<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> <TITLE>Message</TITLE> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16890" name=GENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY> <DIV><SPAN class=206573518-06102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff>Sometimes I wonder if the questions on the evaluation form are too generic.  We get accustomed to the questions and scales and don't focus on what may be more important questions.  I don't have the answers, but it would be more meaningful in some situations to have an evaluation form with questions formulated specifically for that presentation - <EM>i.e., was the level of knowledge appropriate to the attendees, was the lecture sufficiently comprehensive, did the lecture take the direcftion you expected, was material covered what you anticipated, did you learn anything new, how did the speaker relate to the audience, did the presentation leave you wanting to know more, how many times have you heard this same lecture.</EM></FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=206573518-06102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=206573518-06102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff>Just thoughts on a rainy afternoon . . .</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=206573518-06102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=206573518-06102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff>Wanda Samek</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=206573518-06102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=206573518-06102009></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=206573518-06102009> </SPAN></DIV> <DIV></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Tahoma size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> apgpubliclist-bounces@apgen.org [mailto:apgpubliclist-bounces@apgen.org] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Noreen Manzella<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, October 06, 2009 12:01 PM<BR><B>To:</B> Barbara Mathews; apgpubliclist@apgen.org; hhsh@earthlink.net<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [APG Public List] Participating in Evaluations<BR><BR></DIV></FONT> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0> <TBODY> <TR> <TD vAlign=top> <DIV>Harold and list,</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I would second Harold's sentiments on how these evaluations are used.  As a tool to extrapolate the highest and lowest scores for consideration of future proposals by these individuals, they are useful. However, if the scoring falls in the indeterminate middle, there could have been any number of reasons for this "middle ground."  I would hope that this type evaluation would not be viewed as a definite negative.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>In addition, I think many of us are simply checking off boxes as we prepare to rush off to our next presentation.  I think it would help the organizers if attendees would take just a little time to write a specific comment on their negative or positve experience.  Sometimes, I sit with the evaluation paper in hand, and if something strikes me during the presentation either way, I make a shorthand note to myself so I can elaborate on it at the end of the presentation.  In determining which presenters are most effective for any one conference, I think this type comment is invaluable.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Sincerely,</DIV> <DIV>Noreen<BR><BR>--- On <B>Tue, 10/6/09, hhsh@earthlink.net <I><hhsh@earthlink.net></I></B> wrote:<BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid"><BR>From: hhsh@earthlink.net <hhsh@earthlink.net><BR>Subject: Re: [APG Public List] Participating in Evaluations<BR>To: "Barbara Mathews" <bmathews@gis.net>, apgpubliclist@apgen.org<BR>Date: Tuesday, October 6, 2009, 1:50 PM<BR><BR> <DIV class=plainMail>Barbara --<BR><BR>I try to fill them in whenever we have them, which as I recall is not always. <BR>My feeling is that they are mainly useful for picking out the very best and the <BR>very worst -- the far ends of the bell curve -- but not for the majority of <BR>cases in between. I would worry if conference organizers used them to <BR>distinguish, say, between folks with 61% approval and those with 59%, or even <BR>49%. (And the truth is that sometimes I don't know why a given presentation <BR>worked or didn't work for me -- so my reaction might have had nothing to do <BR>with the speaker's style or substance!)<BR><BR>Harold<BR><BR><BR><BR>> <BR>> We've all flogged this particular issue enough, I'm sure, but I do have one <BR>> question for people on the list. This question is a result of my own reflection <BR>> on my earlier postings about MGC, NERGC, and the BCG Ed Fund aggressively using <BR>> evaluations. I realized that I didn't fill them in for the few speeches I did <BR>> hear at the last NERGC.<BR>> <BR>> How many of us have been regularly filling-in these evaluation forms at <BR>> national conferences?<BR>> <BR>> Barbara<BR><BR><BR><BR>Harold Henderson<BR>Research and Writing from Northwest Indiana<BR><A href="http://us.mc461.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=hhsh@earthlink.net" ymailto="mailto:hhsh@earthlink.net">hhsh@earthlink.net</A><BR>home office 219/324-2620<BR><A href="http://www.midwestroots.net/" target=_blank>http://www.midwestroots.net</A><BR><A href="http://midwesternmicrohistory.blogspot.com/" target=_blank>http://midwesternmicrohistory.blogspot.com</A><BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>APG Public Mailing List<BR><A href="http://apgen.org/publications/publiclist/" target=_blank>http://apgen.org/publications/publiclist/</A><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>