Re: FW: IOUG Session Evaluation Results
- From: "Niall Litchfield" <niall.litchfield@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: chris.grabowy@xxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 00:25:45 +0100
Chris,
I agree with the others, those are good scores and indicate a valuable
presentation. Bear in mind that IOUG has high quality presenters and high
expectations. My favourite text comment on a presentation that largely
included timings, organisational politics and DMZ deployment of CPUs to
Oracle Apps, i.e is it possible, how painful is it and what did it really
involve? "This presentation merely regurgitated readmes." I've yet to find
the readme that states patch application time...
Niall
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 7:26 PM, Grabowy, Chris <chris.grabowy@xxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> I give up. I keep taking feedback from previous conferences and
> incorporate them into my future presentations, and I still can't get them
> right. I was "slow", well, the last few times I was "too fast". I took the
> time to make sure everyone got the point for each page of my presentation,
> and I get dinged for it! I had addressed most of the comments during my
> presentation, and I still got dinged on them.
>
> Did anyone else get "great" feedback from presenting at IOUG????
>
> I just can't see myself spending all that time working on anymore
> presentations.
>
> Perhaps, I'll skip the mowing tonight and go straight to the drinking
> part....
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Speakers@xxxxxxxx [mailto:Speakers@xxxxxxxx]
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 12, 2008 1:43 PM
> *To:* Grabowy, Chris
> *Subject:* IOUG Session Evaluation Results
>
>
>
> Dear Chris Grabowy,
>
>
>
> Thank you for speaking in Denver at COLLABORATE 08 – IOUG Forum and for
> generously sharing your time and expertise!
>
>
>
> It is through the quality content provided by our speakers that COLLABORATE
> attendees increase their knowledge, their skills and their network.
> Needless to say, you greatly contributed to the success of our conference
> and presentations, such as yours, are what make COLLABORATE the premier
> learning experience that it is!
>
>
>
> Currently, we are in the process of putting all conference proceedings into
> our LoOk (Library of Oracle Knowledge) member area. If you made any changes
> to your paper or presentation after you uploaded it, please send the updated
> version to speakers@xxxxxxxxx We want to ensure that we have the final
> version.
>
>
>
> Please find the results of your session evaluations below. The overall
> mean at COLLABORATE 08 – IOUG Forum was 3.48. That puts the majority of
> sessions into the Very Good to Excellent rankings.
>
>
>
> Thanks again for your continued support of the IOUG; please look for the
> Call for Speakers notification in late August. We look forward to seeing
> you in Orlando, Florida for COLLABORATE 09 from May 3-7, 2009!
>
>
>
>
>
> Peter Smith
>
> IOUG Director of Education
>
>
>
> Jon Wolfe
>
> IOUG Technical Session Chair
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________
>
>
>
> IOUG Evaluation Report:
>
>
>
> Session: #611: Wiki this Way!!
>
>
>
> Question 1: How well did the abstract for this presentation describe its
> contents? (4=Very Accurate, 1=Not Accurate)
>
>
>
> Your score: 3.73
>
>
>
> Question 2: Was the level of technical content appropriate to the objective
> of the presentation? (4=Very Appropriate, 1=Not Appropriate)
>
>
>
> Your score: 3.5
>
>
>
> Question 3: How effective were the presenter's audio visual materials?
> (4=Very effective, 1=Not effective)
>
>
>
> Your score: 3.26
>
>
>
> Question 4: Would you recommend this session to others? (% Yes is shown)
>
>
>
> Your score: 97
>
>
>
> Question 5: How would you rate the presenter's knowledge of the material
> presented? (4=Excellent, 1=Poor)
>
>
>
> Your score: 3.55
>
>
>
> Question 6: How would you rate this presenter's speaking style?
> (4=Excellent, 1=Poor)
>
>
>
> Your score: 3.23
>
>
>
> Question 7: Overall, how would you rate the quality of this presentation?
> (4=Excellent, 1=Poor)
>
>
>
> Your score: 3.42
>
>
>
> Overall Mean - Average of means for questions 1-3 through 5-7.
>
>
>
> Your score: 3.45
>
>
>
> Written Commentary:
>
>
>
> • A walk-through of how Chris built the Wiki for his team. Screen shots
> would have been good.
>
> • Lessons learned were very helpful! Thank you!
>
> • Opening could be shortened, defining a wiki needed less time. Spend a
> little more time on why you selected a particular Wiki. Do a bit more
> research… OSX Server has a Wiki built-in for example. Info on hosted Wikis
> was very helpful. ie: exit strategy
>
> • Slow
>
>
>
>
>
--
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
http://www.orawin.info
Other related posts:
