FY 2018 IES Principal Investigators Meeting Survey

Annual PI Meeting Feedback Survey

Thank you for attending the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) Annual Principal Investigators (PI)
Meeting. The purpose of this feedback survey is to gather information about your PI Meeting experience
that can inform the development of next year’s agenda. Your answers are voluntary, but your feedback is
very important. Your responses will be anonymous and it will take about 15 minutes of your time to
complete the survey.
NOTE: Please do not use your browser's back button. Instead, please use the back and
next buttons at the bottom of each survey page. When you have completed the survey, click
submit. Once you have submitted your survey, you will NOT be able to change your responses.
If you have any questions about this survey, please contact the IES Planning Team at
IESHELP@manhattanstrategy.com

We appreciate your feedback.
Public Burden Statement
According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless such collection displays a valid
OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for this information collection is 1880-0542. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is
estimated to average 15 minutes per response, including time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data
needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. The obligation to respond to this collection is voluntary. If you have comments or concerns
regarding the status of your individual submission of this survey, please contact Christina Chhin directly at, U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education
Sciences, 400 Maryland Ave., SW, PCP-4124, Washington, DC 20202. ] Number 1880-0542 (Expires 7/31/2017). Note: Please do not return the completed
Customer Feedback Form to this address.

(untitled)

This year's theme, Relevance & Rigor: Creating the Future of Education Research, underscores IES’s
commitment to funding high-quality research projects that will lead to meaningful improvements in
schools and student outcomes.

1. Please indicate the extent to which the overall IES Annual PI Meeting met your expectations.
Exceeded Expectations
Met Expectations
Fell Short of Expectations
Not Applicable/No Opinion

2. Please indicate the extent to which the conference met your expectations with respect to each of the
objectives listed below.

Exceeded
Expectations
Discuss IES and the U.S.
Department of Education priorities
and programs
Address challenges and solutions
in the field of education research
and practice
Highlight new research findings
and approaches from IES-funded
projects
Offer professional development
on a range of substantive and
methodological topics
Provide time for PIs to meet with
their program officers (or IES staff)
Foster connections with other
researchers

PI MEETING LOGISTICS

Met
Expectations

Fell Short of
Expectations

Not
Applicable/No
Opinion

3. Please indicate your satisfaction with each of the logistics items listed below.

Very
Satisfied
Moving this year's
conference from
December to
January
Conference
announcement
Registration
procedures
The conference
website
Conference
program/agenda
Poster abstract
submission
guidelines and
procedures
The mobile app
Meeting space
Hotel
accommodations
Hotel location
Overall conference
experience

Satisfied

Neither
Satisfied
nor
Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very
Dissatisfied

Not
Applicable

4. Please indicate your satisfaction with each of the logistics items listed below.

Very
Satisfied

Satisfied

Neither
Satisfied
nor
Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very
Dissatisfied

Not
Applicable

Responses to your
questions and
concerns
The onsite
registration
process
The onsite
assistance
provided
The overall
logistics

NETWORKING AND ENGAGEMENT

5. Please indicate your satisfaction with each of the networking and engagement items listed below.

Very
Satisfied
Use of the mobile
app to connect with
other meeting
participants
Use of #IESPIMtg
Twitter to engage
meeting
participants
Time for
networking and
informal meet-ups
Lunchtime meetups

Satisfied

Neither
Satisfied
nor
Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very
Dissatisfied

Not
Applicable

6. Monday, January 8, 10:00 AM - 8:00 PM The ED Games Expo: An Annual
Showcase for Education Learning Games and Technologies session
Please rate the ED Games Expo using the scale provided.
Excellent
Average
Poor
Did not attend

7. Please indicate your satisfaction with The ED Games Expo session.

Very
Satisfied
The applicability of
The ED Game
Expo to your
research
The extent to
which The ED
Game Expo format
allowed for
dissemination
and/or discussion
of information

(untitled)

Satisfied

Neither
Satisfied
nor
Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very
Dissatisfied

Not
Applicable

8. Monday, January 8, 8:30 AM - 4:30 PM Early Learning Network Meeting
Please rate the Early Learning Network Meeting using the scale provided.
Excellent
Average
Poor
Did not attend

9. Please indicate your satisfaction with the Early Learning Network Meeting.

Very
Satisfied
The speaker(s) at
the Early Learning
Network Meeting
The applicability of
the Early Learning
Network Meeting to
your research
The format of the
Early Learning
Network Meeting
allowing for
appropriate
dissemination
and/or discussion
of information

Satisfied

Neither
Satisfied
nor
Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very
Dissatisfied

Not
Applicable

10. Tuesday, January 9, 8:30 AM - 9:00 AM Opening Plenary: IES Director's Welcome
Please rate the Opening Plenary: IES Director's Welcome session using the scale provided.
Excellent
Average
Poor
Did not attend

11. Please indicate your satisfaction with the Opening Plenary: IES Director's Welcome.

Very
Satisfied

Satisfied

Neither
Satisfied
nor
Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very
Dissatisfied

The applicability of the IES
Director's Welcome to your
research
The extent to which the session
format allowed for dissemination
or discussion of information
provided

12. Tuesday, January 9, 9:15 AM - 10:00 AM Plenary Session: Commissioner's Welcome
Please provide an overall rating for the Plenary Session: Commissioner's Welcome session you
attended.

Excellent Average
Commissioner's Welcome: NCSER
The Past, Present, and Future of NCER: Comments from
NCER Leadership

Did
not
Poor attend

13. Please indicate your satisfaction with the Plenary Session: Commissioner's Welcome you
attended.

Very
Satisfied

Satisfied

Neither
Satisfied
nor
Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very
Dissatisfied

The applicability of the
Commissioner's Welcome to
your research
The extent to which the session
format allowed for dissemination
or discussion of information

14. Please indicate the extent to which you feel the Plenary Session: Commissioner's Welcome was
effective in accomplishing each of the following:
Very
Effective

Effective

Moderately
Effective

Somewhat
Effective Ineffective

Helping you understand IES
research programs and priorities
Stressing the importance of
relevance and rigor for the future of
education research
Setting a positive tone for the PI
meeting

(untitled)

PI Meeting Sessions (Tuesday, January 9)
For the next set of questions, we'd like your feedback on the quality of each of the sessions you attended
on Tuesday, January 9, 2018. Using the scale provided, please rate each session you attended. If you
attended more than one session during a time-band, please rate up to TWO sessions.

15. Please indicate the title of the FIRST/ONLY session you attended (if applicable) during the
Tuesday, January 9, 10:30 AM - 11:45 AM time-band in the textbox below. (If you attended more than
one session during the time-band, an opportunity to rate the second session is provided below.)
Communicating Research to Policymakers
Developing Measures of Classroom Practice
Moving Beyond p-values: Bayesian Inference in Education Research
NCES EDGE Program: Exploring the Social and Spatial Context of Education
Taking the Next Step: How Students Transition Through Systems
Training the Next Generation of Education Researchers
Leveraging Technology to Support Individualized Learning in Classroom Settings
Did not attend

16. Please provide an overall rating for the first session using the scale provided.
Excellent
Average
Poor

17. Please indicate your satisfaction with this session.

Very
Satisfied
The speaker(s)
The applicability of the session
to your research
The extent to which the session
format allowed for dissemination
or discussion of information

Satisfied

Neither
Satisfied
nor
Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very
Dissatisfied

18. Please indicate the title of the SECOND session you attended (if applicable) during the Tuesday,
January 9, 10:30 AM - 11:45 AM time-band in the textbox below.
Communicating Research to Policymakers
Developing Measures of Classroom Practice
Moving Beyond p-values: Bayesian Inference in Education Research
NCES EDGE Program: Exploring the Social and Spatial Context of Education
Taking the Next Step: How Students Transition Through Systems
Training the Next Generation of Education Researchers
Leveraging Technology to Support Individualized Learning in Classroom Settings
Did not attend

19. Please provide an overall rating for the second session using the scale provided.
Excellent
Average
Poor

20. Please indicate your satisfaction with this session.

Very
Satisfied
The speaker(s)
The applicability of the session
to your research
The extent to which the session
format allowed for dissemination
or discussion of information

Satisfied

Neither
Satisfied
nor
Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very
Dissatisfied

21. Tuesday, January 9, 12:15 PM - 1:00 PM Lunchtime Meet-ups
Please rate the Lunchtime Meet-up(s) you attended according to the scale below.
Excellent

Average

Poor

Did not attend

Lunchtime Meet-up: Career and
Technical Education: The Next
Frontier
Lunchtime Meet-up: Inter-/IntraPersonal Competencies and Older
Students
Lunchtime Meet-up: The Value of
Data Science for Education

22. Please indicate your satisfaction with the Lunchtime Meet-up you attended.

Very
Satisfied

Satisfied

Neither
Satisfied
nor
Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very
Dissatisfied

The applicability of the
Lunchtime Meet-up to your
research
The format of the Lunchtime
Meet-up allowing for appropriate
dissemination and/or discussion
of information

(untitled)

23. Tuesday, January 9, 1:15 PM - 2:30 PM Plenary Session: It's Up to Us: Transparency and the
Public Value of Science
Please rate the Plenary Session: It's Up to Us: Transparency and the Public Value of
Science session using the scale provided.
Excellent
Average
Poor

24. Please indicate your satisfaction with Plenary Session: It's Up to Us: Transparency and the
Public Value of Science.

Very
Satisfied

Satisfied

Neither
Satisfied
nor
Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very
Dissatisfied

The speaker(s)
The applicability of the session
to your research
The extent to which the session
format allowed for dissemination
or discussion of information

25. Please indicate the title of the FIRST/ONLY session you attended during the Tuesday, January 9,
3:00 PM - 4:30 PM time-band in the textbox below. (If you attended more than one session during the
time-band, an opportunity to rate the second session is provided below.)

At the Cutting Edge: Demonstrations of Statistical Software Developed Through the Stats & Methods Program
Changing Students' Beliefs to Improve Outcomes
Defining and Measuring Risk in Special Education and Early Intervention Research
Early Learning Program Meeting
Making Data Publicly Available
Using Research at the Classroom, School, and State Levels: Results from the Knowledge Utilization R&D Cen
Working Together to Improve Student Learning and Engagement - Partnering with and Recruiting Schools and
Did not attend
Left conference before this session

26. Please provide an overall rating for the first session using the scale provided.
Excellent
Average
Poor

27. Please indicate your satisfaction with this session.

Very
Satisfied

Satisfied

Neither
Satisfied
nor
Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very
Dissatisfied

The speaker(s)
The applicability of the session
to your research
The extent to which the session
format allowed for dissemination
or discussion of information

28. Please indicate the title of the SECOND session you attended (if applicable) during the Tuesday,
January 9, 3:00 PM - 4:30 PM time-band in the textbox below.

At the Cutting Edge: Demonstrations of Statistical Software Developed Through the Stats & Methods Program
Changing Students' Beliefs to Improve Outcomes
Defining and Measuring Risk in Special Education and Early Intervention Research
Early Learning Program Meeting
Making Data Publicly Available
Using Research at the Classroom, School, and State Levels: Results from the Knowledge Utilization R&D Cen
Working Together to Improve Student Learning and Engagement - Partnering with and Recruiting Schools and
Did not attend
Left conference before this session

29. Please provide an overall rating for the second session using the scale provided.
Excellent
Average
Poor

30. Please indicate your satisfaction with this session.

Very
Satisfied

Satisfied

Neither
Satisfied
nor
Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very
Dissatisfied

The speaker(s)
The applicability of the session
to your research
The extent to which the session
format allowed for dissemination
or discussion of information

31. Tuesday, January 9, 4:30 PM - 5:45 PM Poster Session
Please rate the Poster Session using the scale provided.
Excellent

Average

Poor

Did not attend

Traditional poster presentations
Technology demonstrations

32. Please indicate your satisfaction with the Poster Session.

Very
Satisfied
The applicability of the poster
session to your research
The format of the poster session
allowing for appropriate
dissemination and/or discussion
of information

(untitled)

Satisfied

Neither
Satisfied
nor
Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very
Dissatisfied

PI Meeting Sessions (Wednesday, January 10)
For the next set of questions, we'd like your feedback on the quality of each of the sessions you attended
on Wednesday, January 10, 2018. Using the scale provided, please rate each session you attended. If
you attended more than one session during a time-band, please rate up to TWO sessions.

33. Wednesday, January 10, 8:30 AM - 9:45 AM Plenary Session: Keynote Address
Please rate the Plenary Session: Keynote Address using the scale provided.
Excellent
Average
Poor
Did not attend
Left conference before this session

34. Please indicate your satisfaction with this session.

Very
Satisfied
The speaker(s)
The applicability of the session
to your research
The extent to which the session
format allowed for dissemination
or discussion of information

Satisfied

Neither
Satisfied
nor
Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very
Dissatisfied

35. Please indicate the title of the FIRST/ONLY session you attended during the Wednesday, January
10, 10:15 AM - 11:45 AM time-band in the textbox below. (If you attended more than one session during
the time-band, an opportunity to rate the second session is provided below.)

Data Privacy Issues in Education Research: Advances and Barriers
Estimation and Impacts of Treatment Effect Heterogeneity
Implementation Research through the IES Goal Structure: Exploring, Developing, Testing, and Measuring Prac
Linking Social, Emotional, and Academic Development in K-12 Education: A Consensus Statement on How W
Mediation Analysis
Single-Case Design: How You Can Use SCD to Enhance Your Research
Un-Siloing Populations of Students and their Needs
Did not attend
Left conference before this session

36. Please provide an overall rating for the first session using the scale provided.
Excellent
Average
Poor

37. Please indicate your satisfaction with this session.

Very
Satisfied
The speaker(s)
The applicability of the session
to your research
The extent to which the session
format allowed for dissemination
or discussion of information

Satisfied

Neither
Satisfied
nor
Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very
Dissatisfied

38. Please indicate the title of the SECOND session you attended (if applicable) during the
Wednesday, January 10, 10:15 AM - 11:45 AM time-band in the textbox below.

Data Privacy Issues in Education Research: Advances and Barriers
Estimation and Impacts of Treatment Effect Heterogeneity
Implementation Research through the IES Goal Structure: Exploring, Developing, Testing, and Measuring Prac
Linking Social, Emotional, and Academic Development in K-12 Education: A Consensus Statement on How W
Mediation Analysis
Single-Case Design: How You Can Use SCD to Enhance Your Research
Un-Siloing Populations of Students and their Needs
Did not attend
Left conference before this session

39. Please provide an overall rating for the second session using the scale provided.
Excellent
Average
Poor

40. Please indicate your satisfaction with this session.

Very
Satisfied
The speaker(s)
The applicability of the session
to your research
The extent to which the session
format allowed for dissemination
or discussion of information

(untitled)

Satisfied

Neither
Satisfied
nor
Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very
Dissatisfied

41. Wednesday, January 10, 12:15 PM - 1:15 PM Lunchtime Meet-ups
Please rate the Lunchtime Meet-up(s) you attended according to the scale below.

Excellent Average

Poor

Did
not
attend

Left conference
before this
session

Lunchtime Meet-up: Creating a
Culture of Replication Research
Lunchtime Meet-up: Effective
Teachers & Teaching
Lunchtime Meet-up: Research and
Education in Rural Settings

42. If applicable, please indicate your satisfaction with the Lunchtime Meet-up session you attended.

Very
Satisfied
The applicability of the
Lunchtime Meet-up to your
research
The format of the Lunchtime
Meet-up allowing for appropriate
dissemination and/or discussion
of information

Satisfied

Neither
Satisfied
nor
Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very
Dissatisfied

43. Please indicate the title of the FIRST/ONLY session you attended during the Wednesday, January
10, 1:30 PM - 2:45 PM time-band in the textbox below. (If you attended more than one session during the
time-band, an opportunity to rate the second session is provided below.)

Evidence-Based Approaches to Developmental Education Reform: Early Findings from the Center for the Anal
Gifted Identification Gap: When Just as Good is Not Good Enough
How to be SMART About your Adaptive Intervention
Pathways to the Education Sciences Program Meeting
The IES Scientific Peer Review Process: Overview and Common Myths and Misconceptions
What is Required for a Partnership to Carry out a Quick Evaluation?
Infusing Your Research into Commercially-Viable Products: Tips and Tricks of the Trade
Did not attend
Left conference before this session

44. Please provide an overall rating for the first session using the scale provided.
Excellent
Average
Poor

45. Please indicate your satisfaction with this session.

Very
Satisfied
The speaker(s)
The applicability of the session
to your research
The extent to which the session
format allowed for dissemination
or discussion of information

Satisfied

Neither
Satisfied
nor
Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very
Dissatisfied

46. Please indicate the title of the Second session you attended during the Wednesday, January 10,
1:30 PM - 2:45 PM time-band in the textbox below.

Evidence-Based Approaches to Developmental Education Reform: Early Findings from the Center for the Anal
Gifted Identification Gap: When Just as Good is Not Good Enough
How to be SMART About your Adaptive Intervention
Pathways to the Education Sciences Program Meeting
The IES Scientific Peer Review Process: Overview and Common Myths and Misconceptions
What is Required for a Partnership to Carry out a Quick Evaluation?
Infusing Your Research into Commercially-Viable Products: Tips and Tricks of the Trade
Did not attend
Left conference before this session

47. Please provide an overall rating for the second session using the scale provided.
Excellent
Average
Poor

48. Please indicate your satisfaction with this session.

Very
Satisfied
The speaker(s)
The applicability of the session
to your research
The extent to which the session
format allowed for dissemination
or discussion of information

Satisfied

Neither
Satisfied
nor
Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very
Dissatisfied

49. Wednesday, January 10, 3:00 PM - 4:00 PM Meet Your Program Officer: Office Hours and
Topic Meetings
Please rate Meet Your Program Officer: Office Hours and Topic Meetings using the scale provided.
Excellent
Average
Poor
Did not attend
Left conference before this session

50. Please indicate your satisfaction with Meet Your Program Officer: Office Hours and Topic
Meetings.

Very
Satisfied
The extent to which you could
access your program officer
The helpfulness of the
discussion to your research
The format allowing for
individual project updates and
questions
The timing of the session

PI Meeting Presenters' Feedback

Satisfied

Neither
Satisfied
nor
Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very
Dissatisfied

51. If you were a presenter at the IES Annual PI Meeting, please rate your satisfaction for each of the
following questions. If you were not a presenter/speaker, please leave this section blank.

Very
Satisfied

Satisfied

Neither
Satisfied
nor
Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very
Dissatisfied

The communication from IES
prior to the meeting
The resources available at the
meeting to support your
presentation

(untitled)

Thinking Ahead to the Next IES Annual PI Meeting

52. Please provide feedback on the items listed below to help inform the next IES Annual PI Meeting.
For each of the questions, you may provide up to two responses in the corresponding text boxes.
Suggestion 1
What did you like best about this
year's meeting?
What topic(s) from this year's
meeting would you like to see again
at the next PI Meeting?
What new topic(s) would you like to
see included at the next PI Meeting?
What suggestions do you have for
improving the meeting format or
logistics?
What suggestions do you have for
improving the networking and
engagement activities?

Suggestion 2

53. Please provide any additional comments/suggestions for how we can improve or better facilitate the
presentation process in the future.

Thank You!

Thank you for taking this survey, we appreciate your feedback. If you have any questions about this
survey, please contact the IES Planning Team at IESHELP@manhattanstrategy.com.