Recognizing that there are often multiple perspectives, C-STEMEC encourages attendees at its events to provide feedback to help improve future C-STEMEC offerings. Below is the link to a report capturing some of the feedback we received about our second Policy Forum dinner event.
Key findings include:
1. Overall, attendees were very pleased with the event with over 80% of survey respondents agreeing or strongly agreeing with positive statements about the event. Respondents would however like to have more audience interaction. Please see the Attendee Satisfaction section of the evaluation brief for more details.
2. 150 individuals completed the event survey—more than twice the total of the first event. The largest group (57.3%) of respondents were classroom teachers. This is a large shift from the first C-STEMEC event survey where 40.3% of the respondents were university staff and only 26.9% indicated being classroom teachers. There were approximately twice as many principals (12.7% compared to 6%) and slightly more (1-2%) policy and central office roles represented at this C-STEMEC event than at the previous breakfast event. If the organizers want to attract individuals in other roles, such as those in more active policy-making positions, they might want to consider their dissemination channels and marketing approaches. See the Respondents’ Role and Organizational Affiliation section of the brief for more details.
3. While attendees were very positive about the event, they did offer several suggestions for improving the event and these were classified into two broad categories, namely:
(a) Event Format—numerous respondents indicated their approval of the event format, noting they were treated as professionals and it allowed an opportunity to network with other individuals who are passionate about STEM teaching. However, many suggested that they wished there would have been more time for additional interaction both between the panelists as well as with the audience and would like to “dig deeper” into the topics addressed. One respondent thought that the organizers might want to consider the use of hand held technologies, such as clickers, to increase audience involvement and interactivity. Some noted it was difficult to read the slides from the very back of the room.
(b) Event Content—the vast majority of respondents had very positive feelings about the content of the presentations and several particularly noted the presentation by Dr. Wendy Jackson. Many others noted that they thought the policy recommendations were practical and should be implemented, though a few indicated that they didn’t think the recommendations were particularly novel or new. Other raised issues as to how to pay for the recommended changes. Several survey respondents requested more explicit, detailed, tangible suggestions of either sites that are putting some (or all) of the recommendations into practice well or examples of what the recommendations would look like in actual classrooms, schools, and districts. They felt that without concrete examples the recommendations were too vague.