close

Se connecter

Se connecter avec OpenID

101 – 43.5% Participant Evaluation

IntégréTéléchargement
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
Edit this form
101 responses
View all responses
Summary
[Image]
Overall: How would rate the 2016 Canadian Knowledge Mobilization Forum ­ How
useful? *** Dans l'ensemble ­ Comment évaluerait le Forum canadien sur la
mobilisation des connaissances 2016 ­ Quelle est l'utilité ?
32
24
16
8
1
0
0%
2
3
3%
3
5
5%
4
11
11%
5
18
18%
6
39
39%
7
24
24%
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Overall: How would rate the 2016 Canadian Knowledge Mobilization Forum ­ How
engaging? *** Dans l'ensemble ­ Comment évaluerait le Forum canadien sur la
mobilisation des connaissances 2016 ­ Comment engageante ?
1
0
0%
2
3
3%
32
3
3
3%
24
4
5
5%
5
23
23%
6
36
36%
7
30
30%
16
8
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Comments about the Forum as a whole *** Commentaires sur le Forum dans son
ensemble
Many themes presented but not enough thought given to the placement / timing of the offerings
Too much being offered in a short span of time requiring participant to make touch choices eg. 7
min presentations
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
1/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
Very practical and hands on. Great to network with other KTPs.
It was excellent as always, and the passion that Peter and the planning committee have is
evident. However, there were too many concurrent sessions. I felt like I missed a lot because
there was too much going on at one time. I suggest not accepting as many presentations in
upcoming forums as it grows larger and really focusing on curated sessions.
Great atmosphere. Friendly and collegial.
I loved the interdisciplinarity of the forum. Very welcoming atmosphere. The program could have
been better designed for usability. Have a master schedule showing names and titles where we
can see all options, then cross­reference to abstracts elsewhere in the program. Add speakers'
Twitter handles to the programs so that we know how to tag them when live­tweeting.
Well­run, interesting and engaging.
Once again Peter and his team put together an exciting and well organized event. The venue
location was excellent.
excellent forum, great food, great people. Only suggestion would be to provide more detailed
information before the conference about the program. E.g. what the keynote speaker will be
covering, titles of the breakout sessions, etc. Great job!
It was my first time to this Forum and I really enjoyed it. I found it very much worthwhile, and I
hope to be able to go every year. It was nice to learn about KM from a variety of fields and
industries: education, government, data management, security, science, etc...
I would have appreciated having conference streams that were broken down between­ academic
outputs (those of us who study KT/Kmb/iKT); those who are practitioners; those who are
knowledge users; and maybe a session on Kmb/KT/iKT tools. It was a bit difficult to tease out
where I would find the information I was looking for from the way the conference was organized.
Great energy, very validating/inspiring Beautiful venue ­ great spaces Program could have been
laid out to more easily navigate (esp instances with choices, having them on 1 page/using
colour to show different sessions etc) As a speaker, expectations were not 100%
clear/communicated well As an attendee it was clear this impacted the program as well (2­3
sessions I planned on attending had speakers that were "no shows")
Énormément de choix d'ateliers, donc il y en a pour tout le monde : c'est très apprécié! Mais ça
aurait été bien d'avoir les descriptions du programme à l'avance. On passe beaucoup de temps
pendant le Forum à lire le document pour choisir nos prochains ateliers. L'endroit et
l'organisation : extraordinaire Animation et Keynotes : inspirants
Facilities were amazing and help facilitate a strong sense of community. Food was fantastic.
Sessions were informative. Loved the young professionals panel. Pub time was a smashing
success.
I really enjoyed networking with others in the field of KM
The keynote speakers were very inspiring, especially Dr. Melanie Barwick. I found it most useful
when session speakers shared their favourite KT resources and tools. As someone just starting
out in KT, I do not know all of the available supports that some of the seasoned KT
professionals use frequently ­ so I found those tips very useful.
Super forum, probablement l'un des meilleurs à ce jour. Bonne structure et organisation. Comme
d'habitude, j'ai trouvé qu'il y avait beaucoup de présentations. Je me demande si ce serait
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
2/31
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
8/10/2016
possible d'être plus restrictif dans les présentations qui sont acceptées ­ ou peut­être même de
limiter à une présentation par personne?
Nice to see delegates from different sectors. Nice to see new faces as well as old faces. I've
been to most of the Forums, I was concerned that this year might become stale­­but certainly
not!
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
3/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
Very good keynote on cybersecurity and lots of networking time. Would like to have some
hands­on training for creating knowledge mobilization plans for different sectors instead of the
optional panels. The 7 min presenters would be great if they could all rehearse once together in
order not to miss out on each other's presentations when not in the same room. Seven minutes
does not seem long enough to present but time for questions at the end allows for a bit more
elaboration at least. Poster session had engaging people but seemed bare.
I found the content this year less relevant and less engaging than the previous Forums.
Speakers were either focused on broad, general concepts only loosly related to the practice of
KT or focused on the "micro" of individual projects within an organization. I found the practical,
hands­on learnings that can be imparted by a KT expert was lacking.
It could be a three day conference I think, there were many concurrents and so many sessions I
would like to have attended but could not. Also, it would be useful to group concurrents so that
very diverse topics are covered in each time slot. For example, I was very interested in learning
about alternative approaches to sharing info. i.e., arts based and other creative forms but found
they were mostly all grouped in one session meaning I was only able to see one of many I would
have liked.
Would have liked to see the detailed program sooner so I could plan which sessions to attend.
* Interesting mix of attendees, nice breadth of topics and variety of session/presentation
formats. * The forum had a comfortable, collegial feel which was very welcoming for someone
like me being new to the scene. The turnout and quality of conversation at the reception and
during breaks was indication of the strength of this community of practice!
Loved it. I learned so much and came away energized. I appreciated the networking but didn't
feel I had as much opportunity as in other years.
great to see so many participants the depth and breadth of the presentations were excellent
even the 7 minute session had an excellent value proposition
Fantastic opportunity to learn, network and grow.
I enjoyed the interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary networking opportunities. Fantastic venue!
As much as I liked being able to choose, I felt like I was missing out on other presentations
during some of the sessions. Other than the pub, there was no informal session where everyone
was at the same place at the same time (in terms of meeting and networking opportunities).
The 'wow' factor was missing for me. Something truly inspirational that comes from a kick­ass
key note. I'd like more curatorship with the content; higher quality over higher quantity.
Excellent presentations from a number of fields. Participants were eager to learn from each
other, and not trying to participate in academic one­up­manship.
Great opportunities to connect with people. Sometimes there were several concurrent sessions
that I wanted to go to, so it was hard to make choices! Some rooms had no moderator so they
started late and then couldn't get their whole presentation done.
Useful content! Very exciting! Would consider grouping workshops together into content themes
(i.e. all workshops that address networks happen at the same time).
It was my first time attending and I discovered that much of the content was not so relevant to
my interests. More focus on process than impact.
Really great presentations and networking!
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
4/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
Toujours aussi inspirant et stimulant.
Great.
Great work! I love coming together with my follow K* people to learn together. For posters and
presentations I recommend more info be sent out in advance about sizing, poster #'s and
method for bringing presentations. This is standard for conferences and can really stress people
out if this information is not given.
I registered for the conference anticipating learning about successes and failures in the practice
of KM. That was not the case, much of what was presented was from a research perspective
and not the practice. The conference program was announced much too late to make an
informed decision. Having the agenda and conference objectives outlined clearly up front would
have assisted in decision making regarding my attendance. I would not attend again given the
topics discussed,
Wonderful networking and atmosphere.
Organization of event could be better ie) program was far too long and confusing ­ summaries of
presentations would have been better. ­Instructions to presenters were confusing and unclear
upon submitting application
It was very engaging, well attended and interactive.
­ Great topic! ­ Would have liked to have heard more about new/novel approaches to innovation ­
Day 1 = too many long breaks ­ Day 2 = great pace
I always meet someone new at the Forum and have interesting conversations about their work
and KM. This year was the same ...
I loved the diversity of the attendees and how approachable everyone is especially to
newcomers. The presentations were high quality and engaging.
Great energy, very good presentations and excellent networking opportunities.
The Forum was extremely well done and I received a lot of value for my participation. A few of
the key highlights for me: ­ The quality of presenters and discussion was extremely high ­ and
the focus of presentations was less on "let me tell you about this individual initiative we are
doing", and more on sharing information that might be helpful to others in the community, and
soliciting feedback on challenges and initiatives. It opened up a space for honest, reflective
discussions about our challenges, opportunities and best practices that I found very helpful in
my practice. ­ The space was fantastic ­ it facilitated networking, attending sessions, and
viewing posters, without crowding. ­ Food was great! Really appreciated the plethora of healthy
options as well as tasty treats. ­ The schedule was fantastic ­ the 10 am start (with optional
morning session) and 4­4:30 pm end worked really well. ­ I absolutely loved the 7 minute speed
presentations ­ what a great way to get targeted, engaging information from so many presenters,
and kudos to the presenters for a fantastic job. A few things I would change: ­ 6 concurrent
sessions is too many! It may be valuable to be more selective about accepting presentations, or
to group them into thematic streams, to facilitate choosing one. ­ I'd incorporate time for
questions or perhaps more networking after the 7­minute presentations ­ the audience often
wanted to discuss with presenters but then it was time to go off to the next session. ­ I know the
space was tight but it might be preferable to have sponsor booths in a more main area. ­ I would
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
5/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
have loved more info on the optional sessions (what were they on? Who would benefit from
attending?) so I could assess whether or not I should attend!
Great variety ­ perhaps too much ­ couldn't catch everything I wanted to and the 40 minute
sessions seemed too short.
Great planning to include networking and down time for informal meetings. I also enjoyed the fun
and collegial atmosphere.
CKF is still THE most important meeting for KMb professionals. No question. The "ambiance" is
great. After five year, the KMb community has evolved and It might be time to think about a
distinctive offering for the senior and junior members (only for a part of the program). This year's
edition felt a little more like an academic conference than previous years (much more time for
listening than interacting). To me, the Forum must be about learning but also about capacity
development and active networking
Great content with links between different presentations. Networking time was excellent! Great
food, too!
Unfortunately, I was only able to attend the 1st day of the forum. As a first time attendee and
someone who is still learning about knowledge mobilization (and the difference between this field
and comms) I was disappointed. I think that there was a lot of excitement in the room and great
people, but I just didn't feel it and wondered why we sponsored the event.
This is such a fun, informative, open and collaborative community and space. The Forum is a
great opportunity to gather with like­minded passionate people who are willing to share their
knowledge and learnings. I very much appreciate and look forward to it each year!
GREAT VARIETY OF PRESENTATIONS FROM DIFFERENT SECTORE
Excellent venue for this type of event. Perhaps consider "ambassador volunteers" to welcome
and include all attendees so hosts are not spread so thin. Consider diversity of attendees more
when planning events outside the program.
À mon avis le forum a connu un succés éclat ant tang au niveau de la contribution des
participants, des invités mais au niveau organisationnel. Pour une toute 1ère participation, je
garde de trés meilleurs souvenirs, égalements les enseignements reçus et les contacts initiés
seront importants pour ma future carriére. Sur le plan organisationnel, le respect de l'heure et de
l'organigramme des activités ont été exceptionnels. La sonorisation a été impéccable. Le forum
n'a pas conn de fausse note sur ce plan. La gastronomie a été de mon avis excellente et le lieu
choisi pour le forum a comblé mes attentes.
­great community ­very collaborative ­lots of opportunities to exchange ideas ­well organized ­
diverse
There was minimal interactivity in the sessions I attended. I'd like to see more opportunities to
interact with other attendees within the sessions. That said, the vibe outside of the sessions
was VERY warm and interactive. The time created for networking and casual conversations was
great.
I enjoyed the Forum. The topics were of interest; there were many more topics of interest than
time allowed to attend. Having said that I found the time length of each session to be long
enough to be informative and short enough to engage attention.
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
6/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
I liked the creative ideas and would like to see more people encouraged to do this rather than
standard PowerPoint presentations about their work.
A few too many panels ­­ maybe need to have some longer "roll­up­the­sleeves" (40 min not
enough). 7 minutes sessions a good idea although wasn't able to hear any of them. Liked the
venue a lot.
Les présentations dans les ateliers (the 7­minute presentation sessions) étaient très
intéressantes, mais il y en avait trop, peu de temps pour les échanges
I really appreciated the networking times as this group seemed really engaged and interested in
connecting. The presentations were excellent.
This was my first time attending. I found it to be quite focused on healthcare. It may have arisen
from my misunderstanding the focus however it could have benefited a bit more from the how
structure conversations. I would have been more interested in the mechanics of knowledge
mobilization etc.
Such a wide range of topics. Biggest problem: having to miss so much as it was not possible to
see everything!
I hate to say this but the programme was probably a bit too packed. It might have been helpful
to have overall themes/strands and then slot the different parallel sessions accordingly.
How would rate the presentation by Michael Hillmer, MOHLTC ­ How useful? ***
Comment évaluerait la présentation de Michael Hillmer, MOHLTC ­ Quelle est l'utilité
?
1
6
6.1%
2
8
8.1%
25
3
12
12.1%
20
4
27
27.3%
15
5
24
24.2%
10
6
18
18.2%
5
7
4
4%
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
How would rate the presentation by Michael Hillmer, MOHLTC ­ How engaging? ***
Comment évaluerait la présentation de Michael Hillmer, MOHLTC ­ Comment
engageante ?
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
1
7
7.4%
2
13
13.7%
3
11
11.6%
4
26
27.4%
5
20
21.1%
6
16
16.8%
7
2
2.1%
7/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
25
How would rate the presentation by Melanie Barwick, Sickkids ­ How useful? ***
20
Comment évaluerait la présentation de Melanie Barwick, Sickkids ­ Quelle est l'utilité
?
15
10
1
1
1%
5
2
3
3%
3
11
11%
4
20
20%
15
5
29
29%
10
6
28
28%
5
7
8
8%
25
0
20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
How would rate the presentation by Melanie Barwick, Sickkids ­ How engaging? ***
Comment évaluerait la présentation de Melanie Barwick, Sickkids ­ Comment
engageante ?
1
1
1%
2
8
8.2%
25
3
5
5.1%
20
4
15
15.3%
15
5
29
29.6%
10
6
28
28.6%
5
7
12
12.2%
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
How would rate the presentation by Benoit Dupont, SERNE­RISQ ­ How useful? ***
Comment évaluerait la présentation de Benoit Dupont, SERNE­RISQ ­ Quelle est
l'utilité ?
32
24
16
8
1
1
1%
2
2
2%
3
1
1%
4
13
13%
5
18
18%
6
38
38%
7
27
27%
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
How would rate the presentation by Benoit Dupont, SERNE­RISQ ­ How engaging?
*** Comment évaluerait la présentation de Benoit Dupont, SERNE­RISQ ­ Comment
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
8/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
engageante ?
1
1
1.1%
2
0
0%
50
3
1
1.1%
40
4
8
8.5%
30
5
10
10.6%
20
6
20
21.3%
10
7
54
57.4%
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
How would rate the 7­minute presentation sessions ­ How useful? *** Comment
évaluerait les séances de présentations de 7 minutes ­ Quelle est l'utilité ?
32
1
3
3.3%
2
3
3.3%
3
4
4.3%
24
4
11
12%
16
5
24
26.1%
6
32
34.8%
7
15
16.3%
8
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
How would rate the 7­minute presentation sessions ­ How engaging? *** Comment
évaluerait les séances de présentations de 7 minutes ­ Comment engageante ?
1
5
5.3%
2
2
2.1%
25
3
3
3.2%
20
4
16
17%
15
5
20
21.3%
10
6
28
29.8%
5
7
20
21.3%
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
How would rate the posters ­ How useful? *** Comment évaluerait les affiches ­
Quelle est l'utilité ?
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
1
2
2.1%
2
2
2.1%
3
12
12.5%
4
7
7.3%
5
32
33.3%
9/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
32
6
24
25%
7
17
17.7%
24
16
8
How would rate the posters ­ How engaging? *** Comment évaluerait les affiches ­
Comment engageante ?
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1
2
2.1%
2
1
1%
25
3
9
9.3%
20
4
17
17.5%
15
5
24
24.7%
10
6
29
29.9%
5
7
15
15.5%
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
How would rate the workshops ­ How useful? *** Comment évaluerait les ateliers ­
Quelle est l'utilité ?
32
24
16
8
1
0
0%
2
0
0%
3
3
3.2%
4
10
10.6%
5
29
30.9%
6
38
40.4%
7
14
14.9%
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
How would rate the workshops ­ How engaging? *** Comment évaluerait les ateliers ­
Comment engageante ?
1
0
0%
2
0
0%
32
3
1
1.1%
24
4
9
9.6%
5
31
33%
6
35
37.2%
7
18
19.1%
16
8
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
10/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
How would rate the cocktail reception ­ How useful? *** Comment évaluerait le
cocktail ­ Quelle est l'utilité ?
20
15
10
5
1
7
8.5%
2
2
2.4%
3
1
1.2%
4
13
15.9%
5
13
15.9%
6
23
28%
7
23
28%
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
How would rate the cocktail reception ­ How engaging? *** Comment évaluerait le
cocktail ­ Comment engageante ?
30.0
1
6
7.5%
2
1
1.3%
3
1
1.3%
22.5
4
10
12.5%
15.0
5
13
16.3%
6
18
22.5%
7
31
38.8%
7.5
0.0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Thinking about Day 1 only: You are designing the next Forum, what do you keep from
this year? *** Penser à jour 1 uniquement: Vous concevez le prochain Forum, qu'est­
ce que vous gardez de cette année?
Keynote presentation Workshops Breakfast Lunch Health breaks
Keynotes and presentations as a larger group to avoid too many concurrent sessions. The
social evening was fun!
great quality of material presented.
I appreciated the long networking breaks and the opportunity to network at the pub afterward.
Keep the friendly staff at the front table, the engaging 'look' of the venue (balloons showing
where to go), the 'feeling' that came with the conference. Relaxed, collegial etc. I also
appreciated the length of time between sessions, start times etc., because it allowed for human
interaction.
Day 1 was great. the format was nice, and it was a good idea to have the housekeeping items
out of the way early, such as the presentation of certificates, and awards. Also, the social
reception at the pub across the street was brilliant. I really enjoyed getting to know people in a
social setting, and the drinks and food provided were especially appreciated.
the opening remarks. The diversity and energy of the presenters was a good opening to the
conference
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
11/31
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
8/10/2016
The appreciation speeches to start the conference (makes a safe, welcoming space) and allows
you to see key players
Un practice keynote Les posters Plusieurs choix d'ateliers (pour tous les niveaux et milieux) La
session optionnelle (panel) du soir pour orienter les jeunes qui commencent.
Pub time.
Move the thank you and awards to the end of the day and not the beginning. enjoyed the pre­
sessions early in the morning
Length of workshop was perfect Also liked the 7 presentations; brief sharings with Q&A. Maybe
reduce to 5 or 6 within the time period to allow for questions.
I would keep the positive introductions and personal touch infused into the welcome ceremony.
Julia Moore presentation ­ the information she provided was useful and the session was well
structured, easy to follow and understand.
keynotes workshops
I liked that the organizing committee was recognized from the outset ­ good way to make sure
their efforts did not go unnoticed Incorporate optional panels into the day (if possible) ­ panel
discussions generated good dialogue that would be relevant for all attendees Good to have
keynote speakers
Les prix pour le leadership en mobilisation des connaissances; les sessions optionelles le matin
et l'après­midi; les workshops. J'ai aussi beaucoup aimé l'idée d'avoir du temps désigné pour
regarder les posters!
pub night ­­ but hard to chat in such a noisy environment
Networking time in open area (gallery) with food. The start of the meeting before the first keynote
was very uplifting. The energy in the room was great at that point.
The venue was excellent and ample networking opportunities were provided.
* The reception. * the "ease in" to the day with optional morning session allowing people to
trickle in from wherever they are travelling from and then have the forum kick­off in the mid­
morning.
the 7 minute presentations were great but perhaps organize them into topic groups. It was
impossible to conceive of moving rooms between them so a grouping would have helped the
choice.
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
12/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
unable to join until noon, therefore can not comment on first speaker ­ although the survey
required me to respond the optional panel at the end was beneficial those who had travelled ­
had time to refresh; those who had to arrive later captured this value add
All the breathing/thinking room between sessions.
Format/schedule; constant engagement from organizers; smaller group feel
keep the keynote address. Keep the policy panel.
­
Active networking opportunities (i.e. interactive posters, workshops, pub night)
Keep it all!
General (sorry­not specific to day 1) Keep it the same size. It was great to have the personal
kinds of connections you get in a smaller conference.
Workshops are great! keynotes good!
Je garderais tout, mais pour les 7 minutes, mais j'en mettrais 2 fois moins par session de façon
a pouvoir échanger un peu plus. Le lieu de l'événement était absolument parfait!
As is.
A similar type venue, the participant packages, the talks, the poster contest, the networking
event, the art installation, at least 1 keynote speaker
poster sessions, workshops
the keynote presenters were very good except for replacement for Deb Matthews; refreshments
and lunch good opportunities to network and very robust offer; facility was excellent, appropriate
and comfortable
Keep the cocktail hour, and the poster time, and the optional panels
Integration of Twitter engagement Start time
I really liked Day 1 and I cannot think of anything I would not keep
A keynote like Melanie's to inspire KTE pros. Posters (but in a brighter room) Practical
workshops (but with more time)
Early optional sessions are a good idea ­ Opening keynote is important
Keynote ­ with a more engaging speaker Workshops Cocktail reception
I like the plenary style (one in the morning and one in lunch) just didn't love the talks. So I would
keep that. And I would keep the workshops, but maybe one session of workshops in day 1 and
one session of short presentations in day 2. I did attend the optional morning panel, I liked that
option too. And that it was optional. It was a nice way to ease into the day.
Keynotes, workshops, reception
N/A
­ keep the posters/visual and art installations time. I loved having dedicated poster review time ­
keep the 40 minute workshops ­ keep the fantastic networking reception ­ although a larger
space might be ideal!
I didn't attend Day 1.
Keep the multiple workshop options ­ it was nice to have a choice
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
13/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
­ The feeling of community ­ 3 Keynote speakers, because we need provocative/stimulating
ideas thrown at us ­ The cocktail ­ The venue (an inspiring one) ­ The workshops (with some
tuning) ­ A session for poster only
The workshops format seemed to work, but as there weren't many participants I wouldn't run as
many at the same time.
I really appreciated the day's structure. Fast­paced, always on time, and very engaging. The
content was varied which was perfect.
Le dynamisme des membres présents au Forum et des présentateurs dans le domaine de la
mobilisation des connaissances
I really liked the enthusiasm, the energy, and that the sessions stayed on track ... 40 minutes or
7 minutes, they were well­timed.
really liked the 7 minute idea
Try to ensure the main keynote is there. If not annouce the change.
7 minutes présentations
Late start time, posters, optional sessions, cocktail reception
­start time ­diversity of speakers/topics ­overall pace and scheduled
I would keep the later start and the multiple plenary speakers at the beginning. I would definitely
keep the venue and the reception!
The cocktail reception was a great way to meet and continue to engage with stakeholders.
Keeping it within the locale of the forum encouraged attendance. I like the design of the day,
short attendance to information sessions and work shops
Interactive posters. 7 minutes sessions that focus on challenges ­ emphasise and define what
catalyst means. Evaluating impact session (Ann and Elizabeth's session) Session on
documentary filmmaking
Similar venue ­­ very good in terms of different types of rooms and spaces. Food good.
40­minute workshops were very interesting and there were so many options! Maybe more time
slots for sessions so that attendees can attend more workshops.
The whole day was helpful and worth to keep it that way, in particular the keynote speaches and
the reception.
The poster session, keynote, and 7 minute sessions. The panel on careers in knowledge
mobilization was excellent and very helpful for me.
Keep all.
Opening plenary Posters Networking
Thinking about Day 1 only: You are designing the next Forum, what do you change
about this year? *** Penser à jour 1 uniquement: Vous concevez le prochain Forum,
qu'est­ce que vous changez de cette année?
Limit presentations to 20 min with 10 min Q and A Provide double session (time) for workshop
so can engage in deeper learning Divide the offering by levels of knowledge e.g. novice,
emerging and proficient KB Have formal poster prevention sessions; poster w / out supporting
narrative = waste of time
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
14/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
Less concurrent sessions ­ more curated agenda
The 5 minute transition between workshops was a bit too tight. The workshops could have been
longer as well.
Ditch the posters. They are ineffective as teaching tools. Lightning talks are much better:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/febs.13383/full
I would have liked to have more time to view the posters. There simply was not enough time to
view them in this schedule.
the conference streams to have more specificity
Really need to start the day on an engaging high note/build anticipation An ice breaker earlier in
the day to get people comfortable and show the variety of participants
Un premier keynote plus inspirant (meilleur orateur) Rendre le programme disponible à l'avance
(au moins 24 h)
Closing ­ I would seek a diverse panel of voices for critical reflection.
Not sure whether it is necessary to regroup in the auditorium at the end of the day.
The printed schedule was difficult to follow. It was unclear which room each session was in. I
would suggest putting the time and room where each session is held right beside each
presentation title (so you do not need to keep flipping back and forth). Some of the language
also seemed like it was targeted at the organizers (e.g., Session 3: 40 minute workshops ­
selection of 6). I would suggest changing the language to "Session 3: Please choose one 40
minute presentation to attend from the list of six presentations below."
Change the key note speakers ­ choose people who are more engaging and can provide
strategies on how to improve knowledge mobilization practice in organizations
less breaks less optional sessions don't have videos running at the same time as poster
sessions
Incorporate some interactive activities ­ world café, roundtables ­ to incorporate discussion
about keynotes, applying new knowledge, etc Networking break activity ­ ice breakers, etc ­ to
encourage people to mingle beyond their usual connections
Peut­être qu'il aurait été suffisant d'avoir un keynote par jour.
see previous question
Longer time for breaks/networking­­had to miss some sessions to get that in.
Correspondence with presenters for presentation made clearer and more ahead of time.
Day 1 keynote began at 10:40 am, which I found to be a late start. Presentations of certificates
and introductions took too much time. There were too few quality presenters and long sections
of the program for meals and breaks. For example, lunch ran from 12:15­1:30 pm and break
began at 2:15 pm. For 2017, I would aim to increase the number of "professional" KT speakers
and strive to find ways for the participants­­who are KMb practitioners­­to learn from experts in
the field.
Day 1 seemed too much like a Knowledge Mobilization 101. I think most people attending the
forum have an idea about what knowledge mobilizers do and would benefit from more concrete
lessons like how to overcome specific barriers and challenges.
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
15/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
* do the awards later in the day and add context to the President's Awards... tell the audience a
bit about what these people have done to be awesome, especially for those that don't know
them.
While the purpose of the extended breaks is to provide opportunities for networking, many don't
take advantage. Perhaps consider more purposeful or facilitated networking sessions.
Develop streams/themes... though I think this would be very hard to do.
Ensure all posters are visible to receive similar traffic
I would consider starting the event earlier. Instead of making the policy dialogue an optional
session to kick off the event, perhaps the dialogue could be a breakout or plenary session after
the keynote. Maybe the cocktail reception could take place the night before? Or start it slightly
earlier.
Ice breaker event at the beginning. Would help to meet people right from the start.
More charismatic and inspirational keynote speaker
Wouldn't change anything.
The program needs to be set up so that people can easily access the abstract they want.
Perhaps the schedule could show all the titles and then a page reference for the abstract.(Sorry
this is for both days)
I wouldn't present awards at the beginning of the day. I understand volunteer and organizer
acknowledgement at the beginning though, and I thought that was good because that usually
gets pushed to the end and it is well deserved. The awards seemed a bit... Political? I wasn't
quite sure why these people were being awarded, and for what criteria (i.e. how could general
audience members aspire to also be awarded in the future). It was a weird way to start the
conference and established a sense of hierarchy and competition that doesn't seem akin to the
nature of knowledge mobilization.
Voir plus haut
As is.
More pre­info for people delivering posters and presentations
more workshops
The agenda was too dense for 200 participants ­ leaving few to be dispersed among too many
options; this is same comment for day 2; ensure posters are installed andhave presenters with
their posters; Move the welcome to 9am instead of 10 and this would allow for an earlier end of
the day; Reduce the number of sessions;
Fewer concurrent workshops running at the same time
More user friendly agenda/program
There were a lot of presentations, which makes sense because most participants want to
present as well. The presentations sometimes seemed a bit disjointed ­ could they be better
clustered?
Strong health focus. Maybe try to get more presentations focused on overall KTO practice.
Put posters in a brighter room. Try to ensure that workshops have new take home messages or
a practical exercise for generating insight on how to improve practice. I went to one workshop
that showed a video of stakeholders speaking about the impact of a health program.
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
16/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
Unfortunately there was no take home message about the video, no commentary from the
presenters on the program or the making of the videos. The presenters tacked on a breakout
session at the end that was unrelated (we were asked to discuss challenges of being a KTE
practitioner).
­ Too many long breaks on day 1. Day 2 schedule was great!
maybe mix a 7­minute session grouping into day one
Less sessions to choose from or maybe session tracks
See above ­ I kind of answer both keep and change together
Fewer choices of workshops with more time to engage in each. I found we were nicely getting
into the 'work' part of the 'shop' and it was time to move to the next activity
N/A
­ more info about the optional session ­ don't schedule a session concurrently with the
networking event!
You should stress to your speakers to not read directly off of their notes for their entire
presentation. I think that if someone is asked to speak they should be someone who is known to
be engaging and who is able to give a 30 min presentation without keeping their head down the
whole time. I know that's difficult to address, but it would make the participant experience much
better.
More than one provocative keynote speakers (just like Benoit Dupont on Day 2) and it must be
from the get go to stimulate discussion all forum long. Reach out to outsiders who can bring a
different point of view to the KMb community. I would add a more structured networking activity
(first half of the day) Some activities targeted at the more senior members and some others at
the junior ones. We must make sure the workshops are actually workshops, not 40 minute
presentations. Workshops are about interaction and skills development.
I would hold a session just for posters that is not concurrent with workshop sessions. The
posters seem to get a lot of traffic, but the workshops happening at the same time had low
attendance.
The only thing I would change is perhaps the number of simultaneous sessions. I would suggest
making the conference a 3 day event perhaps.
Rattacher les présentations à des problématiques vécues par les différents professionnels dans
la mobilisation des connaissances. Par exemple, pour une étudiante au doctorat comme moi, il
aurait été enrichissant d'assister à une présentation synthèse sur les cadres conceptuels les
plus pertinents à utiliser dans le domaine de la mobilisation des connaissances.
For a 2­day conference, there were perhaps too many sessions from which to choose. And a
few could have been merged perhaps into co­presentations ... so perhaps you could consider
taking similar topics and presenting on it, and have a couple of presenters present on the topic
based on their specific case study or example.
time allocation for the workshops and moderation.. perhaps having a few slots of 50­60 minutes
if there were interactive activities /learning
Les posters ­ n'ont pas conn une certaine affluence. Je m'attendais à un engagement des
participants à cette activité, par example des discussions et contributions assez relévées. Les
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
17/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
participants ont trés peu passé du temps à visiter les posters affichés, peut être faudra­t­il
penser aux stratégies pour engager les forumistes à cette composante éssentielle du Forum.
Have hands­on workshops, 7 min presentations, afternoon snack was kind of boring
­put participant twitter handles in the program ­more formal opportunities to dialogue
I would move the exhibitors downstairs where the posters were.
The breaks in between the sessions sometimes seems a little long; maybe shorten them.
Keynotes that project where KM needs to be in five years and why More sessions on assessing
KM impact More on creative ways to create and share knowledge e.g. Participatory methods,
visual, Lego serious play :)
Thought the idea of starting with a session before the opening was a bit odd ­­ no context for the
session. Add in a couple of longer workshops ­­ if this Forum has some "learning­by­doing"
components ­­ that would be good. Try to coach speakers to not read their notes.
Maybe 30­minute workshops. See above comment.
Longer breaks between the workshops.
Better space for the posters.
­ Would there be a way to allow people to participate in more of the workshops......perhaps fewer
concurrent sessions, but repeating some? ­ I didn't find enough time to view all the posters
Less parallel sessions. Have an open space part of the day so networking can be done
Any other comments about Day 1? *** D'autres commentaires sur Jour 1?
no
I would like at least an hour dedicated for poster viewing.
Would be nice to have the options up on the screen as people leave the room, the program was
very complex and while lots of options is a great thing, it was visually hard to plan ahead. So a
slide that says these 2 sessions are upstairs, and these two are just around the hall would be
very helpful to facilitate getting to the next session.
Fabulously organized! The food and venue was very impressive.
The workshops were not as informative as I thought they might be. With the exception of one
presentation, I didn't feel that I received any strategies or guidance about how develop KMb
activities in my organization. I do realize that we are all trying to develop our own frameworks
but I was hoping to get more information from the workshops.
maybe too many presentations at the same time, so hard to choose
Unsure if there were overarching themes to the workshops ­ could be helpful to have workshop
streams or themes to help with workshop selection
nope
Definitely ditch the 68­page program. totally un­navigable. essentially useless. Need a shorter
"cheat sheet" instead­­with room names. Love the Learnography notebook. Very useful.
Good forum and location.
Please transfer dietary restrictions to the caterers. I spent most of the day hangry. Kudos to the
caterers who came through but I missed most of the networking time waiting for my meal. I also
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
18/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
missed the evening event because I developed a headache. allow more transition time/bathroom
breaks the program was very difficult to navigate
keep the After Party ­ coins and appetizers excellent;
Engaging, positive, humourous, lively facilitation by Michael Johnny, Peter Levesque and David
Phipps...and well done by the organizing team.
­
Most exciting of the two days
I felt really bad for the young KMb professional talk... it was at the same time as the food and
drink across the street! I think that was an unfair match, and I wouldn't suggest rivaling free food
and drink with a talk.
I loved the networking event!
Have a 7 minute round on Day 1 ­ this will avoid the low attendance at sessions that took
considerable preparation; don't make the policy round table option , make it an integral part of
the agenda; the presentation of awards was very uneventful and should not have been done at
plenary; the posters were not professional, there were many simply not installed; there were no
presenters with whom one could discuss the poster; overall room signage was lacking and staff
were not sufficiently briefed to provide direction on opening day
­ Food was great!
It was good; the planned keynote would have been more exciting, but stuff happens that you
can't do much about ­ I get it
Well organized, wonderful facility, great energy!
N/A
This is to no fault of the organizers, but the presentation from Michael Hilmer really set the tone
of the day to me. He didn't, himself, feel like a great knowledge mobilizer and at the end I
couldn't really tell what was the point. Melanie Barwick's presentation didn't seem overly
advanced for attendees at a knowledge mobilization forum ­ seemed more like a KMb 101.
Venue was immaculate, food delicious!
L'organisation autour de la réception des participants a été bien coordonné. Par example,
chaque participant retrouvait des informations importantes sur le déroulement du forum.
Great start to the conference!
Great day overall.
Great twitter interactions!
It was excellent.
Thinking about Day 2 only: You are designing the next Forum, what do you keep from
this year? *** Penser à jour 2 uniquement: Vous concevez le prochain Forum, qu'est­
ce que vous gardez de cette année?
Keynote presentation Workshops Breakfast Lunch Health breaks
Keynotes and presentations as a larger group to avoid concurrent sessions.
Keep the 7 minute presentations. Consider repeating each presentation at least once so people
don't miss so many interesting topics
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
19/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
The 7­minute talks were quite effective. 40 minutes is also a good length for longer sessions.
Everything ­ it was great.
I was disappointed by day 2
A speaker outside of the health field (the tech talk was very helpful/gave a lot of perspective)
Interesting snacks/got people excited
Les présentations de 7 minutes Plusieurs choix d'ateliers (pour tous les niveaux et milieux)
Loved the 7 minute presentations. I'd seek to offer more of these.
The optional presentations in the morning.
keynotes 7­min presentations
7­minute sessions were great ­ good examples of KMb in action Ice cream break was especially
appreciated Engaging keynote speaker
Popcorn & crème glacée!! Excellent keynote.
i actually can't remember day 1 vs. day 2...all my comments about day 1 as well as day 2 are in
my previous answer above...sorry!
Awards could be done at the end of the first day or at the reception itself rather than filling up
time during the main forum event.
Didn't attend Day 2.
* variety of workshop options.
see above
7 minute sessions ­ I garnered more than I originally thought that I would
A little more breathing/thinking room between sessions ­­ people were rushed for part of this day.
Workshops and 7­min presentations (with a buffer to account for presentations running long).
Keep the catalyst sessions. I would divide the catalyst sessions over the 2 days or half in the
morning and half in the afternoon. They are fun. Having them split up would allow people to be
able to attend more.
Looking at Km differently ­­ the SERNE­RISQ presentation was unexpected, but very
informative.
Best afternoon snacks at a conference EVER
More short (7 to 14 minute) presentations, with more movement between them.
Everything was good :)
Idem jour 1
The number of workshops
early career panel, key note speaker, talks
7minute presentations were excellent,
Keep the tasty snacks
I cannot think of anything I would not keep
Too many presentations in the 7 minute session, which does not leave a lot of time for group
discussion.
again early optional session is good opening keynote is important
Keynote ­ this year was fantastic! 7 minute sessions Workshops Poster awards
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
20/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
I missed the second half of the day due to a work thing:( but I did enjoy participating in the
7minute presentations. I really enjoyed the plenary in the morning, very engaging and
invigorating way to start the day. I liked the poster competition.
Keynotes, workshops, reception, Haagen Daaz Icecream Bars
I'd keep the 7­minute presentations and the keynote speaker.
­ keep the 7 minute sessions! Loved them! ­ timing of the day was fantastic.
Great networking time.
A good keynote speaker like Benoit Dupont Workshops
Create content, but too many choices. If you continue to offer so many concurrent sessions,
them perhaps announce at beginning of session that all ppts are available ... or perhaps you
could give each attendee a USB flash drive (you could get 200 ­ 300 of them for a very
reasonable cost, I think). That way one would not worry so much about what one was missing
out.
same
Optional international roundtable.
7 min presentations, engaging keynote, poster awards, afternoon snacks rocked!
­start time ­diversity of speakers/topics ­overall pace and scheduled
I didn't see Benoit's keynote, but from the buzz I heard after I'd definitely keep him.
The 7 minute presentations.
Sorry it's difficult to separate the days...
Keep the 7 minutes sessions. Benoit was a good speaker. I missed most of Day 2 ­­ so can't
make more comments.
Loved the 7­minute presentations!
Same as for day 1: Very helpful, everything is worth to be kept.
I really liked the poster awards and the brief explanation each winner gave of their work. It was a
great way to hear about posters I didn't get a chance to see. I also really liked some of the
practical sessions about careers in KM
Keep it all.
Thinking about Day 2 only: You are designing the next Forum, what do you change
about this year? *** Penser à jour 2 uniquement: Vous concevez le prochain Forum,
qu'est­ce que vous changez de cette année?
Limit presentations to 20 min with 10 min Q and A Provide double session (time) for workshop
so can engage in deeper learning Divide the offering by levels of knowledge e.g. novice,
emerging and proficient KB Have formal poster prevention sessions; poster w / out supporting
narrative = waste of time
see above
Less concurrent sessions ­ more curated agenda. As an introvert who gets very nervous to give
presentations, the thought of being called up fairly unexpectedly to present on my poster (as
those who won did) is extremely uncomfortable. A heads up to all those with posters that they
may have to do that so they know what to expect would really help (at least for this introvert!) :)
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
21/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
I would provide a side by side columnar layout of the 7 min presentations, and all concurrent
events in general. This allows the delegates to read through the details, and then obtain an
overarching view of the day and plan their presentation attendance accordingly.
I felt that there were too many streams, especially for the 7­minute talks.
Nothing, I think it went very well.
the organization and direction of the streams
Leave the posters up for both days
Too much choice in the program 7 minute talks should have been clustered with an "overarching
theme" or title to help people decide.. too many abstracts to read and cross compare to select
an appropriate session
Le 7e atelier, la tête n'y est plus vraiment et l'engagement est réduit... beaucoup d'info en 2
jours. Peut­être un atelier de moins et finir un peu plus tôt?
I'm always struck at how abrupt the closing is. Maybe we're tired, full. But I am wondering if
there's an option to harness the energy from the past two days and capture it moving forward?
Nothing!
J'aime beaucoup l'idée d'avoir une session avec des présentations plus courtes (comme le 7­
minute presentation), mais je n'ai pas trouvé la structure de cette session efficace du tout cette
année. Dans l'invitation aux soumissions, c'était indiqué que les présentations seraient de 7
minutes, suivies d'une discussion. Avec 6 présentations de 7 minutes chacune en 1 heure,
c'était toutefois impossible d'avoir une discussion. Je pense que les courtes présentations sont
une façon intéressante de créer une conversation entre les participants autour d'un thème/sujet.
C'est un espace de discussion/réflexion/remue­méninges, plutôt qu'un espace d'enseignement.
Mais il faut laisser du temps pour la discussion! Je pense qu'il aurait été plus intéressant d'avoir
deux sessions d'une heure chacune pour ces présentations de 7­minutes. On aurait ainsi pu
avoir 3 présentations par salle, organisées autour d'un même thème. Ça nous aurait permis de
prendre 30 minutes pour les présentations, suivies de 30 minutes de discussion sur ce thème.
Par ailleurs, il aurait été bien d'indiquer, dans le programme, le thème commun aux
présentations jumelées dans une même session. Il y avait tellement de présentations que c'était
difficile de tout lire et de décider à quelle session participer. Avoir un titre pour chaque
salle/session (en plus d'un titre pour chaque présentation) aurait vraiment aidé.
Drop the 7­minute sessions. Or mix them up with the longer sessions. As it stands, I missed too
many interesting things.
Earlier end or extend the 7 min presentation to create more sessions if replace the awards.
As per my comments for Day 1, increase the number of professional speakers and reduce the
content provided by individual delegates. I found beginning with the keynote speaker at 10:15
am to be a late start. The 7­minute presentations section called "Technology and Tools" was a
mix of presentations from all different aspects of KT. One presentation was an "idea" someone
has and another a summary of a book someone read. I would like to see more cohesive around
a central theme.
* encourage workshop leaders to make their sessions interactive.
Develop streams/themes... though I think this would be very hard to do.
Ensure there is more buffer time with the 7­min presentation sessions
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
22/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
­
Too much content; not enough time
Idem jour 1 Peut­être que j'ajouterais encore un cocktail, même si beaucoup quittent rapidement,
plusieurs ont encore des choses à se dire.
Definitely have fewer workshops and have them arranged thematically.For example, becoming a
KTP ­ there were two presentations ­ one of which could have definitely been a 7 minute
presentation for all the information that it imparted ­ i.e. it wasn't useful at all. The other had
excellent information to impart.
add in poster presentations on day 2 instead of 7 min presentations so you can easily go to the
posters you think are interesting
make optional roundtable part of agenda and therefore not optional ­
More full group sessions in the PM Less 7 min presentations
Again, more clustering of presentations
Less sessions to choose from
Have some workshop time and 7minute presentations (see day 1 comments) There were so
many short presentations, I really wanted to see some of them but I was in my own session, I
don't know how you deal with that but it would be nice to have fewer concurrent sessions so you
didn't feel like you were missing out so much. I would like the 7 minute presentations to have
time for one question after each presentation so it could be more interactive.
Fewer choices of workshops with more time to engage in each. I found we were nicely getting
into the 'work' part of the 'shop' and it was time to move to the next activity
I'd have the morning session be more interactive, perhaps consider having a larger panel of
experts with varying areas of expertise
­ maybe replace one of the workshops with another 7 minute session?
I felt like the sessions were rushed­­especially the 7­minute ones, and I felt like there wasn't
adequate time for questions or to delve deeper into the research/information.
The 7­minute presentations are a good ideas only if more time is allowed for discussion. 10
minute discussion after 6 presentations in a row is definitely not enough to go deeper.
same
En déhors de la présentation de Benoît Dupont qui a été engageante, il va falloir trouver des
stratégies pour engager plus les participants lors des ateliers. J'ai observé que le nombre de
participants au 1er jour a littéralement chuté. Le départ des participants bien avant la fin des
activités devrait être re­penser, je serais trés heureux d'y être associé à une tells initiative.
maybe 2 slots of 7 min presentations, time for problem solving/brainstorming sessions
­put participant twitter handles in the program ­more formal opportunities to dialogue ­more
opportunities to move between room in 7 minute sessions ­more topical grouping of 7 minute
sessions
I would add an after party for the smaller group of die­hards who want to keep the conversation
going.
Make the day a little longer. Maybe start a little earlier as the attendees if they stayed overnight
will be in the city and should be able to attend earlier. The workshops were engaging so they
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
23/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
often ran over, maybe a little longer break between workshops or lengthen the workshops.
Can there be some sessions on finding and working with natural mobilisers, people who
automatically network and broker Add international perspectives
The 7­minute presentation sessions need to be longer or have fewer presentations (there was
barely any time for discussion this year). I also think that the presentations could be grouped
better with regard to their topics. Longer breaks between the workshops.
Moins de présentations de 7 min dans les sessions pour plus d'échange. Allonger à 10 minutes
les présentations car trop court
Maybe end with a keynote? It seemed many people left after lunch and some of the end
sessions weren't well attended.
­ Same as for Day 1, would there be a way to allow more participation in the numerous
workshops and not have to miss so many? ­ 7 minute sessions: perhaps one less presenter in
each session to allow for more discussion
Any other comments about Day 2? *** D'autres commentaires sur Jour 2?
no
see above
Maybe prizes and some thank you notes could be done at lunch (though I imagine they are
handed out at the end to keep people there)
Again, having workshop streams/themes could be helpful in delineating what workshops were
going to be about (practice, examples, etc)
Ensure all workshops are well­planned and useful. It is better to have fewer, high quality
workshops then several, average workshops.
I really enjoyed meeting knowledge brokers and intermediaries outside of my usual area of work.
I think opening it up or expanding attendance may be good in the future if possible to support.
By the end of the second day, the terminology was getting repetitive. It felt like each
presentation was talking about the same thing. Maybe have a theme for each day to switch
things up a little?
Less exciting day
7 minute presentations are not conducive to share information and solicit contributions
especially if the proposal was written with that end. Perhaps having stations set up where
participants can listen/see the presentations and offer contributions to the questions posed
would be good. This format could also be another way in which poster presentations are made.
there were too many 7­minute sessions offered at the same time; presenters didn't get to see
others ­ splitting them between the two days would help that
Thank you for helping me to realize I am a knowledge mobilizer with 15 years experience. I just
didn't realize it!
N/A
Great food!
I enjoyed last year's walking KMB and the opportunity to tour the city as a group. May be
something to bring back.
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
24/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
Another great day!
Great day and wrap to forum.
Definitely left feeling invigorated, with a bunch of new friends.
I would suggest putting organizations on nametags. Also, if job titles could be included on the
contact list/roster it would help to illuminate some of the various job titles held by people in KM
roles. That would be helpful for us early job seekers!
Enjoyed it very much
The Institute is preparing a major redesign of its activities ­ what do you find most
useful about the Institute (Forum, Summer School, Certificate, Leaders Roundtable,
Website, Community of Practice, National and National connections) ­
cannot comment as only Forum participant to date
Forum
N/A
Forum, Community of Practice
Forum
Only attended the forum. Found it useful.
This was my first forum, and I use the website, but I haven't really taken advantage of the other
services.
Don't know enough about the Institute to really say.
Certificate; leaders roundtable; website; national connections
I am not particularly familiar with all of its activities so it is challenging to comment. This was
my first forum and I found it very useful/a worthwhile endeavour.
Le forum était ma première participation avec l'Institut. Je viens tout juste de découvrir, donc ne
connait pas les autres activités.
1. Forum ­ a leading place to network, learn and engage in KMb. 2. Summer School ­ building
this to support advance and introductory aspects of KMb is massive value. 3 ­ CoP ­ we've only
scratched the surface here. I think there's significant opportunity for this to meaningfully grow.
Forum
Forum is a good way to engage with fellow practitioners and learn more about the expanding
field. Appreciate the opportunity to interact with fellow KMbers from across sectors. Community
of Practice: emails are insightful ­ appreciate especially the sharing of new journal articles from
York Summer School: great way to learn the basics of the trade. Ongoing professional
development opportunities/training would enhance this learning
Le forum! N'étant pas située dans la région d'Ottawa, je ne crois pas avoir accès à plusieurs des
activités de l'Institut.
website is very difficult to navigate. Not familiar with any of the other things listed. LOVE the
CKF conference each year.
Definitely the Forum and the in­person networking.
I am not aware of all these activities as of yet.
The Forum.
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
25/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
* Forum was very useful * I am not as familiar or tapped into the other activities yet so can't
comment on their usefulness.
The activities under the Institute are all awesome, it is challenging to think of a disruptive
innovation that would transform the concept. Next years week approach looks like a fantastic
opportunity. A retreat style of immersing yourself in the conversations. With the additional time,
residential component, ­ introduction of a session of problem solving; ie; my practice is struck ­
what can I do? Has anyone experienced this challenge, if so what did you try? A matching board
­ of who to talk with = matching problems with potential problem solvers/solutions
Not sure ­­ am new to all this!
I haven't been as involved as I would like to be.
Website is very useful ­ especially for someone who is new to this community. A great resource
to find a job in the field as well (I used it & found one!).
I found the certificate useful for career purposes and the Forum for networking. The CoP could
be enhanced. Website hard to navigate.
I really only participate in the Forum.
I can only speak to the Forum and website­it was my first time at the Forum and I really liked it!
I liked the opportunity for interaction with the mic system at the Peter Gilgan auditorium.
community of practice for sure, especially the email list servs. Website is good too!
Le Forum, sans aucun doute. Le summer school aussi.
Community of practice.
Forum, website, national connections made through the forum
Summer school, Forum
Course opportunities (certifications, summer school). However summer school in Toronto would
be ideal.
Forum and certificates, leaders roundtable
All of what is listed above
Forum is really the only feature of the Institute I've taken advantage of ­ and I think it's great!
Forum, COP
Love the Forum, and the connections. The website is still a little clunky so I don't use it alot but
I do sometimes. I have not attended/engaged with the summer school or the certificate or
Leaders Roundtable.
Forum, website, CoP
Forum, CoP, Leaders Roundtable, International connections
Than
Pour l'instant, je ne connais que le forum de l'Institut. Je le trouve bien agréable et surtout bien
utile.
Forum, Website, Community of Practice, website
N'ayant pris qu'au Forum, j'ai du mal à faire une petite comparaison, toutefois je crois que le
Certificat, Forum et la connection internationale me paraissent plus utile.
Forum, network of KMb professionals
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
26/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
Opportunities to meet, network and learn.
I love the events, but that's all I have experience with.
Not well aware of what the Institute does now ­­ can see value in a range of activities.
I only have participated in the Forum and used the website which I have found very beneficial.
Cannot comment on other activities.
Forum. Don't know a lot about the other activities.
I cannot comment on this as I have only attended the one session.
Having participated in many of the activities, I find that they all fit together quite well. With that
said, I find the certificate website and forum the most the most useful. I can imagine that the
Summer School would be very applied and useful as well, but I have not attended yet.
Forum, Website, Community of Practice
CoP
Open Comments
What would be the benefits afforded with a membership? This question begs to be answered
before I can say for certain
The agenda was way too busy and very overwhelming. Next year I suggest not including the full
abstracts, and also including the affiliations of each presenter ­ this would help in choosing
which session to attend. Overall, another wonderful Forum! See you next year!
Depends on the cost and the benefits.
Will the IKM have a repository for conference materials—slides, handouts, etc?
Excellent conference with interesting topics that made me think about the way I personally do
things in relation to KM. The only improvement for next time would be more information ahead of
time about what to expect. I was a workshop presenter and had to delay booking a flight
because I was waiting to find out what date/time I was presenting. I felt that we rec'd information
about sessions very late (as in the day we arrived). That being said, things felt highly organized
and the facilitators kept things on time, which was appreciated. Conference materials were great
(info, contact information, swag) and I will come again next year if I am able. Congratulations to
everyone involved!
Remember not to change what works.
I would consider becoming a member if we decided to create a credentialing/accrediting system,
much like Evaluators have done. I would support this move and become much more involved if
this happened.
Becoming a member would depend on the cost
Selon coût et activités offertes.
A reat two days. Thanks Peter and the leadership team for your hard work and commitment to
KMb. I am a better practitioner because of it.
you should make questions in the survey with n/a since I did not attend some of the speakers.
Thank you for a wonderful networking and learning opportunity. The level of excitement and
commitment to KT was obvious within the conference facilitators and organizers ­ very inspiring!
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
27/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
as a presenter, we had difficulty getting in touch with the team ­ need more communication with
presenters, including posters, before the event
Detailed program for the Forum was slightly difficult to use ­ rooms were not listed for main
events, and the descriptions of workshops were very long (hard to sort out what was happening
when!) Appreciated diversity of content ­ would love to see more presentations from across
sectors!
J'apprécie énormément que le forum tente d'être un événement bilingue!! Par contre, il serait
bien de faire réviser les textes français par un traducteur, puisqu'il y a souvent plusieurs fautes
grammaticales qui peuvent rendre les phrases difficiles à comprendre (incluant dans cette
évaluation!).
it depends what would I *get* for being a member. When I have had memberships for other
organizations I get to attend their seminars for free (otherwise I'd have to pay $20) not sure how
that would work for me though as I am in Toronto and you are in Ottawa. The organization I am
thinking of is an international org with local chapters so it makes it easier to attend things (I am
part of the local Toronto chapter). Would I get a cheaper registration fee at the CKF conference?
Access to KMb tools or something that I wouldn't get otherwise? Even if I don't *get* anything it
would depend how much it costs to become a member, that would guide my decision (whether I
can afford it or not). (sorry I am still poor after many years in school)
I love that organizers are willing to try new things to shake up the dusty traditional format of
pedagogical presentations. Some work, some don't, but that's okay. We learn by trying.
I am already a member of two other professional associations, therefore it would depend on
whether my employer pays for the KMb membership. The CoP meets my needs at present.
I have previously enjoyed the Forum and thank Peter and his team for organizing this important
event.
depends on the price. I would not want to see it as a barrier to joining. Consider offering a
discount to the Forum for members as an incentive.
Michael Johnny did a fantastic job as MC ­ his passion and compassion really helped to set the
tone of truth, honesty, transparency and authenticity.
Thank you!
Pre­conference communication needs improvement: more descriptive emails, more advanced
notice about networking events. Schedule needs to be better organized; it was very hard to
follow.
Membership I would consider depending on what it would offer. Well done. Congratulations!
Difficult to evaluate what is "useful" to me in this survey. Went to the forum with an open mind,
so nothing was particularly useful or not­useful to me.
If the Institute became membership based, I would recommend both student and non­profit
membership rates for economic accessibility. Students who take the Summer School and
certificate could be offered 1 free year membership. Membership give­aways at the Forum would
be great as well.
In regards to the membership question, I would hope there would be options for new grads/young
professionals that would be cheaper than someone more established in the field. Furthermore, I
think I would have to see a greater and more tangible benefit in being a member than what is
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
28/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
currently offered (i.e. more meet ups or conferences). Overall I think this initiative is really good
­ I think that KMb draws a very diverse and open group of thinkers together. Most importantly,
this initiative gives participants a place to share their thoughts and voices when it comes to
KMb. I applaud you for making it so user­focused, and not entirely top­down. For the most part,
it felt like no matter what your background or experience level in KMb, you could have your
voice heard and your questions taken seriously. That being said, there were a couple of experts
in knowledge mobilization (and rightfully so for what they have contributed to the field) at the
event who, for lack of a better term, sort of acted like "know it all's" and did not feel
approachable. I know that you really can't do much about this! I guess what is needed is
adopting a more critical lens on the knowledge mobilization field in general, and recognition of
the unique viewpoints that people can bring to developing it further. We've got a long way to go,
and not building our own silo will help!
I am clearly not the primary target audience for the Forum, so my comments may not be
representative but I am always disappointed to see presenters use text­heavy slides, and/or
read text verbatim from their slides or notes. (You're smart and prepared; we took the trouble to
attend the conference and we're here in the room: Talk to us!) And even egg­head academics
like to be given a reason to pay attention from the first word (excessive thankyous, insider
backstories are not inherently engaging, but arresting visuals, stories, humour, impact are)
je pense qu'il faudrait impliquer les chercheurs un peu plus; parler de l'importance d'évaluer les
impacts des efforts de KM. Et il faudrait proposer (imposer?) aux chercheurs qui présentent un
format exempt de jargon scientifique.
*capping the number of presentations *more time to network *sessions on practicalities of the
profession *moving forward with a professional association for practitioners Thank you
group presentations by topic/theme so that they are more engaging for the viewer
Would love more presentations geared towards the use of Social Media for Knowledge
Mobilization.. There seemed to be a strong interest in connecting via social media. Did not
attend cocktail reception ­ rating not applicable
Nice venue, good food, very well organized! Welcoming volunteers and really terrific, engaged
delegates!
With the submission process, you identified terms such as KMb ninja, etc. Would have been
great to align the activities throughout the day with those terms to better categorize content that
is for KMb novices, beginners, and advanced.
Food was great!
You are all awesome! It really is a great event to attend. I made some great new connections
and had a chance to reconnect with connections from last year. It was, again, a very satisfying
and welcoming experience. Thank you!
Thank you for your continuing support of the pratice.
It would be nice to hear from more diverse global partners, to hear of Knowledge Mobilization
tools that are used in other countries to improve KMb across jurisdictions.
Congratulation to the organizers!
Thank you to the committee for the thoughtful and well planned agenda. I also appreciate all of
the materials we received to refer back to! Very helpful.
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
29/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
Merci pour cette belle occasion de réseautage et pour m'avoir permis d'approfondir mes
connaissances!
This was my first conference. I thought it was very good ­ lots of content (almost too much in
that it was very hard to choose sessions when there were so many running concurrently), very
good vibe happening ­ positive, enthusiastic participation.
excellent opportunity to network, learn about work that is happening in other sectors. Quite a bit
of energy and creativity there. Great food and excellent venue!
Great job Peter Michael and all the volunteer team!
Would be great to make the new KMb professional panel into a longer session. Some good tips
for new professionals and it is always interesting to hear about people's careers.
­provide evaluation immediately upon conclusion of program while ideas are fresh and
participants may be able to complete while travelling.
Great job, Peter and team!
A good insight into state of the art KM in Canada
The program was not very handy. Abstracts too long. This survey: include a "don't know" option
(for example if someone has not attended a particular keynote)
I thought the forum was great. I could only stay for Day 1. I would love to see more
segments/workshops/presentations on the commercialization and tech transfer piece.
I would however be interested in finding more about the overall objectives etc. I believe that
there are untapped audiences for Knowledge Mobilization that are unaddressed as well as a
need for a focus on the mechanics behind the process. catkinso@cmhc­schl.gc.ca
For the forum it would be great if there were a few more applied and practical sessions.
This was my first Forum and I found it to be interesting, engaging, and extremely useful. RE:
Membership. Having been a part of organizations with memberships, it is hard to use resources
for inviting and keeping track of memberships, especially if dues are involved. More helpful
would be no cost memberships, and finding resources to support the organization on an ongoing
basis that did not require bookkeeping, accounting dues notices, etc.
If the Institute for Knowledge Mobilization was to offer a membership to help support
its activities, would you be willing to become a member?
54.6%
43.3%
Yes ­ Oui
42
43.3%
No ­ Non
2
2.1%
Uncertain ­ incertain
53
54.6%
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
30/31
8/10/2016
Participant Evaluation ­ #CKF16 ­ Évaluation par les participants ­ Google Forms
Number of daily responses
50.0
37.5
25.0
12.5
0.0
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1dr8cse9XQnycOnV­QmzDG6RgAfpf4mYjMCG3rxa4VOs/viewanalytics
31/31
Auteur
Документ
Catégorie
Без категории
Affichages
1
Taille du fichier
406 Кб
Étiquettes
1/--Pages
signaler