Receiving too many emails?Each newsletter includes an unsubscribe link. If you would like to unsubscribe from our newsletter, please use this link when the email is sent to you.
Share this posting on social media!
Diversity Program Consortium 2017 Annual Conference Evaluation Topline Report
The Diversity Program Consortium (DPC) met in Bethesda, MD, from October 9-11, 2017. The annual grantee's conference brought together over 100 people from the BUILD, the NRMN, the NIH and the CEC. This report presents the topline evaluation findings from their 2017 annual conference.
Data was collected onsite daily, with 63 participants completing evaluation forms for the October 9th Welcome Reception poster session and October 10th (Day 1), representing a 61% response rate. Of the 63 participants completing the evaluation form, 44 were from BUILD centers, six were from the NIH, four represented the CEC and six people did not indicate their affiliation.
The poster session during the Welcome Reception was highly valued by the 42 participants who completed this item. Sixty-two percent of responders rated its usefulness as excellent or above average. Another 33% rated the session average and only 2 people rated its usefulness below average. Of note, 88% of the responders (n=44) rated the opportunity to interact with colleagues either excellent or above average.
After welcomes and opening remarks on October 10th, the meeting offered a number of small breakout sessions, including Advancements in Mentor Training, BUILD models; NET Library, Resources for the DPC; Theories of Change: Measuring Institutional Climate Transformation; and Developing & Leveraging Intensive Partnerships. Each of the sessions was rated highly on the criteria of usefulness, as shown in Table 1, below.
Table 1: October 10 Morning Breakouts
Percent Rating Excellent or Above Average
Advancements in Mentor Training
Theories of Change
Developing & Leveraging Institutional Partnerships
The afternoon of October 10th offered another set of small breakout sessions. These included Culturally Responsive Approaches to Teaching; Developing Research Capacity in Teaching Intensive Institutions; Consortium Data Available for Analyses; and Hearing Student Voices, Use of Qualitative Data. Ratings for usefulness and opportunity to interact are presented below in Table 2.
Table 2: October 10 Afternoon Breakouts
Culturally Responsive Approaches
Developing Research Capacity
Consortium Data Available
Hearing Student Voices
Day 1 ended with a DPC Poster Session. Of the 46 participants who responded, 89% rated its usefulness excellent or above average and 91% rated the opportunity to interact as excellent or above average.
On October 11 (Day 2), the meeting began with small group breakout sessions. The topics were: Inclusion of Graduates and Post-Docs in Student Training; Sustainability: Scalable, Low- Cost, High Impact Strategies; Evaluation Working Group; General Program Management and Institutionalizing Best Practices, Undergraduates in STEM. In Table 3, data is presented for these sessions.
Table 3: October 11 Morning Breakouts
Inclusion of Graduates and Post-Docs
Evaluation Working Group
General Program Management
Institutionalizing Best Practices
The luncheon keynote speaker on Day 2, Dr. Maggie Werner Washburne was highly rated, with 90% of respondents (n=48) rating the usefulness of her presentation as excellent or above average. However, only 12% of respondents (n=68) found the usefulness of the closing session on Dissemination to be either excellent or above average. Of note, 71% of responders found the usefulness of the Dissemination session below average or poor.
General meeting evaluation data was provided by 48 participants: 93% of participants rated the organization of the meeting as excellent or above average; 79% rating the opportunity to interact at the meeting as excellent or above average; and 85% rated overall annual meeting experience as excellent or above average.
POST CONFERENCE DEBRIEF FINDINGS
A Debriefing Session with the Annual Conference Planning Committee (ACPC) and with the Communications Working Group was held on November 14th using a “Thorns and Roses” feedback framework. The debriefs resulted in a compilation of lessons learned and highlights of successful elements. Overall comments were very positive and constructive. Some of the most important takeaways included the following:
Some sites even took them to put in the Dean’s office!
Each section is highlighted in this newsletter and includes the location of the materials available.
The Diversity Program Consortium Coordination and Evaluation Center at UCLA is supported by Office of the Director of the National Institutes of Health / National Institutes of General Medical Sciences under award number U54GM119024.