Basic Workshop Evaluations 2008-2017

54 workshops: 650 participants & respondents from the University of Kent (386),  Lancaster University (128)  and Kingston University in Moscow(64) SOAS, University of London (72). 

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 3 104
540
(99%)
Instructor's method of teaching 2 1
27
213
407
(95%)
Instructor answering questions 2 2 27
209
411
(95%)
What is your assessment of the theoretical content? 2 1 58
263 326
(91%)
What is your assessment of the role plays? 1 1 29 217
400
(95%)
Did the workshop successfully use PowerPoint/ visual/audio aids?   
2
2
41
197
408
(93%)
Role Play Exercises   1 2 3 4 5 (4+5)
The Orange Exercise  (3 NA)
2 17
109
233 286
(80%)
Oil Pricing Exercise  (4 NA)
3 3
35 165 440
(94%)
The Three-Way Organization Exercise* (244 NA) 2 7 37 126 210
(88%)
Negotiating Corporate Change - Video* (538 NA)  0  0  5  30  27 (92%)

Sally Soprano Exercise*

Universal Aircraft Exercise*

(49 NA)

(600 NA)

2

0

6

0

53

3

207

6

333

17

(90%)

(88%)

Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Exercise  (6 NA)
4
13 106
271
250
(81%)
Luna Pen Exercise* (66 NA) 2 5 54
217
306
(90%)
*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   (25 NA)
5
6 53 156
405
(90%)
I would recommend this workshop to another student (4 NA)
1 2  27 173 443
(95%)
What I learned in this workshop will help me in my personal life (3 NA)
0 8
50
189

400

(91%)