Inquiry-Based Learning - February 24, 2010 Survey

The evaluation involves a series of questions which allows you to rate the Dobb's Foundation Fellowship's Inquiry-Based Learning workshop held on February 24, 2010. Please do your best to give comprehensive feedback on whether this workshop met your needs.

	Excellent	Good	Fair	Poor
Communication leading up to the workshop.	Communication leading up to the workshop. Excellent	Communication leading up to the workshop. Good	Communication leading up to the workshop. Fair	Communication leading up to the workshop. Poor
Organization and preparation of the workshop (format, sequence, materials)	Organization and preparation of the workshop (format, sequence, materials) Excellent	Organization and preparation of the workshop (format, sequence, materials) Good	Organization and preparation of the workshop (format, sequence, materials) Fair	Organization and preparation of the workshop (format, sequence, materials) Poor
Objectives of the workshop (clearly stated, appropriate)	Objectives of the workshop (clearly stated, appropriate) Excellent	Objectives of the workshop (clearly stated, appropriate) Good	Objectives of the workshop (clearly stated, appropriate) Fair	Objectives of the workshop (clearly stated, appropriate) Poor
Content level of the workshop (appropriate and consistent)	Content level of the workshop (appropriate and consistent) Excellent	Content level of the workshop (appropriate and consistent) Good	Content level of the workshop (appropriate and consistent) Fair	Content level of the workshop (appropriate and consistent) Poor
Participant involvement in the workshop (quantity)	Participant involvement in the workshop (quantity) Excellent	Participant involvement in the workshop (quantity) Good	Participant involvement in the workshop (quantity) Fair	Participant involvement in the workshop (quantity) Poor
Participant involvement in the workshop (quality and diverse voices)	Participant involvement in the workshop (quality and diverse voices) Excellent	Participant involvement in the workshop (quality and diverse voices) Good	Participant involvement in the workshop (quality and diverse voices) Fair	Participant involvement in the workshop (quality and diverse voices) Poor
Application value of the workshop (practical, applicable to my teaching)	Application value of the workshop (practical, applicable to my teaching) Excellent	Application value of the workshop (practical, applicable to my teaching) Good	Application value of the workshop (practical, applicable to my teaching) Fair	Application value of the workshop (practical, applicable to my teaching) Poor
Evaluation (matched to objectives, content and format)	Evaluation (matched to objectives, content and format) Excellent	Evaluation (matched to objectives, content and format) Good	Evaluation (matched to objectives, content and format) Fair	Evaluation (matched to objectives, content and format) Poor
Facilitator(s) (knowledge, expertise on content)	Facilitator(s) (knowledge, expertise on content) Excellent	Facilitator(s) (knowledge, expertise on content) Good	Facilitator(s) (knowledge, expertise on content) Fair	Facilitator(s) (knowledge, expertise on content) Poor
Facilitator(s) (effective group skills)	Facilitator(s) (effective group skills) Excellent	Facilitator(s) (effective group skills) Good	Facilitator(s) (effective group skills) Fair	Facilitator(s) (effective group skills) Poor
Accommodations (location, room, food, group size)	Accommodations (location, room, food, group size) Excellent	Accommodations (location, room, food, group size) Good	Accommodations (location, room, food, group size) Fair	Accommodations (location, room, food, group size) Poor
Overall experience	Overall experience Excellent	Overall experience Good	Overall experience Fair	Overall experience Poor

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

Communication leading up to the workshop.

Communication leading up to the workshop. Excellent

Communication leading up to the workshop. Good

Communication leading up to the workshop. Fair

Communication leading up to the workshop. Poor

Organization and preparation of the workshop (format, sequence, materials)

Organization and preparation of the workshop (format, sequence, materials) Excellent

Organization and preparation of the workshop (format, sequence, materials) Good

Organization and preparation of the workshop (format, sequence, materials) Fair

Organization and preparation of the workshop (format, sequence, materials) Poor

Objectives of the workshop (clearly stated, appropriate)

Objectives of the workshop (clearly stated, appropriate) Excellent

Objectives of the workshop (clearly stated, appropriate) Good

Objectives of the workshop (clearly stated, appropriate) Fair

Objectives of the workshop (clearly stated, appropriate) Poor

Content level of the workshop (appropriate and consistent)

Content level of the workshop (appropriate and consistent) Excellent

Content level of the workshop (appropriate and consistent) Good

Content level of the workshop (appropriate and consistent) Fair

Content level of the workshop (appropriate and consistent) Poor

Participant involvement in the workshop (quantity)

Participant involvement in the workshop (quantity) Excellent

Participant involvement in the workshop (quantity) Good

Participant involvement in the workshop (quantity) Fair

Participant involvement in the workshop (quantity) Poor

Participant involvement in the workshop (quality and diverse voices)

Participant involvement in the workshop (quality and diverse voices) Excellent

Participant involvement in the workshop (quality and diverse voices) Good

Participant involvement in the workshop (quality and diverse voices) Fair

Participant involvement in the workshop (quality and diverse voices) Poor

Application value of the workshop (practical, applicable to my teaching)

Application value of the workshop (practical, applicable to my teaching) Excellent

Application value of the workshop (practical, applicable to my teaching) Good

Application value of the workshop (practical, applicable to my teaching) Fair

Application value of the workshop (practical, applicable to my teaching) Poor

Evaluation (matched to objectives, content and format)

Evaluation (matched to objectives, content and format) Excellent

Evaluation (matched to objectives, content and format) Good

Evaluation (matched to objectives, content and format) Fair

Evaluation (matched to objectives, content and format) Poor

Facilitator(s) (knowledge, expertise on content)

Facilitator(s) (knowledge, expertise on content) Excellent

Facilitator(s) (knowledge, expertise on content) Good

Facilitator(s) (knowledge, expertise on content) Fair

Facilitator(s) (knowledge, expertise on content) Poor

Facilitator(s) (effective group skills)

Facilitator(s) (effective group skills) Excellent

Facilitator(s) (effective group skills) Good

Facilitator(s) (effective group skills) Fair

Facilitator(s) (effective group skills) Poor

Accommodations (location, room, food, group size)

Accommodations (location, room, food, group size) Excellent

Accommodations (location, room, food, group size) Good

Accommodations (location, room, food, group size) Fair

Accommodations (location, room, food, group size) Poor

Overall experience

Overall experience Excellent

Overall experience Good

Overall experience Fair

Overall experience Poor

Inquiry-Based Learning - February 24, 2010

1. Rating Scale Section

Question Title

* 1. Reflecting on the following questions will give us good insight into the effectiveness of the workshop on February 24th.