Evaluation results, part 1

At the end of the international youth exchange "Celebrate the Difference!" we conducted an anonymous evaluation with the participants. We used the online survey application "Polldaddy" which is available free of charge in a basic version. 23 out of 24 participants filled in the online questionnaire, which is quite a remarkable result in itself. The questionnaire consisted of ten questions, five of them closed (multiple choice, see below) and the other five open questions. Below you will find the results of questions relating to some general aspects of the venue, the group, the organisation and the programme of the exchange, but also to some more specific aspects of the contents.

Evaluating the venue and its environment

The first question of the evaluation form asked for opinions about the venue of the exchange (i.e. the youth hostel in Breisach) and its surroundings:


Question 1: How do you evaluate the...?

One can be pretty content with this result, I guess. With the exception of one aspect, all the replies are in the middle or top half of the evaluation scale. With a group as diverse (in many ways) as ours, it will never be possible to make everyone happy or even very happy. Plus, some of the opinions are contradicting each other, as becomes clear in replies to other questions. Some people suggest to go to a quieter place next time, while others propose to go to a city centre, so that the event is in the middle of urban 'real' life. Hm!

The only sub-question to which there are negative evaluations is the one about access to other places nearby (i.e. near Breisach). Now, this question is maybe not specific enough. But I really wonder what people might want to improve here: if we go closer to Freiburg, France will be farther away. If we go to Strasbourg, we will not see Freiburg or Colmar so easily. Maybe someone can make some suggestions here, what might be meant? Any suggestions will be much appreciated.

Evaluating the team of trainers and organisers

Question #4 asked for people's opinions about the 'leaders' of the exchange: 

Question 4: The team of organisers and trainers

The result is pretty good, as this image reveals, and there seems to be no need for fundamental changes. Is that correct? If anyone disagrees, please let me/us know. Of course we should all strive for marks in the extreme left column, but even the two left-hand columns are acceptable for the beginning, I believe... ;-)

Evaluating the atmosphere and other general aspects

This question relates to general aspects of our project, such as language situation, workload, group size etc.

Question 5: How do you generally evaluate the...?

The answers to this question reveal a somewhat more differentiated picture: The language situation could apparently be improved (but how?), as well as info & communication before and during the seminar. The most interesting (and contentious) aspect, however, seems to be the relation of programme time and free time, which as many as six people did not find satisfactory. The question is: what could be improved? I remember from our mid-term evaluation, that some people were unhappy because they wanted more FREE time, while others wished for there to be more PROGRAMME time! It is a dilemma which cannot be resolved, as far as I can see.

Another thing which could have clearly been improved (and many respondents have stated this in their written evaluation replies), however, is the time discipline. I can imagine that more people could have been happy with work / free time, had the programme started and finished according to schedule, and had there been less waiting and hanging around. I suppose that those who had a tendency to be late (and sometimes not even show up at all) are aware of this (or at least I hope so). My request to them (participants as well as group leaders) is to reflect about this, and to think about the effect of their behaviour on the atmosphere as a whole, and on all other people.

Evaluating the programme

The next question (#6) was the programme and its components: "How do you specifically evaluate the...?", followed by a list of (almost) all activities of which the programme of our youth exchange was composed:



Question 6: How do you specifically evaluate the...?

This is a set of feedback which makes me rather happy :-) It appears that the great majority of participants was content with all aspects of our programme, content-wise. Nice! I can identify only some topics (European Court of Human Rights, Skype conference with Franziska Brantner etc.) which some of you did not find remarkable. But even there it is not negative criticism which is articulated, perhaps rather indifference or neutrality.

One respondent (each) is saying that the 'warm-ups and energisers' and the 'Discrimination Scale' were disappointing. Why, I wonder? As for the energisers, I had the impression that some participants thought they were silly and somehow 'too much', especially in the mornings. Well, everyone has the right to have an opinion of their own; but I often thought that it was especially those who did NOT take part in these elements, for whom it would have been useful to do so...

What we don't learn from this feedback is, which elements people missed from the programme. But there was another open question which asked for this information, the results of which will be presented here later.

Evaluating the workshops in particular

Last but not least, a question (#7) about the workshops which were conducted as part of the exchange during three days:


Question 7: What is your opinion about the workshops and their results?

Again, I am very happy about your evaluation, and it seems that in the future this element of the whole meeting can be / should be kept. Good! Two little things catch my eye, though: Four people are saying that the technical support was nothing special, and 14 people think the clarity of tasks and expectations was not very good. So this is something which should be improved. I wonder if it concerns all three workshops, or not. Anyone want to help us on this?

I would like to thank the 23 participants for their valuable feedback! I for my part have kept my promise to make the evaluation very transparent and to treat the evaluation results very seriously. They will be taken into account in any future activity of mine!