MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette
description
Transcript of MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette
![Page 1: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
MARCH 16-17, 2011
NEW YORK CITY, NY
EVALUATION RESULTS
Michelle BissonnetteU.S. Department of Education
![Page 2: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Table of Contents
Who Responded ?
Results
Overall Summit Evaluation
Evaluation of Sessions
Evaluation of Logistics and Support
Evaluation Comments
![Page 3: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Who
Responded?
![Page 4: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Who Responded?
Participants: Attendees engaged in dialogue at the center tableAttendees: Invited guests in audience observing dialogue and participating in Q&A
Response Rate: Percent of each group who completed an evaluation
19%
43%
Chart: See accessible version in notes
4
![Page 5: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Overall
Summit
Evaluation
![Page 6: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Item 3A. The summit as a whole was useful – I am glad I attended. (5 = Strongly Agree, 1= Strongly
Disagree)
Chart: See accessible version in notes
Average ScoreParticipants: 4.74Attendees: 4.48All: 4.61
6
![Page 7: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Item 3B. The issues discussed were relevant to my work. (5 = Strongly Agree, 1= Strongly
Disagree)
Chart: See accessible version in notes
Average ScoreParticipants: 4.58Attendees: 4.44All: 4.51
7
![Page 8: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Item 3C. I learned about policies and practices that will help me when I return home.
(5 = Strongly Agree, 1= Strongly Disagree)
Chart: See accessible version in notes
Average ScoreParticipants: 4.31
Attendees: 4.08All: 4.19
8
![Page 9: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Item 3D. I made valuable professional connections.(5 = Strongly Agree, 1= Strongly Disagree)
Chart: See accessible version in notes
Average ScoreParticipants: 4.03Attendees: 3.98All: 4.00
9
![Page 10: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Item 3E. The OECD background paper was informative and will serve as useful tool as I
continue this work.(5 = Strongly Agree, 1= Strongly Disagree)
Chart: See accessible version in notes
Average ScoreParticipants: 4.31Attendees: 4.33All: 4.32
10
![Page 11: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Item 3F. The meeting logistics and pre-meeting communications were effective.
(5 = Strongly Agree, 1= Strongly Disagree)
Chart: See accessible version in notes
Average ScoreParticipants: 4.12Attendees: 4.03All: 4.07
11
![Page 12: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Evaluation
of
Sessions
![Page 13: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Item 4A. Quality, relevance and usefulness of Framing the Issues session
(5 = Excellent, 1= Poor)
Chart: See accessible version in notes
Average ScoreParticipants: 4.58Attendees: 4.36All: 4.47
13
![Page 14: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Item 4B. Quality, relevance and usefulness of Teacher Recruitment and Preparation session
(5 = Excellent, 1= Poor)
Chart: See accessible version in notes
Average ScoreParticipants: 4.43Attendees: 4.11All: 4.27
14
![Page 15: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Item 4B. Quality, relevance and usefulness of Teacher Development, Support and Retention
session (5 = Excellent , 1= Poor)
Chart: See accessible version in notes
Average ScoreParticipants: 4.41Attendees: 4.13All: 4.27
15
![Page 16: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Item 4B. Quality, relevance and usefulness of Teacher Evaluation and Compensation session
(5 = Excellent, 1= Poor)
Chart: See accessible version in notes
Average ScoreParticipants: 4.41Attendees: 4.07All: 4.24
16
![Page 17: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Item 4B. Quality, Relevance and Usefulness of Teacher Engagement in Reform session
(5 = Excellent, 1= Poor)
Chart: See accessible version in notes
Average ScoreParticipants: 4.12Attendees: 4.19All: 4.15
17
![Page 18: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Item 4C. Please indicate your level of satisfaction with the format of the sessions. (5 = Excellent, 1= Poor)
Item 4C. Session Format Part I – Participant Discussion
Chart: See accessible version in notes
Average ScoreParticipants: 4.59Attendees: 4.32All: 4.45
Item 4C. Session Format Part II – Attendee Q&A
Chart: See accessible version in notes
Average ScoreParticipant: 4.15Attendee: 3.97All: 4.06
18
![Page 19: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Item 4D. Quality, relevance and usefulness of What Have We Learned? session
(5 = Excellent, 1= Poor)
Chart: See accessible version in notes
Average ScoreParticipants: 4.22Attendees: 4.42All: 4.32
19
![Page 20: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Evaluation
of
Logistics & Support
![Page 21: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Item 5A. Travel and hotel information was clear and timely.
(5 = Strongly Agree, 1= Strongly Disagree)
Chart: See accessible version in notes
Average ScoreParticipants: 4.45Attendees: 4.05All: 4.25
21
![Page 22: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Item 5B. American Museum of Natural History was an effective setting for day one.
(5 = Strongly Agree, 1= Strongly Disagree)
Chart: See accessible version in notes
Average ScoreParticipants: 4.25Attendees: 3.98All: 4.11 22
![Page 23: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Item 5B. The Hilton NY was an effective setting for day two.
(5 = Strongly Agree, 1= Strongly Disagree)
Chart: See accessible version in notes
Average ScoreParticipants: 4.60
Attendees: 4.44All: 4.52 23
![Page 24: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Item 5B. My questions and concerns were addressed in a timely and complete manner.
(5 = Strongly Agree, 1= Strongly Disagree)
Chart: See accessible version in notes
Average ScoreParticipants: 4.50Attendees: 4.21All: 4.35 24
![Page 25: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Evaluation
Comments
![Page 26: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Comments on Format:
• Tony Mackay – brilliant moderator
• Rich + very good
• Great to have unions and ministers together
• Keep questions/comments from observers/audience focused on session topic.
• Submit questions from audience in advance.
• Include more time for Q&A or vary format of sessions throughout day.
26
![Page 27: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Comments on Format:
• More time for discussion and networking
• Sessions began to feel a bit redundant
• Greater variety of session format: breakouts, mixed seating during meals
• Include more teachers at the table.
• Extend the summit so there is more time to process and engage.
• Video screens and interpreters a must
• School leaders/principal representatives – what is our role in the summit?
27
![Page 28: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Participants/Attendees found helpful or insightful:
• Framing document/session
• Rapporteurs’ summaries
• Learning from international experiences esp. Hong Kong, Singapore and Finland
• Hearing how unions and management work in collaboration
• High achieving countries’ clearly defined systemic change
• Hearing about:– the common challenges of all education systems– similar problems from which we can learn and translate
solutions for our own unique contexts28
![Page 29: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
General Feedback:
• THANK YOU! BRAVO! EXCELLENT! STUNNING!
• Please continue this summit in future.
• Suggested readings/research for attendees
• Materials/logistical information available earlier
• A teacher exchange could add a lot to understanding between the countries.
• This was an outstanding and historic event that began a very important conversation with the objective to improve teaching and learning.
29
![Page 30: MARCH 16-17, 2011 NEW YORK CITY, NY EVALUATION RESULTS Michelle Bissonnette](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070405/56813fd4550346895daab6c1/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
THANK
YOU!