CSM Header
Office of Special Programs and Continuing Education
 
EMFI Header

Summer Field Program - August 11-16, 2008

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 3.65

b. Range of topics 3.29

c. Pace 3.65

d. Opportunity to acquire detailed information 3.61

e. Opportunity for discussion with speakers 3.35

f. Opportunity for interaction with participants 3.51

II. Field Guide

a. Content 3.65

b. Length 3.73

c. Illustrations 3.73

d. Clarity 3.76

e. Reference value 3.69

III. Logistics

a. Organization 3.94

b. Lodging 3.90

c. Food 3.92

d. Transportation 4.00

IV. EMFI Staff

a. Helpful 4.02

b. Cooperative 4.02

c. Knowledgeable 4.04

V. Value of Field Experience

a. Professional Value 3.52

b. Educational Value 3.82

c. Enjoyable 3.96

VI. Overall Evaluation of the Field Program 3.82


Open-Ended Questions

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

  • Good location, landscape, varied sites, experiences, knowledgeable speakers, tour leaders, open/friendly safe and interesting.
  • Logistics were fantastic - kept on schedule - plenty of time to socialize, interact and gain understanding of the technology.
  • The ability to get very in-depth site visits and the interaction with the other participants.
  • Organization and logistics and knowledgeable staff.
  • Depth of technical knowledge of staff; access to energy projects; interaction with other participants.
  • "Kick the tires" / hands-on experience is extremely valuable!
  • Expertise, knowledge of local information.
  • Site visits, participants, staff, great people, great variety of educational information.
  • Incredible field experiences. The program was thoughtfully scheduled in terms of variety and pace. In addition to learning a great deal about technologies and policy I made valuable contacts, especially among presenters, but also among EMFI participants.
  • The schedule was great, well balanced and lots of information.

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

  • The lack of real opposing viewpoints.
  • Need a better balance between renewables and non renewables.
  • It would be helpful to have some focus in wider issues related to energy development/use in climate change, environmental degradation.
  • A bit more "101" information needed prior to site visits.
  • More about mining than energy - need to come away with clearer sense of alternatives and priorities.
  • Give more opportunity to discuss.
  • Many presentations started too deep for me.
  • Some issues are out of context.

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

  • Reunion tours for participants.
  • Show presentations on the bus.
  • A visit to a carbon capture facility.
  • Facilitate an awareness that there are legitimate concerns that come with energy use/resource extraction, but that the U.S. can't do without fossil fuels.
  • Discuss renewables and provide examples.
  • A primer on energy financing.
  • More on direct comparisons and effects of alternatives.
  • More energy, less mining.
  • Offer comprehensive contextual "seminars" on the issues.
  • Address the "why" behind a particular regulation.

4) Any additional comments?

  • Very good program.
  • Will strongly recommend to others.
  • Great trip and very educational!
  • This was a fabulous trip! Thank you for the opportunity.
  • Thank you - unbelievable experience.
  • Awesome trip!!
  • Great program, great staff, keep up the good work.
  • Thank you! This is an excellent program.

Back