Good points here. The “purpose” was basically copy-pasted from our “mission statement” on the SMT website. We could make something pedagogy-oriented a fourth element in the article. Perhaps: “(4) to model and advocate for popular repertoire in music theory pedagogy”?

Thank you for your thoughts, Mitch!

1a—I’m fine with putting that in this draft. I don’t see any reason why people would oppose it being more inclusive. I think we should discuss that (along with the 3-year terms) at the meeting explicitly, though.
1b—I left them out just in case we want to add another award someday, so we don’t have to ame…[Read more]

Well done, Megan. I think this is great.

I agree with Mitch that the window for awards should be 3 years. Based on when an article is published and when the PMIG meets, the 2-year window might effectively be only a single chance to submit.

My only other suggested change is to add (or change) something in “Article II: Purpose” to more…[Read more]

oh, and another reason—6. the Interest Group Task Force has been interested in encouraging IGs to implement bylaws.

Hello! At our next meeting, I would like to vote in some bylaws. While bylaws are not at present common in the SMT Interest Groups, I think it may be the right time for our group, for a few reasons:
1. I am proposing a change to term length and the number of officers.
2. Our group regularly gives awards, and the process for administration of the…[Read more]