Agenda Packet 12-12-18 Work Session

Home Browse Search

74 Appendix GAppendix GAppendix GAppendix G: : : : Process Process Process Process EvaluationEvaluationEvaluationEvaluation Participant evaluation from the 9/12/18 meeting was more informal and not recorded here. Participant Evaluation from 10/04/18Participant Evaluation from 10/04/18Participant Evaluation from 10/04/18Participant Evaluation from 10/04/18 MeetingMeetingMeetingMeeting At the conclusion of the Working Group meeting on October 4, 2018, participants completed a brief written evaluation. Their feedback has been synthesized here. Quantitative Evaluation Data Regarding the Process For each of the following process evaluation questions, participants marked a score of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agreed). A score of 3 indicates neutral feelings. Averages scores for each of these questions are below. 1. The Working Group followed the Ground Rules 4.73 2. I was able to share my ideas: 4.52 3. I felt like my ideas were respected 4.44 4. The facilitator remained impartial: 4.52 Qualitative Evaluation Data In addition to the quantitative data, participants were asked to share any additional comments, questions or suggestions. A summary of their comments to each of these questions follows here. The numbers that follow some points indicate that multiple people had similar ideas. Kudos • Liked the movement, variety, and small group (9) • Ability to talk with/meet a variety of different people (3) • High standard for holding people to the process. Strong structure (3) • Good to start with interests (2) • Improved food! (2) • Good opportunity to share ideas. • Inventory of strategies • Looking forward to presentation from the economist on Nov 14. • Thanks for using the microphone. • Don’t like the breakout groups but they work well. • Dot voting • Bipartisan director • Heard from all sides fairly. • More concrete ideas were generated. Suggestions for Improvement • Speed up introductory activities. Tired of the introduction- what you’re missing by being here. (3) • Some people are dominating the conversation, still need to get more voices in the room • Some in the community are ignored/underrepresented. • Some people are not open/being reactive. • Feeling pressured to agree even if you don’t or have a different opinion. • Need more time for options • Start looking at outcomes and test acceptance of them. • Tired of repeated comments about the urban growth boundary. • Name tags came off a lot. December 12, 2018, Work Session - Item 2