submissions will not jeopardize full consideration of each.

Conducting Cosponsored Sessions
Program unit chairs are encouraged to explore the possibility of conducting cosponsored sessions with other program units when it seems appropriate to do so. Sometimes cosponsored sessions are arranged ahead of time by program unit chairs and announced in the Call for Papers, and other times cosponsored sessions arise when a program unit chair receives a cluster of proposals that would be best presented in concert with another unit’s work. The manner in which cosponsored sessions are listed in the Program Book is 1.) by program unit type, section, group, then consultation; 2.) alphabetical by program unit name. For instance: Buddhism Section and Hinduism Group; Black Theology Group and Indigenous Religious Traditions Group; Platonism and Neoplatonism Group and Contemporary Pagan Studies Consultation.

Number of Cosponsored Sessions
Each section, group, and consultation may have a cosponsored session in addition to its normal allotment of sessions. Seminars are not permitted to have cosponsored sessions. Cosponsored sessions count as each unit’s extra session.

A unit receives only one extra session for cosponsoring. Thus, if a program unit has two regular sessions, it will receive a third session if it cosponsors.  If the unit cosponsors a second session, that session is considered one of the regular two sessions (ie, the unit does not receive a fourth session).

Sections willing to have all of their sessions scheduled at any of the nine session slots may request an additional session (exclusive of their cosponsored session) if it is scheduled on Tuesday morning. If a program unit wishes to have two or more cosponsored sessions, please contact the Director of Meetings and Marketing for further guidance.

Policies Concerning Participation in the Annual Meeting
Because the Annual Meeting is a convention of members, program participants must be current members of AAR by June 15. Membership in SBL does not fulfill this requirement. Program unit chairs should verify the membership of each participant before Program Book copy is submitted. Individuals listed in a session who are not verified as current members will not be listed in the Program Book. Current membership for Annual Meeting participation means having paid in full the membership dues for the same calendar year as that of the Annual Meeting. When possible, the Director of Meetings and Marketing will inform program unit chairs of such cases in order to allow the chair time to remind the proposed participant to become a current member or to make alternative arrangements for the session.

Further, all Annual Meeting participants must preregister for the Annual Meeting by June 15. Participants not registered by June 15 will have their name removed from the Program Book. N.B. Participants must be registered for the meeting at the appropriate regular, student, or retired member rate, rather than the spouse/partner rate. The spouse/partner rate is intended for those attendees who would not otherwise come to the Annual Meeting.

To ensure that individual members have maximum accessibility to program slots, members may not be on the program more than two times. This includes the SBL side of the program. Business meeting presiders may appear thrice. If the Director of Meetings and Marketing discovers a member is slated to participate more than two times during the processing of session forms, the office will contact the member and the affected program units. The member will be asked to drop one or more sessions and to notify the proper program unit chairs of their decision. All sessions must have a presider, and presiders should not deliver a paper in a session over which they preside. Similarly, respondents may not deliver a paper in a session in which they will also respond.

Special Invitations
Requests to invite a nonmember whose field is not religion and who is not located within a religion department or program should be submitted to the executive director at annualmeeting@aarweb.org as soon as possible, but no later than March 31 of the meeting year.

Typically, the program unit chair sends an email request and gets a response within a day. Authorization must precede the extending of an invitation to a nonmember. In your correspondence with the executive director, please include the full address for the invited participant, and a brief rationale for the exception. A nonmember whose field is religion must become a member to participate at the Annual Meeting. Participants from developing nations are exceptions to this requirement. Keep in mind that membership waivers do not necessarily imply waivers of registration for the Annual Meeting.

Papers vs. Panel
The Annual Meeting program has three types of sessions: paper sessions, panel sessions, and poster sessions. A “panel” is a session with one announced theme and a list of participants who address that theme but do not present separate formal papers. A session with a theme and separately announced paper titles/presentations is considered a “paper” session. Any session that lists individual paper titles—regardless of theme, format or structure—will be considered a presentation of papers. A “poster” is a session that allows participants to present a graphical and textual display of the topic. Poster proposals are not submitted to individual program units but are evaluated by the Program Committee.

Special Topics Forums, Plenary Addresses, and Wild Card Sessions
Sessions in honor of members will be organized by and within existing program units, rather than as a Special Topics Forum (STF). STFs are reserved for committees of the AAR. Plenary speakers are selected by the AAR president. Recommendations are appreciated; however, the decision is ultimately that of the president, and often made far in advance of the current annual meeting year. Wildcard sessions are one-time sessions on the Annual Meeting program.  Such sessions are on topics not covered by extant program units. Wildcard session proposals are evaluated by the Program Committee.

Preparing Program Session Materials
Each chair prepares session materials in their entirety and submits them to the Director of Meetings and Marketing through the Session Entry database by April 7. For each session planned, the following must be submitted: a session request describing each session; room set up and equipment needs; program participant information for each person including presiders and respondents; paper and panel abstracts; and hard-copy participant forms for all participants if their proposals were not submitted via OP3. All of these materials with the exception of the hard-copy participant forms must be submitted online. You may fax or mail the participant forms.

Session Entry Database
The program session form is available online at www.aarweb.org from early March through April 7. Further instructions for entering the form will be available there. Please keep in mind that one request must be made for each session. This holds even if you are dividing up the session thematically. Your sessions’ proper scheduling and Program Book are predicated on accurate submission of this information.

If the session was coordinated by a person other than the program unit chairs, give the person’s name and contact information in the comment/concerns field of the online session form. Indicate any special needs including any requests for scheduling (e.g. Sabbath observance or persons with disabilities). When listing other sessions to avoid in scheduling, please be specific about the units or topics to be avoided (i.e. Buddhism Section’s session on “Buddhism in Sri Lanka” rather than “anything about Buddhism”) and list them in priority order.

Audiovisual Requests
The scheduling of audiovisual (AV) equipment at the Annual Meeting depends upon the accurate and timely completion of both participant and session forms. Please double-check that all AV requests from the participant forms have been transferred to the session form (this will be automated for those using OP3). If there are requests that are puzzling or incomplete, please check with the participant for clarification. All requests for AV must be made at the time program copy is submitted. If you are requesting unusual AV for your session (e.g. dance floors, special lighting or specific computer equipment), contact the Director of Meetings and Marketing and confirm the availability of such equipment. Unusual arrangements must be finalized early.

Please also note that due to the high rental costs of computer equipment mean that we cannot guarantee all requests. The Director of Meetings and Marketing will contact the program unit chairs and participants if requests are denied. AAR reserves the right to decide whether AV can be provided, depending on costs and availability. AV requests received after July 31 cannot be accommodated.

Participant Forms
Each participant or pre-arranged session convener (including presiders and respondents) must complete a participant form before they are included on the program. This is not only to make certain that names and institutions are listed correctly in the Program Book, but also to ensure that the individual certifies any special scheduling needs, AV requests, etc. Please send in all completed participant forms to the Annual Meeting Program Director by the April 7 deadline. Fax copies are acceptable if legible. A separate participant form is not required for proposals submitted via OP3.

Acceptance/Rejection Notification
It is very important that you notify proposers whether they are on your program or not. We urge the use of email. Please send notification for each proposal as soon as possible, but no later than April 1. In the email, indicate to invitees how and when you should be contacted to confirm acceptance of the invitation. E-mail notification is largely automated in OP3.

Preparing Session Requests in the Session Entry Database
Program Book copy is automatically generated from the information you provide through the online Session Entry Database. Below are a few things to keep in mind when submitting your session information.

  • Divide the time slots into segments desired; e.g., participants, respondents, business meeting; first theme, participants, second theme, participants, respondents. See examples below. If you have multiple sessions and prefer a specific order, please number them. Priority will be given to maintaining the sessions’ order over day/time requests. AAR does not list specific times for individual presentations within a session.
  • Note that participants are attached to particular sessions and cannot be added/edited unless you are within the edit mode of the given session.
  • Include an abstract for each presentation (up to 150 words) for publication in the Book of Abstracts. Only one abstract should be submitted for panels or seminars.
  • Program units that accepted proposals via OP3 can import the proposal information directly from the system. You will not need to rekey any information, but please check to make sure it is accurate.
  • ALL ONGOING PROGRAM UNITS MUST SCHEDULE A BUSINESS MEETING. Please note on your program session form the session that will include your business meeting and who will be presiding over the business meeting. All business meetings must occur within the time frame of one of your sessions and should be open to all registered attendees. Please also note whether it is more important for the business meeting to occur within a particular session or at the particular time you’ve requested.
  • ALL SESSION ENTRY INFORMATION IS DUE APRIL 7TH.

Special Note about Diacritics
The executive office makes every attempt to use correct diacritics in the Program Book. Some diacritical characters are part of the standard font set; please see the Diacritical Characters page at www.aarweb.org/other/diacritical.asp for a list of theses and instructions on how to enter them. For diacritical marks that are not part of the standard font set, please describe to the best of your ability any diacritical marks in session themes, paper titles, or abstracts (e.g., “a macron over the first and second ‘a’ in yogacara” or “an underdot under the ‘n’ in Vishnu”). If you are using non-Latin characters, please type them out in a Microsoft Word document using the font Arial Unicode MS. The Insert - Symbol command (Alt-I,S) has multiple fonts for your use. Save the document and send a copy as an e-mail attachment to the Annual Meeting Program Director at annualmeeting@aarweb.org.

Example of Paper Session (with Business Meeting)
Buddhism Section
Anne M. Blackburn, Cornell University, Presiding
Theme: Contributions to the Study of Buddhism
Michael Como, College of William and Mary
Medicine, Immortality and Yoshino
David Drewes, University of Virginia
Caitya Comparisons in Indian Buddhist Texts: A Reevaluation of the Evidence for a Cult of the Book in Indian Mahayana
Justin McDaniel, Ohio University
Negotiating with the Pali: Lao Buddhist Homiletics and the Kammavaca Nissaya
Business Meeting:
Anne M. Blackburn, Cornell University, and Peter N. Gregory, Smith College, Presiding

Example of Panel Session
Roman Catholic Studies Group
Rodger Payne, Louisiana State University, Presiding
Theme: Catholicism and Civil Rights in the Twentieth-Century South
Panelists:
Gregory Nelson Hite, University of Virginia
Charles R. Gallagher, Milwaukee, MI
Andrew S. Moore, Middle Tennessee State University
Justin Poche, University of Notre Dame
Responding:
Peter A. Huff, Centenary College of Louisiana

Example of Cosponsored Session
Philosophy of Religion Section and Theology and Continental Philosophy Group
Michiko Yusa, Western Washington University, Presiding
Theme: Kyoto School Thought in Dialogue with Western Thought
James W. Heisig, Nanzan Institute for Religion and Culture
Nishida Kitaro’s Medieval Bent
Yoshio Tsuruoka, University of Tokyo
Interpretations of Western Mysticism by Some Kyoto School Thinkers: Suzuki, Nishitani, and Ueda
Thomas P. Kasulis, Ohio State University
Watsuji Tetsuro’s Critique of Modern European Social Philosophy and Its Impact on the Kyoto School

  1. Submitting Annual Program Unit Reports

Describing a Year’s Activities
The Program Unit Report is an online form made available to program unit chairs by the Director of Meetings and Marketing. It requests information on attendance at each session, the process used for soliciting and evaluating proposals, and an overall evaluation by the program unit leadership of the quality of proposals and presentations. The form also asks the program unit chair to make both general and specific suggestions that will enhance the Annual Meeting and its processes.

This report is due almost immediately after the Annual Meeting so the Program Committee can review it at their meeting in the second week of December. We understand that this is a very tight deadline at a terrible time of the semester. It is essential, however, if we are to preserve the flexibility to make changes from one Annual Meeting to the next. If we scheduled the Program Committee any later, we would have a year’s lag before ideas which emerge at one Annual Meeting could find a place on the program. We appreciate your understanding of this very difficult schedule. We are making every effort through the use of online forms to reduce the amount of information which needs to be entered. Please share any suggestions you might have.

These reports play a vital role in helping the committee develop a comprehensive perspective on the meeting, as well as a detailed understanding of the particular needs or problems faced by individual program unit chairs. For these reasons, the reports should be prepared with care even though there is little time between the Annual Meeting and the Program Committee meeting.

Changes in Leadership
Annual reports are the vehicle for reporting leadership changes. If there is to be a change of leadership, the current program unit leadership should indicate who the new chair is replacing and the process by which the decision was made.

The chairs and committee members of seminars serve terms that are coterminous with the term of the program unit. The chairs of sections, groups, and consultations are appointed for three-year terms, renewable once. Section, group, and consultation steering committee members are appointed by the current chair and serve three-year terms, renewable once. Alternative patterns for terms of office for either the program unit chairs or steering committee members should be proposed to the Program Committee.

The size of program unit steering committees is fixed by the rules governing the Annual Meeting. All may have three to five members plus the chair(s). Requests for exceptions should be made in the annual report.

The annual report also offers an opportunity for a program unit to make suggestions for special performance events, and extra-meeting events and activities. Please understand that your suggestions and recommendations are appreciated, even if they do not always find their way to realization. Finally, requests for program unit name changes should also be made in the program unit report or as a supplement. Name changes are at the discretion of the Program Committee.

  1. Preparing for Renewal or Change of Status

Rationale
The review and evaluation process represents the chief, though not the only, means by which the Academy is able to assess its work in constituent units. It is also intended to serve as a way of being responsive to changes in scholarship concerning the conception and practice of religious studies.

Reviewers
Reviewers are selected by the president in consultation with the Program Committee chair. Efforts are made to locate a member who has expertise in the field and who is able to play the role of participant observer in the unit’s review.

Assumptions
The review of program units is undertaken for the express purpose of determining which units will be continued. For renewal, program units must have a favorable review and evaluation, make a compelling argument for continuation, and have present persuasive evidence of creative plans for another term. Seminars are nonrenewable. Currently, consultations may be renewed for a second three year term. In order to continue beyond the second term, the consultation must apply for group status a year in advance of the conclusion of the of its term and undergo a formal review.

Procedures
The review is based on at least three forms of evidence:

  1. the program unit chair’s annual reports;
  2. a self-review stating the aims of the unit, its procedures, its programming accomplishments, and a rationale for the unit’s continued existence (due in the executive office and to the unit’s reviewer by October 15th of the review year);
  3. the reviewer’s written report, which is based on (1) attending as many sessions of the unit as possible during the Annual Meeting, including the unit’s business meeting(s); (2) personal interviews with the unit chairs, members of the steering committee and a cross-section of participants at Annual Meetings both current and previous (if that can be arranged); and (3) the unit’s written self-review.
     

Program Unit Chair’s Responsibilities during the Review or Renewal Process
The following is a list of program unit chair responsibilities to guide you as you prepare your unit’s proposal for renewal or a change in status. Program unit chairs should:

  1. cooperate fully with the reviewer in supplying all requested information in a timely fashion;
  2. assist the reviewer in arranging a mutually acceptable time or times at the Annual Meeting to meet with the steering committee of the unit;
  3. prepare any supplemental material the unit wishes to submit to the Program Committee in light of the reviewer’s report;
  4. indicate where you may be reached by telephone by the Program Committee during its meeting (held in mid-December) in the event there is need to do so;
  5. submit to the Program Committee a formal petition for reauthorization for an additional period of time. That petition should review the history and activities of the unit since it was last authorized, present a plan for the future work of the unit if it is continued, and indicate the contribution of the work done under the unit’s auspices to advancing the academic study of religion;
  6. indicate committed leadership for the future of the unit (a CV for any new chair(s) and letters of agreement/support from steering committee members.)

Criteria
Among the criteria deemed relevant to the review, though not necessarily in this order, are the following:

  1. the imagination, conceptual richness, and scholarship that have gone into planning the unit’s sessions;
  2. the extent to which the unit’s constituency has been afforded an opportunity to participate in the sessions (with attention to diversity of age, race, ethnicity and gender among participants);
  3. the degree of commitment that the unit’s constituency seems to exhibit to the ongoing life of the unit;
  4. the extent to which the field of interest represented in/by the unit continues to reflect a major area of interest and work for a significant portion of the Academy’s membership;
  5. the unit’s range of appeal to those members of the Academy whose own fields of specialization do not normally fall within the field of interest represented by the unit and the unit’s ability to involve such people periodically in its programs;
  6. the intellectual caliber and distinction of the work carried on by the unit, whether through presentation of papers, the sponsorship of discussions or the publication of proceedings;
  7. and, finally, the promise the unit holds for advancing the academic study of religion and/or strengthening its relationship to other disciplines.

Previewing the Reviewer’s Report
The reviewer will arrange to meet with the chairs and steering committee of the unit under review near the conclusion of the Annual Meeting and will indicate to them the substance of the report that will be made to the Program Committee.

The chairs and steering committee of the unit may choose to submit additional materials responsive to the reviewer’s evaluation of the unit. The supplement will be due at the same time as the Program Unit Report, but should be submitted separately as an e-mail, e-mail attachment or fax.

The Program Committee Meeting
The Program Committee considers all review reports and related documents early in its meeting. Since the Committee must consider the case for renewal in relation to a range of other considerations, a positive reviewer’s report is necessary, but not by itself sufficient for renewal. The decisions of the committee regarding the future of a program unit are final, except in the case of termination of sections, which may be appealed to the AAR Board of Directors. Such an appeal should be made in writing and submitted to the executive director no later than March 1 for consideration at the spring board meeting or October 1 for consideration at the November board meeting. (As a practical matter this entails a minimum of one year’s hiatus in the unit’s activities, given the short time between committee decisions and publication of the Call for Papers.)

  1. Reimbursement Policy

In addition to your contributions of time and talent, we recognize the financial support that your colleges and universities provide (in the form of telephone calls, copying, and postage) to help our volunteer system work. Without such support, we would not be able to have such a large, varied, and participatory process and event. We do, however, want to be sensitive to those unit chairs who are without institutional support. Thus we have set up a fund to help defray costs (up to US$200). All requests for reimbursements should be sent to the executive director in writing. Only those receipted expenses not covered by your home institution can be reimbursed. Please contact the Director of Meetings and Marketing for an expense report form, if necessary.

  1. Suggested Best Practices

The following is a short list of guidelines, based on the calendar, to assist you in managing your program unit and its sessions more effectively.

January
Upon receipt of your Religious Studies News, Call for Papers, send a reminder to your unit’s “faithful” that the proposal process has begun for the current year’s Annual Meeting. Also, send reminders to your steering committee that they must renew their memberships in order to take part in the review process in March.

February
Contact your steering committee with instructions on how to access OP3 if you are using this system; and/or on the timetable and procedures for proposal review.

March/April
Proposal reviews begin in earnest. If you are not using OP3, the following are merely suggestions on how to organize the review:

  • Separate the proposals into two stacks, complete and incomplete. Decide whether you will or will not entertain incomplete proposals. The CFP instructions indicate that only complete proposals are eligible.
  • Devise a balloting system, with rankings 1-7 and then a space for comments and a possible theme, if an individual paper proposal. Assign each proposal an arbitrary number. Keep a master list.
  • Send out copies of the proposals to each of your steering committee members with a copy of the ballot for each proposal.
  • Set a solid deadline by which ballots should be returned to you. Keep in mind that your final session requests are due to the Director of Meetings and Marketing by April 7.
  • Assemble the results and organize a conference or group e-mail among steering committee members if necessary. Finalize session themes and best time slots, including business meeting.
  • Send acceptance/rejection notifications via e-mail; await responses if necessary before submitting finalized session information online.
  • Inform your participants when their papers are due to respondents, if necessary.
  • Enter all the information for your participants and sessions into the online Session Entry Database no later than April 7, 11:59 pm Eastern time.

May
Upon receipt of your Pre-Registration Packet in the May issue of Religious Studies News; remember that you had VIP Housing/Reg forms to fax in before May 1.

June
Watch your e-mail for non-member and/or non-registered participant notifications from the Annual Meeting Program Director. Participants who have not renewed their AAR membership or who have not registered for the Annual Meeting will have their name removed from the Program Book before it goes to print. It is your responsibility as chair to ensure that your participants are current members.

July
Searchable version of the Program Book goes online. Double-check your sessions to ensure all the information is accurate. You will also receive confirmation of your sessions’ AV requests during this time.

September
Upon receipt of your Program Book in the mail, contact each of your steering committee members to remind them of the time and location of the unit’s business meeting during the upcoming Annual Meeting. Propose an agenda; including any leadership changes which might need to be made.

November
Hold business meeting and elections if necessary; generate ideas for the next year’s Call for Papers. During the meeting, if you find that a room does not have the requested AV equipment or that it is malfunctioning, contact Meeting Management Staff by going directly to the Convention Information Desk. They will handle the situation by contacting the audio-visual company as indicated. Do not contact the audio-visual company unless you are willing to assume the costs that are incurred by their response to your problem. Further, if there is a need to add equipment not originally requested, participants may do so at their own expense by contacting the audio-visual company. Costs for on-site equipment can be prohibitive.

December
Turn in Program Unit Reports and change of status requests.

  1. A Word of Thanks

The AAR owes program unit chairs a great deal of gratitude. The work is time consuming and sometimes tedious, but without it we would not have such a rich and variegated forum for sharing research and learning with one another. The executive office staff are ready to assist program unit chairs in whatever way possible. Please feel free to call on us whenever you have a question.

Each year, the executive director sends letters of appreciation to the institutions who support your work on our behalf. We solicit names and addresses of presidents, deans, department chairs, and other officials from you on our Web site in the Program Unit Chair Resources pages. Please see the online request form at www.aarweb.org/annualmeet/progunitchair.asp.

The executive director is also pleased to write a letter on your behalf for appointments, promotions, tenure, and other career advancement decisions. Please send an updated curriculum vitae with your request.

Let us know how we can make this process work better for you!

  1. Additional Meetings

Organizations, persons, or program units wishing to plan receptions and other meetings before, during, or after the Annual Meeting should consult the Annual Meeting Web pages at www.aarweb.org for more information. The deadline for priority scheduling of Additional Meeting requests is May 30. Requests after that date will be accommodated as space allows. No additional meeting of a scholarly or programmatic nature (i.e. with names of presenters or titles) will be scheduled during the nine regular program unit sessions of the Annual Meeting. Before submitting a proposal, it is important that those members interested in establishing a new program unit be aware of a program unit chair’s responsibilities. See Sections 2-8.

  1. Proposing a New Program Unit

The AAR accepts program unit proposals from any of its members. Proposals are evaluated by the Program Committee during their December meeting. This section includes a basic Q&A designed to help prospective program unit chairs to think through the steps involved in establishing a new program unit.

How do new program units get started?
Program units typically grow out of a community of scholars looking to establish a wider and more public forum than is available through private meetings and conversations. Although it is not necessary that a new program unit exhibit a broad constituency in its original proposal, the proposal must demonstrate sufficient interest to warrant program unit status.

Is a new program unit the best option?
Before undertaking the process of establishing a new program unit, members should ask whether existing program units are capable of including the conversations that this new unit is designed to engender. Often, members can save a great deal of time and disappointment by attending a program unit’s business meeting and asking the unit to include specific topics in the next Call for Papers. This is encouraged because program units reach their full potential when there is a continual influx of new ideas and themes. If, however, there is no place where your work currently fits, or if the questions you want to raise warrant an independent place on the program, then the following procedures should assist you in establishing a new program unit.

How do you decide which type of program unit is appropriate?
Typically, consultations provide a platform for a community of scholars to announce a line of inquiry new to the AAR program and to seek out others interested in pursuing it further. While some consultations pursue a limited agenda and end after three or fewer years, others develop a constituency interested in exploring a topic for a longer period and apply for group status.

In most instances, the Program Committee prefers to see that a new unit has had significant success as a consultation before considering a proposal to include it as a group. If a consultation has been successful, and if its members can make an effective case for their line of inquiry as an ongoing independent unit, then application for group status is the appropriate next step.

To establish a new section, a proposal needs to demonstrate that the new section embraces a broadly defined and enduring subfield that provides a forum for a variety of approaches and projects not covered by existing program units. It should also identify a constituency large enough to warrant a significant number of sessions at the Annual Meeting.

What must be included in a proposal to establish a new program unit?
Anyone petitioning to establish a new section, group, seminar or consultation, must submit the following information to the executive director well in advance of the regular meeting of the Program Committee, which occurs within two weeks after the Annual Meeting.

Proposals received after the first weekend in December cannot be considered until the following year. Please consult the deadline sheet on the front cover of this booklet.

Proposals to establish a new program unit should include:

  1. The name and type of the proposed unit.
  2. Themes or topics to be included in the first year of the unit’s existence.
  3. If a seminar is proposed, a projection of the publication aspirations of the unit and a schedule of the publication plans.
  4. A list of the names of members who are committed to participation in the program unit.
  5. A well-developed statement that makes an intellectual argument for the new unit. The Program Committee is especially attentive to the persuasiveness of the case for authorization, considering whether the proposal presents a clear rationale, defined analytical focus, articulated methodologies, and set of goals to be achieved.
  6. The names of an appropriate number of persons who are willing to accept leadership responsibilities as members of the unit’s steering committee. Indicate clearly the name(s) of member(s) willing to be designated as the chair(s) of the new unit and include a curriculum vitae for each.
  7. Copy for the proposed unit’s Call for Papers (up to 125 words).
  8. A brief bibliography listing important publications.
  9. Please send these materials in one Word document (e-mail attachment) to AnnualMeeting@aarweb.org.

Does your proposal make a case for initiating a new program unit?
A proposal is your opportunity to “make the case” for the new program unit to the Program Committee. While writing the proposal it is important to realize that the Program Committee expects a well-developed document that substantiates the proposed unit’s purpose. In addition, proposals should include discussion of the methodology, scope, and directions the unit might take during its tenure. Typical proposals run two to five pages and include appendices with information on steering committee members and previous Annual Meeting sessions (if any) on the topic held by those making the proposal. Statistics regarding attendance are of particular interest.

Are there any other AAR contexts which play an important role in establishing a new program unit?

  1. In preparing petitions members should be aware that the Program Committee will evaluate proposals in light of the following policy:

The American Academy of Religion is committed to the policy and practice of including women, minority, and younger members in the activities of the Academy in as many ways as possible. In Annual Meeting programming this commitment will be carried out to the degree that each unit works to accomplish it. Thus, unit chairpersons, steering committees and participants in sessions provide the testing arenas for evaluating our success in adhering to this commitment. The Program Committee will include attention to this policy and practice in evaluating proposals for starting or continuing program units.

  1. The Program Committee’s freedom to approve new program units is curtailed by the exigencies of time and space. Short of a major revision of the meeting’s time, place, and length, the Program Committee reviews more good ideas than can be accommodated. The committee typically prefers first proposals to be consultations as a starting place; yet, even here the committee is rigorous—indeed parsimonious—in its approvals.

If you have additional questions while completing your new unit proposal, please direct them to the Annual Meeting Program Director at annualmeeting@aarweb.org.

 

Welcome to the AAR's newly redesigned website! Over the coming weeks, please look for continued improvements to enhance your experience, including area-specific links in the box above, new content, and increased functionality.