Session Evaluation - CFAS AM 2019 - SYMPOSIUM III

Please fill out the following information regarding the session JOHN COLLINS SYMPOSIUM III, which took place on Saturday, Sept. 21st, from 8:00 am to 10:30 am, and included the following lectures:

8:00 – 8:45 Keynote: Evolving from 4 Decades of Subjective Embryo Selection to Objective to Maximize Live Birth Rates
Speaker: Simon Fishel

8:45 – 9:20 Lecture 1: The Oocyte Strikes Back – Small RNAs in Embryo Genome Defence (and what it means for ART)
Speaker: Jonathan LaMarre

9:20 – 9:55 Lecture 2: The Incubator Function of the Uterus: Oxygen, Temperature and pH Dynamics in the Female Reproductive Tract
Speaker: Ying Cheong

9:55 – 10:30 Lecture 3: What Exactly is Endometrial Receptivity?
Speaker: Bruce Arthur Lessey

If needed, a link to the program can be found here.

Question Title

* 1. Were the intended learning objectives for the lectures met [5 being clearly, effectively met, 1 being not met at all]?

Please explain

Question Title

* 2. The presentations were free from commercial bias, or any other form of inappropriate bias [5 being strongly agree, 1 being strongly disagree].

Please explain.

Question Title

* 3. The information provided in the lecture was relevant to my practice [5 being strongly agree, 1 being strongly disagree].

Please explain.

Question Title

* 4. Please score the overall delivery of the presentation content and audio visual [5 being exceptional, 1 being unsatisfactory].

Please explain.

Question Title

* 5. The speakers communicated clearly [5 being very clear, 1 being incomprehensible].

Please explain

Question Title

* 6. The speakers were knowledgeable regarding their subject [5 being very knowledgeable, 1 being not knowledgeable at all].

Comments:

Question Title

* 7. The lectures promoted interaction (1 being no interaction, 5 being very interactive).

Please explain or give examples.

Question Title

* 8. What did you learn from this session? Please specify the presenter's name or the talk title when referring to a specific talk.

Question Title

* 9. What do you intend to incorporate into your workplace/practice? Please specify the presenter's name or talk title when referring to a specific talk.

Question Title

* 10. Overall, how would you rate this session (1 being unsatisfactory, 5 being exceptional)? Please explain.

Please explain.

Session Evaluation - CFAS AM 2019 - SYMPOSIUM III

Question Title

* 1. Were the intended learning objectives for the lectures met [5 being clearly, effectively met, 1 being not met at all]?

Question Title

* 2. The presentations were free from commercial bias, or any other form of inappropriate bias [5 being strongly agree, 1 being strongly disagree].

Question Title

* 3. The information provided in the lecture was relevant to my practice [5 being strongly agree, 1 being strongly disagree].

Question Title

* 4. Please score the overall delivery of the presentation content and audio visual [5 being exceptional, 1 being unsatisfactory].

Question Title

* 5. The speakers communicated clearly [5 being very clear, 1 being incomprehensible].

Question Title

* 6. The speakers were knowledgeable regarding their subject [5 being very knowledgeable, 1 being not knowledgeable at all].

Question Title

* 7. The lectures promoted interaction (1 being no interaction, 5 being very interactive).

Question Title

* 8. What did you learn from this session? Please specify the presenter's name or the talk title when referring to a specific talk.

Question Title

* 9. What do you intend to incorporate into your workplace/practice? Please specify the presenter's name or talk title when referring to a specific talk.

Question Title

* 10. Overall, how would you rate this session (1 being unsatisfactory, 5 being exceptional)? Please explain.

Question Title

* 11. Additional comments:Please specify the presenter's name or talk title when referring to a specific talk.

* 11. Additional comments:
Please specify the presenter's name or talk title when referring to a specific talk.