Conference One (not to be confused with Conference Two, starting tomorrow) was good. For the most part, the presenters avoided the Things I Hate. I know that at C2, there'll be a lot of talk about the election and that I'll want to kill all of them: people, remember - not everyone shares your biases pro or con a party/person/policy. I know that in this polarized world it's hard to believe that you might actually know someone that doesn't think the way you do, but - gasp - you just might. So keep the major angst to yourself until you know you're not going to annoy anyone.
End of rant one.
Rant two concerns the purpose of C1. It's a "Leadership Summit", which is wonderful. I'm always flattered to be considered a leader. It was inspiring to hear many of the thoughts, but... I know too many "sheep". There was little to no talk about how to reach them. It's a conundrum for which I have little response. If they don't come to the conference, how do you get the ideas back to them? If they don't do professional reading, how do you get the ideas back to them? If they aren't passionate about staying current and being relevant, how do you get the ideas back to them? Even more important: how do you convince someone in a school with little money, no help and an administration that sets up roadblocks to change that these ideas matter?
So the "could be better part" for C1? Next time, let's work on outreach - create a primer of small steps that anyone can take, perhaps, or figure out ways to bring the news to "the people" rather than forcing them to travel to hear it.
Sadly, I expect the same from C2.