Revision as of 16:48, 16 November 2009 (edit) SvDijk (Talk | contribs) (New page: '''N.B.''' WG-members are supposed to have read:<br> *MoU, basis of the Action (COST website)<br> *"Working in the Working Groups" (attached in mail message) <br> *The 4 articles put on...) ← Previous diff |
Revision as of 22:24, 17 November 2009 (edit) (undo) SvDijk (Talk | contribs) Next diff → |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
+ | <br>__NOEDITSECTION__ | ||
+ | == Working Group meetings 21 November 2009 == | ||
- | + | <br><br><br> | |
'''N.B.''' WG-members are supposed to have read:<br> | '''N.B.''' WG-members are supposed to have read:<br> | ||
*MoU, basis of the Action (COST website)<br> | *MoU, basis of the Action (COST website)<br> |
Revision as of 22:24, 17 November 2009
Working Group meetings 21 November 2009
N.B. WG-members are supposed to have read:
- MoU, basis of the Action (COST website)
- "Working in the Working Groups" (attached in mail message)
- The 4 articles put online in this NEWW site (Schabert, Moretti, Hoogenboom, Van Dijk).
Agenda for each of the WGs:
1. adoption of the agenda
2. selection of two persons taking notes
3. comments on milestones as formulated in the MoU: role of this particular WG
4. objectives for this WG as formulated in the Work Plan: possible given your own expertise as individual researchers?
5. comments on the database WomenWriters and the ways of working in it, as presented in the morning session, from the perspective of this WG [participants are kindly requested to have a try, beforehand, of consultation as well as data entry and trying quantitative approaches]
6. planning for this Grant period – tasks up to 31 Oct. 2010
7. collaboration with the other WGs
8. is the WG as a whole sufficiently equipped, or is it necessary to find supplementary expertise? Is there not too much diversity in the WG?
9. decisions about ways of communicating
10. distribution of tasks to individual WG members, for May meeting in view of November milestone
11. suggestions for STSMs
12. AOB