Leveraging Educational Technology Meeting Evaluation Form

		Department of Education—Office Educational Technology Leveraging Technology to Keep America Competitive

Meeting Evaluation

Date: (pre-printed) Meeting: (pre-printed) Location: (pre-printed) Please rate each statement by using the scale listed on the right.	Scale: Strongly Disagree (1), Disagree (2), Neutral (3), Agree (4), Strongly Agree (5) Disagree-----------------Agree
1. The meeting invitation provided sufficient information about the meeting activities.	1 2 3 4 5
2. Meeting materials were received in a timely manner (i.e., one week in advance).	1 2 3 4 5
3. Meeting materials were well thought-out, well-developed and well-organized.	1 2 3 4 5
4. The meeting facilities were excellent.	1 2 3 4 5
5. Travel arrangements were excellent.	1 2 3 4 5
6. Lodging services were excellent.	1 2 3 4 5
7. Food services were excellent.	1 2 3 4 5
8. The honorarium offered for the meeting was reasonable.	1 2 3 4 5

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for this survey is 1800-0011 and will expire on xx/xx/xxxx. The time required to complete this survey is estimated to average 5 minutes per respondent, including the time to review instructions and complete the survey. If you have any comments concerning the accuracy of the time estimate or suggestions for improving this form, please write to: U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC 20202-4537. If you have any comments or concerns regarding the status of your individual submission of this form, write directly to: Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, U.S. Department of Education, Lyndon Baines Johnson Building, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20202.

9. The goals for the meeting were clearly articulated, reasonable and met.	1 2 3 4 5
10. The meeting started on time.	1 2 3 4 5
11. Discussions were productive.	1 2 3 4 5
12. My individual contributions were welcomed and respected.	1 2 3 4 5
13. Questions and concerns were addressed appropriately.	1 2 3 4 5
14. The meeting was worth my time.	1 2 3 4 5
15. The meeting did not extend past the scheduled time.	1 2 3 4 5
16. This meeting met my expectations.	1 2 3 4 5
17. The contractor (i.e., host) was responsive and provided good support before the meeting.	1 2 3 4 5

The strengths of the meeting were:

The meeting could have been improved by:

Additional Comments/Suggestions:

2