NZSTI Conference - Canterbury 2010 Survey

1. Information provided prior to the conference was accurate and timely

Information provided prior to the conference was accurate and timely 1- Strongly agree

2- Agree

3- Neutral

4- Somewhat disagree

5- Strongly disagree

2. The processing of my registration was easy and straight forward

The processing of my registration was easy and straight forward 1- Strongly agree

2- Agree

3- Neutral

4- Somewhat disagree

5- Strongly disagree

3. The venue was suitable and accessible for this kind of event

The venue was suitable and accessible for this kind of event 1- Strongly agree

2- Agree

3- Neutral

4- Somewhat disagree

5- Strongly disagree

4. The catering during the conference was satisfactory and met my needs

The catering during the conference was satisfactory and met my needs 1- Strongly agree

2- Agree

3- Neutral

4- Somewhat disagree

5- Strongly disagree

5. The conference fee (excluding the conference dinner) represent value for money

The conference fee (excluding the conference dinner) represent value for money 1- Strongly agree

2- Agree

3- Neutral

4- Somewhat disagree

5- Strongly disagree

6. The pre-conference drink venue (bar) was suitable

The pre-conference drink venue (bar) was suitable 1- Strongly agree

2- Agree

3- Neutral

4- Somewhat disagree

5- Strongly disagree

6- I did not attend

7. The cost of the conference dinner represented value for money

The cost of the conference dinner represented value for money 1- Strongly agree

2- Agree

3- Neutral

4- Somewhat disagree

5- Strongly disagree

6- I did not attend

8. Globalisation - Hyden Toonen, TransNational

	Relevance	Quality of presentation
High	*Globalisation - Hyden Toonen, TransNational High Relevance	High Quality of presentation
Medium	Medium Relevance	Medium Quality of presentation
Neutral	Neutral Relevance	Neutral Quality of presentation
Semi-low	Semi-low Relevance	Semi-low Quality of presentation
Low	Low Relevance	Low Quality of presentation
N/A	N/A Relevance	N/A Quality of presentation

any comments

9. What price quality - Patrick King, NZTC

	Relevance	Quality of presentation
High	*What price quality - Patrick King, NZTC High Relevance	High Quality of presentation
Medium	Medium Relevance	Medium Quality of presentation
Neutral	Neutral Relevance	Neutral Quality of presentation
Semi-low	Semi-low Relevance	Semi-low Quality of presentation
Low	Low Relevance	Low Quality of presentation
N/A	N/A Relevance	N/A Quality of presentation

any comments

10. Learning from each other - Peter Tuffley

	Relevance	Quality of presentation
High	*Learning from each other - Peter Tuffley High Relevance	High Quality of presentation
Medium	Medium Relevance	Medium Quality of presentation
Neutral	Neutral Relevance	Neutral Quality of presentation
Semi-low	Semi-low Relevance	Semi-low Quality of presentation
Low	Low Relevance	Low Quality of presentation
N/A	N/A Relevance	N/A Quality of presentation

any comments

11. Editing workshop - Patrick King and Peter Tuffley

	Relevance	quality of presentation
High	*Editing workshop - Patrick King and Peter Tuffley High Relevance	High quality of presentation
Medium	Medium Relevance	Medium quality of presentation
Neutral	Neutral Relevance	Neutral quality of presentation
Semi-low	Semi-low Relevance	Semi-low quality of presentation
Low	Low Relevance	Low quality of presentation
N/A	N/A Relevance	N/A quality of presentation

any comments

12. Simultaneous interpreting workshop - Hannah Brodsky

	Relevance	quality of presentation
High	*Simultaneous interpreting workshop - Hannah Brodsky High Relevance	High quality of presentation
Medium	Medium Relevance	Medium quality of presentation
Neutral	Neutral Relevance	Neutral quality of presentation
Semi-low	Semi-low Relevance	Semi-low quality of presentation
Low	Low Relevance	Low quality of presentation
N/A	N/A Relevance	N/A quality of presentation

any comments

13. Future directions in NAATI accreditation - Lindsay Heywood, NAATI

	Relevance	quality of presentation
High	*Future directions in NAATI accreditation - Lindsay Heywood, NAATI High Relevance	High quality of presentation
Medium	Medium Relevance	Medium quality of presentation
Neutral	Neutral Relevance	Neutral quality of presentation
Semi-low	Semi-low Relevance	Semi-low quality of presentation
Low	Low Relevance	Low quality of presentation
N/A	N/A Relevance	N/A quality of presentation

any comments

14. Theory and practice are the same ... in theory - Inna Palmer, Interpreting New Zealand

	Relevance	quality of presentation
High	*Theory and practice are the same ... in theory - Inna Palmer, Interpreting New Zealand High Relevance	High quality of presentation
Medium	Medium Relevance	Medium quality of presentation
Neutral	Neutral Relevance	Neutral quality of presentation
Semi-low	Semi-low Relevance	Semi-low quality of presentation
Low	Low Relevance	Low quality of presentation
N/A	N/A Relevance	N/A quality of presentation

any comments

15. Do we have consistency and standards? - Diana Clark, Language Line

	Relevance	quality of presentation
High	*Do we have consistency and standards? - Diana Clark, Language Line High Relevance	High quality of presentation
Medium	Medium Relevance	Medium quality of presentation
Neutral	Neutral Relevance	Neutral quality of presentation
Semi-low	Semi-low Relevance	Semi-low quality of presentation
Low	Low Relevance	Low quality of presentation
N/A	N/A Relevance	N/A quality of presentation

any comments

16. Ethics of machine translation - Dorothy Kenny

	Relevance	quality of presentation
High	*Ethics of machine translation - Dorothy Kenny High Relevance	High quality of presentation
Medium	Medium Relevance	Medium quality of presentation
Neutral	Neutral Relevance	Neutral quality of presentation
Semi-low	Semi-low Relevance	Semi-low quality of presentation
Low	Low Relevance	Low quality of presentation
N/A	N/A Relevance	N/A quality of presentation

any comments

17. Classicalisation of language in translation - Fangzhou Peng

	Relevance	quality of presentation
High	*Classicalisation of language in translation - Fangzhou Peng High Relevance	High quality of presentation
Medium	Medium Relevance	Medium quality of presentation
Neutral	Neutral Relevance	Neutral quality of presentation
Semi-low	Semi-low Relevance	Semi-low quality of presentation
Low	Low Relevance	Low quality of presentation
N/A	N/A Relevance	N/A quality of presentation

any comments

18. Troubleshooting for translators - Peter Low, University of Canterbury

	Relevance	quality of presentation
High	*Troubleshooting for translators - Peter Low, University of Canterbury High Relevance	High quality of presentation
Medium	Medium Relevance	Medium quality of presentation
Neutral	Neutral Relevance	Neutral quality of presentation
Semi-low	Semi-low Relevance	Semi-low quality of presentation
Low	Low Relevance	Low quality of presentation
N/A	N/A Relevance	N/A quality of presentation

any comments

19. Exceptions to the rule - Daniel Cheng, Interpreting New Zealand

	Relevance	quality of presentation
High	*Exceptions to the rule - Daniel Cheng, Interpreting New Zealand High Relevance	High quality of presentation
Medium	Medium Relevance	Medium quality of presentation
Neutral	Neutral Relevance	Neutral quality of presentation
Semi-low	Semi-low Relevance	Semi-low quality of presentation
Low	Low Relevance	Low quality of presentation
N/A	N/A Relevance	N/A quality of presentation

any comments

20. Translation for interpreters - Peter Tuffley

	Relevance	quality of presentation
High	*Translation for interpreters - Peter Tuffley High Relevance	High quality of presentation
Medium	Medium Relevance	Medium quality of presentation
Neutral	Neutral Relevance	Neutral quality of presentation
Semi-low	Semi-low Relevance	Semi-low quality of presentation
Low	Low Relevance	Low quality of presentation
N/A	N/A Relevance	N/A quality of presentation

any comments

21. Interpreting for translators - Henry Liu

	Relevance	quality of presentation
High	*Interpreting for translators - Henry Liu High Relevance	High quality of presentation
Medium	Medium Relevance	Medium quality of presentation
Neutral	Neutral Relevance	Neutral quality of presentation
Semi-low	Semi-low Relevance	Semi-low quality of presentation
Low	Low Relevance	Low quality of presentation
N/A	N/A Relevance	N/A quality of presentation

any comments

22. Attending the NAATI preparatory workshop was worthwhile

Attending the NAATI preparatory workshop was worthwhile Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

N/A

any comments

NZSTI Conference - Canterbury 2010
Exit this survey

1. Default Section

1. Information provided prior to the conference was accurate and timely

2. The processing of my registration was easy and straight forward

3. The venue was suitable and accessible for this kind of event

4. The catering during the conference was satisfactory and met my needs

5. The conference fee (excluding the conference dinner) represent value for money

6. The pre-conference drink venue (bar) was suitable

7. The cost of the conference dinner represented value for money

8. Globalisation - Hyden Toonen, TransNational

9. What price quality - Patrick King, NZTC

10. Learning from each other - Peter Tuffley

11. Editing workshop - Patrick King and Peter Tuffley

12. Simultaneous interpreting workshop - Hannah Brodsky

13. Future directions in NAATI accreditation - Lindsay Heywood, NAATI

14. Theory and practice are the same ... in theory - Inna Palmer, Interpreting New Zealand

15. Do we have consistency and standards? - Diana Clark, Language Line

16. Ethics of machine translation - Dorothy Kenny

17. Classicalisation of language in translation - Fangzhou Peng

18. Troubleshooting for translators - Peter Low, University of Canterbury

19. Exceptions to the rule - Daniel Cheng, Interpreting New Zealand

20. Translation for interpreters - Peter Tuffley

21. Interpreting for translators - Henry Liu

22. Attending the NAATI preparatory workshop was worthwhile

NZSTI Conference - Canterbury 2010Exit this survey

1. Default Section

1. Information provided prior to the conference was accurate and timely

2. The processing of my registration was easy and straight forward

3. The venue was suitable and accessible for this kind of event

4. The catering during the conference was satisfactory and met my needs

5. The conference fee (excluding the conference dinner) represent value for money

6. The pre-conference drink venue (bar) was suitable

7. The cost of the conference dinner represented value for money

8. Globalisation - Hyden Toonen, TransNational

9. What price quality - Patrick King, NZTC

10. Learning from each other - Peter Tuffley

11. Editing workshop - Patrick King and Peter Tuffley

12. Simultaneous interpreting workshop - Hannah Brodsky

13. Future directions in NAATI accreditation - Lindsay Heywood, NAATI

14. Theory and practice are the same ... in theory - Inna Palmer, Interpreting New Zealand

15. Do we have consistency and standards? - Diana Clark, Language Line

16. Ethics of machine translation - Dorothy Kenny

17. Classicalisation of language in translation - Fangzhou Peng

18. Troubleshooting for translators - Peter Low, University of Canterbury

19. Exceptions to the rule - Daniel Cheng, Interpreting New Zealand

20. Translation for interpreters - Peter Tuffley

21. Interpreting for translators - Henry Liu

22. Attending the NAATI preparatory workshop was worthwhile

NZSTI Conference - Canterbury 2010
Exit this survey