restricted access Report of the Program Committee, 2001
In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Southeastern Geographer Vol XXXXII. No. 1, May 2002, pp. 135-136 REPORT OF THE PROGRAM COMMITTEE, 2001 Stephen J. Walsh OVERVIEW. The Lexington SEDAAG meeting included 33 sessions, comprising 1 3 regular paper sessions, nine special sessions, four panel sessions, two student honors sessions, two poster sessions, two undergraduate Gamma Thêta Upsilon (GTU) sessions, and a Southern Studies session. A total of 151 presentations were made, including 12 posters, 10 student honors papers, and nine GTU papers. Ninety-one discussants took part in the program. On Sunday, four field trips were conducted. Derek Alderman, East Carolina University, won the Wheeler Award (first paper received [May 23, 2001]). A whopping 382 people participated in the program (with papers or posters or as chairs or discussants), compared to 219 in Chapel Hill in 2000. Participation in the 2001 SEDAAG meeting was the largest on record. The meeting boasted a broad diversity of specially arranged sessions and panels, field trips, and session topics, running the gamut from physical geography to spatial techniques , development, urban/industrial, agriculture, social, and southern studies. Undergraduate participation was showcased once again through the two GTU sessions . GTU paper submissions were significantly higher than last year. Also, a new feature of the 2001 program was an Honorary Lecture as part of the Opening Session . This year, Professor Bobby M. Wilson, University of Alabama-Birmingham, presented the invited paper, entitled "America's Johannesburg: A Critical Geography ." The World Geography Bowl continues to be a showcase event of SEDAAG. A preliminary round robin competition was followed by the Championship Event, preceded by a Student All Stars vs. Professional Dream Team competition. The SEDAAG Business Meeting, presided over by Tyrel Moore, Professor at the University ofNorth Carolina at Charlotte and President of the Southeastern Division of the Association of American Geographers, was followed by the Honors Luncheon and an address by Janice Monk, Professor at the University of Arizona and President of the Association of American Geographers. Her presentation was entitled "Women's Words, Women's Worlds: The American Geographical Society ca. 19001970 ." An undergraduate luncheon was also held. The Honors Committee gave the Best M.A. Paper Award to Amanda Henley, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, for her paper entitled "Observations of the Heat Island in a Small City Revisited ." The Ph.D. award went to Kerion Bailey, University of Kentucky, for "AMIS: Development of a Multicriteria/GIS Corridor Planning Methodology. Dr. Walsh is Professor of Geography at the University ofNorth Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3220. E-mail: 136STEPHEN J. WALSH CONSIDERATIONS. Approximately $1,600 was spent this year to print and mail 500 copies of abstracts and programs for the Lexington meeting. The same information that was mailed was placed on the meeting web site in the form of PDF documents . Is it time to reconsider the generation of hardcopy documents in lieu of the costs involved and the ease of downloading material over the Internet? Might some more abbreviated document (e.g., Program at a Glance) be generated as hardcopy material for distribution as part of the conference registration? The current procedure includes the electronic distribution ofthe program through an email attachment to all program participants and department chairs. The email also provides the URL of the meeting web site so that participants can download the abstracts and the program as needed. Mailing ofthe programs and abstracts to the Local Arrangements Committee in Lexington (from Chapel Hill) cost SEDAAG approximately $300.00. Might it be better to have the materials printed locally as a cost and time saving? The efforts of the Local Arrangements Committee in support of the generation of the 2001 SEDAAG Program were outstanding. The 10-person Program Committee reviewed all submitted papers—two reviewers per paper. Costs included the mailing of papers to each Committee member (approximately $ 1 1 1 .00), and the time involved in assigning the papers to the Committee members and the review of each manuscript relative to a derived grading scheme. As a consequence of the review process, seven papers and two posters were deemed unacceptable, although two were reassessed and included upon appeal. Tighter guidelines need to be written and then enforced regarding...