1. Conference Survey



* 1. Conference Attendee Status:

* 2. I attend the ACSP Annual Conference:

* 3. I was in attendance at the Conference:

* 4. Overall, I would describe my experience at the 2012 Cincinnati Conference as:

* 5. Please indicate how satisfying each of the following conference elements was to you in your overall experience in Cincinnati:

  Very unsatisfying Somewhat unsatisfying Somewhat satisfying Very satisfying Not applicable
Quality of paper sessions
Quality of roundtable sessions
Place-based (aka Local Host) sessions
Plenary session (Mayor Mallory)
Poster session
Welcome reception
Awards Luncheon Presentations
Awards luncheon keynote (Mitch Silver)
Conference hotel
Opportunity to network/socialize with colleagues
Mobile workshops
Book Fair
Job Fair

* 6. Of the conference elements listed above, which are the three most important to you with respect to your ongoing attendance at ACSP?

* 7. Of the items above that you consider very or somewhat satisfying, please make any suggestions for improvement you may have.

* 8. Of the conference elements from question 5 that you consider very or somewhat UNSATISFYING, what can we do to make them more meaningful for your conference experience?

* 9. In 2012, we implemented a deadline for full paper submission in order for authors to be noted in the conference program as having their paper completed. For future conferences, ACSP should:

* 10. Please provide any other comments or suggestions you have on requiring papers to be submitted in advance of the annual conference.

* 11. In 2012 the program highlighted Intersection Sessions (Scholarship that cuts across more than one track and resonates with the conference theme p. 28 of your program). Rank how important you think highlighting these sessions is:

* 12. Based on my experience in Cincinnati, my attendance and participation at a future ACSP Conference is:

* 13. Please share any other comments or suggestions. Thank you!