UIT 2014 – EVALUATION REPORT Hilton Prague Hotel 22–24 January 2014.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Primary MCQ Course Evaluation September 2010 Mean score, maximum being 5.
Advertisements

Feedback from FCRC 2013 Conference Creswick – 11 th – 13 th September.
© Quality Solutions for Healthcare Team Leadership Programme Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board Workshop evaluation from 25 th January 2012 Debbie.
Lincolnshire and Rutland Public Service Compact – Conference March 2011 “The Leadership and Management Workshop Programme” A presentation by Nicola Marshall.
Northern Area Partnership (NAP) Conference 2011 ‘The Future of UK Skills - the challenge for the next 10 years’ York, 20 th – 22 nd May 2011 Thank you.
Support Staff Conference Feedback & Evaluation. Comments “Fabulously organised, brilliant workshops. Great registration and staff. Can't wait for the.
Ealing Scrutiny Conference Monday 23 Victoria Hall - Stakeholders Evening Tuesday 24 Pitzhanger Manor House - Members Evening Hosted by the.
Primary MCQ Course Evaluation May Mean score represented as bar charts. 1= poor 5= excellent Mean score for each subject is presented as bar graphs.
MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette U.S. Department of Education.
Y axis represents number of candidates OSCE/VIVA course: 9-10 January 2012 course evaluation and candidate feed back Total candidates: 38 1: very poor.
Dr. Brad Harrington, ©2009 Career Management & Work-Life Integration Course Overview and Student Feedback.
Dr. Brad Harrington, ©2009 MB 110: Human Resource Management Course Evaluations Prof. Brad Harrington Boston College.
Using Qualtrics for Midterm Course Evaluations Heather Urry Psychology.
No Man is an Island How to foster collaboration and teamwork in assessment Brigham Young University Dan Chandler Cynthia Wong Farris Child.
Maximize Your “Trends in Recruiting” Experience Tips for New Members and First Time Attendees Presented by: Midwest ACE Membership Committee.
3 rd Times a Charm or 3 Strikes – µ R 2 out Statistical Literacy in Nursing J. Craig Phillips PhD, LLM, RN, PMHCNS-BC, ACRN Assistant Professor.
Crofton & Sharlston Medical Practice Questionnaire Results 2013/14 Presentation of 2013/14 Patient Questionnaire Results Patient Participation Group Wednesday.
Facilitator Feedback I found it very enlightening and fulfilling for myself. Sometimes (many times) I forget what it’s like when you’re just starting.
Feedback from Jan ’04 R4 Meeting Oct 15, 2004 LRSPC Meeting.
Effective Teaching of Health Reporting: Lectures and More Barbara Gastel, MD, MPH Texas A&M University Train the Trainer Workshop: Health Reporting for.
Belgrave Surgery Patient Survey Results Results from questionnaire modified from GPAQ December 2012/January distributed to patients attending.
OISTAT EduComm 2013 Cardiff In addition to official Oistat rules, and recommendations: How to organise a meeting, some Do´s and Don´t´s and even Pros and.
Convocation 2007 Survey Results. Please rate the following aspect of convocation: Quality of Content.
Gordon Research Conference on Liquid Crystals June 19 – June 24, 2011, Mount Holyoke College, Massachusetts Liang-Chy Chien, Kent State University, DMR.
.. HFM Distance Learning Project Student Survey 2003 – 2004 School Year BOCES Distance Learning Program Quality Access Support.
BMA House Christmas Lunches 2010 Results Restaurant Christmas Lunches 2010 Do you feel the BMA Christmas lunch package was value for money? Answer Options.
Final FRCA VIVA Course Evaluation 9 th and 10 th June 2009.
Medical School Open Day April Impact Q. Before/After attending the OD at the Uni, how likely were you to apply to the UoE Medical School? Q. If.
Clare Saunders and Danielle Lamb Subject Centre for Philosophical and Religious Studies.
Y axis represents number of candidates OSCE/VIVA course: April 2009 course evaluation and candidate feed back Total candidates:22 1: very poor 2:
With thanks to... We would like to express thanks to Dr Saqib Mahmud who presented “ECG Essentials”. We have received lots of brilliant feedback for his.
Final FRCA VIVA Course Evaluation 11 th and 12 th June 2009.
Final FRCA SOE Course Evaluation Course 1 : June 1 st – 2 nd 2015.
Career Pathways for English Language Graduates Liz Whitaker York St John University 16 th July 2008.
© 2015 albert-learning.com Inviting Neighbor for Dinner Inviting neighbors for dinner.
“Excellent conference. Found great value in many sessions. Will attend again.” “Very well organized and presented! Impressed with the quality.
.. CRB/FEH/Questar III Distance Learning Project Student Survey 2009– 2010 School Year BOCES Distance Learning Program Quality Access Support.
Y axis represents number of candidates OSCE/VIVA course: April 2010 course evaluation and candidate feed back Total candidates: 36 1: very poor 2:
Primary MCQ Course Evaluation September Mean score represented as bar charts. 1= poor 5= excellent Mean score for each subject is presented as bar.
EVALUATION RESULTS March 14 and 15, New York, New York.
ESDGC Conference 2013 Evaluation. Setting the scene! Welcome Phil Williams.
2015 SAA Board Survey. Raw Board Survey ResultsStrongly Agree AgreeDisagreeStrongly Disagree Don't Know Total Points Responses minus DKs Average Score.
Primary MCQ Course Evaluation May 2010 Mean score, maximum being 5.
Final FRCA VIVA Course Evaluation November 2009.
Y axis represents number of candidates OSCE/VIVA course: 26&27 April 2012 course evaluation and candidate feed back Total candidates: 37 1: very poor 2:
Y axis represents number of candidates OSCE/VIVA course: 6-7 January 2009 course evaluation and candidate feed back Total candidates:30 1: very poor 2:
Final FRCA VIVA Course Evaluation 25 th and 26 th November 2009.
Y axis represents number of candidates OSCE/VIVA course: April 2009 course evaluation and candidate feed back Total candidates:28 1: very poor 2:
Final FRCA VIVA Course Evaluation June 2012.
Y axis represents number of candidates OSCE/VIVA course: December 2009 course evaluation and candidate feed back Total candidates: 29 1: very poor.
Pupil Interviews. O We prepared written interviews made up of 13 questions. O We randomly selected 2 children from each class by their place on the register.
Y axis represents number of candidates OSCE/VIVA course: December 2009 course evaluation and candidate feed back Total candidates:30 1: very poor.
Y axis represents number of candidates OSCE/VIVA course: September 2010 course evaluation and candidate feed back Total candidates: 33 1: very poor.
Y axis represents number of candidates OSCE/VIVA course: 5-6 January 2012 course evaluation and candidate feed back Total candidates: 34 1: very poor 2:
6th Annual Postdoctoral Research Symposium February 5, 2016 Office of the Provost, Beckman Institute, and the Graduate College.
IPAC venue selection – review of procedure
10 Classic Evaluation Questions to use at your meetings
Nursery/P1 Transition Evaluation Feedback
BNA2017 FESTIVAL OF NEUROSCIENCE:
Quiz: How Are Your Meetings
y axis represents number of candidates
Credit Risk Skills Workshop Training Evaluation Report
ACGS Summer Scientific Meeting 2016
Primary FRCA MCQ course evaluation February 2015
Primary MCQ Course Evaluation
University Faculty Senate Presentation
Friday 6 March 2015 etc. Venues Prospero House Conference Evaluation
Vox Pop – is that like a Box Plot?
January 2018 PPG Workshop Evaluation
10 Classic Evaluation Questions to use at your meetings
Presentation transcript:

UIT 2014 – EVALUATION REPORT Hilton Prague Hotel 22–24 January 2014

Meeting highlights The meeting was attended by over 900 delegates 97% thought that the conference was well organised 93% thought the length of the meeting was just right 92% felt they had learned something from the event 70% felt that the event would change their practice 99% would attend the next meeting 2

Overall scientific content of the meeting

0% How would you rate the quality of the content? UIT 2014 content quality 0% How would you rate the quality of the speakers? Majority of the speakers were excellent! Generally very high quality! Most speakers are first class! ExcellentVery goodNeutralFairPoor n=270 Proportion of respondents (%) 96% 94% 4

Overall meeting quality Have you learned something from this event? Will this event change your practice? Was the event well organised? Did you feel that the event was biased? n=272 n=267 n=257 92% 70% 97% Proportion of respondents (%) NeutralYesNo 5

Individual session feedback

Session I: Treatment pathway of the infertile couple Very good lectures with a dynamic way to perform them Very well planned program and audience interaction is well organised Great provocative lecture from Professor Fisk Remarkable organisation ExcellentVery goodNeutralFairPoor n=483n=481n=484n=480n=477 73% 77% 73% 36% 68% Proportion of respondents (%) 7

Session II: Variations in treatment protocols Very good session and speakers Congratulations to Dr Fatemi Bhatti was honest about what we DON’T know – which was good Very useful session n=445 n=449n=433 ExcellentVery goodNeutralFairPoor 91% 61% 84% 70% Proportion of respondents (%) 8

Session III: Advances in embryology Excellent up-to-date presentations on comprehensive data Very good session with up-to-date information Excellent session – really enjoyed it n=414n=408n=404n=398 ExcellentVery goodNeutralFairPoor 67% 73% 77% 82% Proportion of respondents (%) 9

Session IV: Genetics in diagnosis and management of pregnancy Dennis Lo gave an exceptionally brilliant lecture worthy of a Nobel Prize candidate Prof Lo’s lecture has been the highlight of the meeting – Fantastic! Excellent lecture from Dennis – he should do the opening lecture at ESHRE n=342n=340n=332n=316 ExcellentVery goodNeutralFairPoor 79% 71% 50% 91% Proportion of respondents (%) 10

Session V: Ovarian reserve – individualisation of treatment Keynote lecture was excellent Very good session with great speakers – would have liked more from Bob Casper Best session of the meeting n=253n=261n=263n=254 ExcellentVery goodNeutralFairPoor 77% 83% 88% 79% Proportion of respondents (%) 11

Session VI: Challenges in infertility treatment…to treat or not to treat? Excellent Entertaining talk from Nick! Really the best meeting I’ve been in n=28 n=29 ExcellentVery goodNeutralFairPoor 93% 69% 100% Proportion of respondents (%) 12

Materials and organisation

Meeting materials and interactivity Rated the abstract book as very good or excellent 84% Rated the pre-meeting correspondence/ information as very good to excellent 83% Rated the iPad materials as very good or excellent 95% Rated the interactivity as very good or excellent 95% Felt there was sufficient time for discussion 94% 14 n=270 n=271 n=267 n=264 n=270

Meeting venue Rated the auditorium as very good or excellent 95% Rated the location and venue as very good or excellent 97% Rated the catering as very good or excellent 94% 15 n=269 n=271 n=270

Selected general comments (1) Because of excellent food, I have 2 kg more, which is not so good but I enjoyed every meal Extremely well organized – have been most impressed and grateful Different continental buffet at conference dinner was a great idea! We enjoyed it More comfortable chairs The AV was exceptional Fantastic venue and organisation 16 Dennis Lo was the highlight of the meeting

Selected general comments (2) Enjoyed the academic content and interaction with colleagues Congratulations to all involved in organizing and delivering this meeting I would definitely like to attend the next meeting Please have the next meeting in a warm country! Congratulations on the great event Excellent meeting 17

Selected general comments (3) Too much use of survey feature No need for abstract book in the era of iPad Would like to see more use of the iPad to see what the audience does, not just test the audiences’ understanding iPad voting is tedious I missed refreshments for vegans, but otherwise excellent 18 Poor location of hotel in a business area, Prague is a good choice though. I understand that few places available to host 1000 people though Position of cameramen disturbed a lot to see the lectures

Selected general comments (4) The dinner was very badly organised, the place was inappropriate, the tables and chairs – not for our age The days are packed and intense: 8:30am start unnecessary! 9am plenty early enough Long days 19 The only sad thing was that there was no ‘nurse’ option in the drop down box in profile. Nurses in the UK are pivotal to the running of an IVF unit Some people were conducting loud conversations, which was a bit distracting – chairs should be instructed to advise Auditorium was sometimes too cold but good views all round

Future UIT meetings 20

Suggested topics for further meetings Infertility in PCOS Ovulation induction Embryology Endometriosis Reproductive immunology Male infertility Day-to-day practice of ART Natural cycle IVF Psychological counselling 21