Advanced Workshop Evaluations 2009-2016

The evaluation forms were filled out anonymously by the participants at the end of each workshop

27 workshops: 248 participants & respondents from the University of Kent (136);  Kingston University in Moscow (64) and SOAS, University of London (48).

 

(1) very poor (2) poor (3) adequate (4) good (5) excellent

Presentation & Content 1    2    3    4    5    (4+5)
Instructor's knowledge of the subject 0 0 0 26
222
(100%)
Instructor's method of teaching 0 1
8
52
187 (96%)
Instructor answering questions 0 0 8
50
190 (97%)
Your assessment of the theoretical content?    0 0 23
86
139 (91%)
Your assessment of the role plays? 0 2
8
48 190 (96%)

 

(1) very poor (2) poor (3) adequate (4) good (5) excellent

Role Play Exercise  1   2   3   4   5   (4+5) 
The Crocodile Story  (40 NA)  

2  
24 
81 
100 
(87%) 

The Mouse Exercise  (27 NA)

The Mercury Negotiation (221 NA)

0

0

2

0

2

0

42

4

175

23

(98%)

(100%)

 

(1) strongly disagree (2) disagree (3) neutral (4) agree (5) strongly agree

Future Planning   

3
4
5
(4+5) 
I would recommend this workshop to another student   0 0 1
48
199 (99%)
What I learned will help me in my personal life 0 1
18 67
162
(92%)

The PNBR template is a useful tool in preparing for a negotiation (35 NA)

0

 

2

 

18

 

55

 

138

 

(91%)