CSM Header
Office of Special Programs and Continuing Education
EMFI Header

Summer Field Program - August 6-11, 2007

Summary of Evaluations

(Excellent=A=4.0; Very Good=B=3.0; Average=C=2.0)

I. Technical Content of the Field Experience

a. Content 3.60

b. Range of topics 3.53

c. Pace 3.23

d. Opportunity to acquire detailed information 3.47

e. Opportunity for discussion w/ speakers 3.63

f. Opportunity for interaction w/ participants 3.70

II. Field Guide

a. Content 3.70

b. Length 3.60

c. Illustrations 2.90

d. Clarity 3.17

e. Reference value 3.43

III. Logistics

a. Organization 3.93

b. Lodging 3.00

c. Food 3.30

d. Transportation 4.03

IV. EMFI Staff

a. Helpful 4.10

b. Cooperative 4.10

c. Knowledgeable 4.00

V. Value of Field Experience

a. Professional Value 3.70

b. Educational Value 3.97

c. Enjoyable 3.80

VI. Overall Evaluation of the Field Program 3.74

Open-Ended Questions

1) In your opinion, what were the most significant strengths of the Program?

  • The “kick the tires” experience. I can’t remember a week that I’ve learned so much and had so much fun! This program came to me highly recommended and I will advocate it in the same vein. The Opportunity to ask questions and see processes (on-the-ground) first hand was fabulous. I also appreciated the diversity of the program and the variety of energy and minerals discussed
  • Selection of Field Trip stops is the biggest strength of the program. The ability to go to sites that would not be open to most of us as individuals is the biggest benefit of the EMFI. Also, the ability for attendees to talk to the field geologists, miners, environmental staff, and local government reps.
  • Wide range of content, access to people on the ground in the industries, seeing things first hand. Being able to go on draglines and down working (and training) mines makes it memorable as well as educational
  • Good variety of energy sources discussed and the first hand opportunity to see these resources was excellent.
  • Site visits; EMFI staff.
  • Introduction to conflicts between development, environmental protection, and private use. Seeing and experiencing production facilities and processes.
  • Bringing a diverse group together so we can network; sites and on-the-ground touch and feel; organization; great and knowledgeable staff.
  • The wide range of backgrounds of the participants combined with the ability of CSM to leverage the unique company of those participants to get into the sites that are visited.
  • Excellent diversity of issues, good hands on experiences and access to experts
  • Breadth of topics, opportunity to kick the tires, knowledge of staff and the great people who came to participate

2) In your opinion, what were the most significant weaknesses of the Program?

  • No weaknesses, however some suggestions to make the program better: frame technology and application discussion to fully understand how project or issue being discussed impacts industry, individuals, and society as a whole. Also, portions of the field guide were difficult to read (size and copied illustrations). I had no problem asking questions but referring to the guide on these subject areas will be tough.
  • I think that once during the trip there should be a formal back and forth discussion of key policy issues among attendees and moderated by the EMFI staff. This can happen one on one in personal discussions during the week, but I think there is value in doing it more formally as a group. It could be done on the bus during one of the long rides, without impacting logistics.
  • A week riding on a bus is tiring, but there really is no way around it.
  • It is hard, logistically, to move and feed a large group so really no major complaints; Monday was too long for the first day; changing roommates was draining each day; I feel you tried to cover too much both from an educational perspective and geographically.
  • None really. Would have preferred a single room as much as possible. Also, expected more from NREL visit.
  • Would have made better use of time on bus for briefings prior to visits. Nothing on wind – major gap in the program. Nothing on electric transmission development issues; too much oil shale.
  • While not totally in your control the rooms at some of the hotels were not so great!
  • The lack of time/opportunity to take advantage of the range of backgrounds to learn about perspectives related to the issues we have been introduced to. Every minute has been filled to the point where it is difficult to read the information provided in our book. I also think that the focus of EMFI is on the E (energy); opportunities to emphasize mineral issues that impact road building, cost of cement/drilling mud, etc.
  • Some long days – too long, not enough time to really absorb the information. NREL presentation was too technical and wasn’t dynamic. Oil shale site visit and discussion should have been combined.
  • Renewable energy piece (options and economics) could have been better described. The issue of utility costs should also have been described (e.g. why renewable energy isn’t a near-term solution). Carbon storage and sequestration – Wyoming state geologist could have addressed the group.

3) In your opinion, what unique opportunities exist for the Institute in the future?

  • Unlimited opportunities exist. I would definitely encourage EMFI to look into non-traditional funding sources – directed funding, 501 c(3) status, foundations/fund raisers, etc. In this era of an increased interest in Energy research names (EMFI) can position itself to be a leader in educational information on these issues.
  • The ability to bring real-life knowledge to decision-makers or those that inform decision makers. Keep doin’ what you’re doin’!
  • The week was full of interesting educational opportunities; it would be nice to have had a little down time to reflect and absorb and share thoughts among the group and learn from others in the group.
  • More information/site visits to pipeline companies; more explorative (3D seismic, etc.) visits
  • Carbon sequestration, coal to liquids development
  • To continue bringing policy makers and other key folks together to better understand the issues and challenges!
  • The tours and issues addressed provide a unique perspective. Seems to me you might be able to broaden your client base by offering a variation of this trip to a group in the East. You woul dahve to plan more time for true discussions amongst participants but if marketed properly it might draw on an interesting mix of participants including alums.
  • Regional trips focus on other energy issues, bring in more environmental and economic issues. I also think that there is a huge potential to target personal staff of member’s offices on key committees, especially Eastern members who do not understand the West.
  • Government officials could be lined up to address political hot points and issues of contention. Greater participation of state employees (agencies, governors office, etc.) would be a plus

4) Any additional comments?

  • I had an amazing experience. Thanks again to the entire EMFI team for your work and effort in putting this event together. Gary, without your support of this program, I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t be here. Ton, John, Rachel, and Wentz (Melody too!) thank you so much for an exciting and educational week! (Plus I have lots of rocks!)
  • A very useful, fun, and excellent experience.
  • I appreciated the work of all of the staff especially the interns. They worked long hours yet were always willing to help or provide information.
  • I could have done without the stories about foul-smelling “hippies” and Indians too focused on gambling to bother to learn how to farm.
  • Outstanding job! Thanks for making a difference!!!
  • Seems to me that an issue trip on factors related to abandoned mines might bring together an interesting group.
  • NREL was a mess, the Trona mines were great. The last day was hard because the time with Shell and Questar went on for so long – it seemed repetitive compared to Encana. And we all wanted to get to the Park. Overall, it was a great week.
  • Superb program!