European Cetacean Society

www.EuropeanCetaceanSociety.EU

ECS Conference 2009 Feedback Form

Here you have the opportunity to comment on the past ECS conference. Your feedback will help us make improvements and thereby serve your requirements better. Please take the time to comment honestly on all aspects of the conference. Thank You!

A. General Information

Q1) What is your Membership Status ?

Full member   Student member   Institutional member   Non-member

Q2) Did you attend the 22nd Annual Conference in Egmond aan Zee, The Netherlands?

YES   NO

Q3) Did you attend the 23rd Annual Conference in Istanbul, Turkey?

YES   NO

How many days did you attend the 23rd Annual Conference in Istanbul, Turkey?

 days

Q3B) What was the reason for NOT attending the conference?

Other commitment at these dates
Lack of funding
Problem with VISA
Other...

Please specify:

Q4) Do you plan to attend the 24th Annual Conference in Stralsund, Germany?

YES   NO

Q5) What criteria would make you choose to attend a next ECS Conference?

funding opportunity
scientific programme (as advertised online)
specific workshops before or after the conference
opportunity to present my own work
availability at this time of the year
location of the conference (Country)
duration of the conference
Other

Please specify:

Q6) Do you think that you received a reasonable value for your Registration Fee?

YES   NO

Q7) Would you use a secure web site to pay registration fees by credit card?

YES   NO

Q8) Did you find the volunteers friendly and helpful at the 2009 conference?

YES   NO

Q9) Did you find the signage helpful for finding your way around in the conference center at the 2009 conference?

YES   NO

Q10) Did you attend a pre-conference workshop at the 2009 conference?

YES   NO

Q11) Did you receive sufficient information via the conference website?

YES   NO

B. Scientific Programme

Q1) Did you submit an abstract for the 2009 conference?

YES   NO

Q2) Did you find the abstract submission process via the web site acceptable?

YES   NO   I submitted my abstract by email

Q3) Did you find that the deadline for abstract submission was:

Too early   Too late   About right

Q4) How was the delay between your submission and the answers from reviewers?

Too long   About right

Q5) Would you like to get more feedback from reviewers and scientific committee regarding why your abstract was not accepted in the format you were requested ?

YES   NO

Q6) Did you find the programme in the abstract book helpful and informative?

YES   NO

Please specify why:

Q7) Did you access the spoken and poster presentation schedules via the website prior to the conference?

YES   NO

Q8) Should the abstracts be available on the website?

YES   NO

Should the abstracts be restricted to members/conference delegates only?

Members only
Conference delegates only
Both
None

Q9) What did you think of the scientific quality of the presentations

Generally Poor   Acceptable   Generally Good

Please specify why:

Q10) What did you think of the invited talks?

Generally Poor   Acceptable   Generally Good

Please specify why:

Q11) What did you think of the poster sessions?

Generally Poor   Acceptable   Generally Good

Please specify why:

Q12) Regarding the reviewing process and the resulting scientific programme, do you think that the balance between talks and posters was:

Fair   Unfair

Please specify why:

Q13) Was the number of contributed spoken presentations:

Too few   Too many   About right

Q14) Could you easily locate the posters in which you were interested?

YES   NO

Q15) Was there sufficient space to view the posters?

YES   NO

Q16) Was the time allocated for poster presentations sufficient?

Sufficient   Insufficient

How long would you recommend the poster sessions to be?

 hours.

Student Awards

Q17) Were you aware of the criteria used for student awards?

YES   NO

Did you agree with the criteria used?

YES   NO

Q18) Was the number of prizes:

Too few   Too many   About right

AGM

Q19) The AGM was:

Too short
Too long
About right
Interesting
So-so
Insufferably boring

Q20) Do you feel the Society listens sufficiently to the views of its members?

YES   NO

Q21) Were participants questions given sufficient time and attention in the AGM?

YES   NO

C. Social programme/ facilities

Q1) Regarding the quality of the videos on Video Night, did you:

Generally Dislike   Neither Like nor Disike   Generally Like   Did not attend

Q2) Regarding the length of Video Night:

Good   Too long   Too short

Q3) The coffee breaks were:

Too short   Too long   About right

Q4) The lunch breaks were:

Too short   Too long   About right

Q5) Would you like to have snacks or meals presented within the conference center during lunch breaks ?

YES   NO

Q6) Did you attend the icebreaker?

YES   NO

Did you enjoy the icebreaker?

YES   NO

Please specify why:

Q7) Did you attend the final dinner and dance?

YES   NO

Did you enjoy the final dinner and dance?

YES   NO

Please specify why:

Q8) Did you attend the final dance only?

YES   NO

Did you enjoy the final dance?

YES   NO

Please specify why:

Q9) Did you get connected via the WIFI on your personal laptop?

YES   NO

Q10) Did you use the internet cafe?

YES   NO

Did you find that there were:

Enough computers
Not enough computers

Q11) Are there any other facilities you would suggest to have at the conference venue?

D. Future conferences

Q1) How long should the conference be, in days?

Longer   Shorter   Same as this conference

Q2) Would you prefer biennial rather than annual conferences?

YES   NO

Q3) Comments/Suggestions: Please provide any suggestions that you have to improve future conferences.

Q4) Do you have any other comments about the conference?



Contact the webmaster | Log IN | Top of page