Basic Workshop Evaluations 2008-2017

56 workshops: 686 participants & respondents from the University of Kent (386),  Lancaster University (128)  and Kingston University in Moscow(64) SOAS, University of London (108). 

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

 

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

Presentation & Content 1 2 3 4 5 (4+5)
Instructor's knowledge of subject 2 1 3 112
568
(99%)
Instructor's method of teaching 3
3
29
228
423
(95%)
Instructor answering questions 2 2 27
209
411
(95%)
What is your assessment of the theoretical content? 2 2
67
275 340
(90%)
What is your assessment of the role plays? 1 1 35
228
421
(95%)
Did the workshop successfully use PowerPoint/ visual/audio aids?   
2
3
48
211
422
(92%)
Role Play Exercises   1 2 3 4 5 (4+5)
The Orange Exercise  (3 NA)
2 20
116
247 298
(80%)
Oil Pricing Exercise  (4 NA)
3 3
35 175 466
(94%)
The Three-Way Organization Exercise* (304 NA) 2 7 37 126 210
(88%)
Negotiating Corporate Change - Video* (624 NA)  0  0  5  30  27 (92%)

Sally Soprano Exercise*

Universal Aircraft Exercise*

(49 NA)

(660 NA)

2

0

7

0

60

3

217

6

351

17

(89%)

(88%)

Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Exercise  (6 NA)
4
13 114
288
261
(81%)
Luna Pen Exercise* (66 NA) 2 5 60
229
324
(89%)
*Not all workshops included these exercises              

 

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

Future Planning 1 2 3 4 5 (4+5)
I would like to take a one-day advanced negotiation course   (61 NA)
5
6 53 156
405
(90%)
I would recommend this workshop to another student (4 NA)
1 4
 31 181 465
(95%)
What I learned in this workshop will help me in my personal life (3 NA)
0 9
57
196

421

(90%)