2015 Principal Investigators (PI) Meeting Feedback Survey

800800

Meeting Feedback Survey

Thank you for attending the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) 2015 Principal Investigators (PI) Meeting. The purpose of this feedback survey is to gather information about your 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 kept confidential and it will take about 15 minutes of your time to complete the survey.

If you have any questions about this survey, please contact IES Planning Team at [email protected].

Thank you for participating in this survey. Your feedback is important to helping IES improve its annual PI Meeting.

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, CP-611A, Washington, DC 20202. [Note: Please do not return the completed survey to this address.]

Meeting Objectives

ADVANCING DIVERSITY OF PEOPLE AND IDEAS

The IES 2015 PI Meeting sought to bring together people with diverse interests and perspectives on education and special education to collaborate about designing and executing high-quality scientific research that leads to improved student outcomes. 

Please indicate to what extent the session objectives listed below met your expectations using the scale provided.

	Exceeded Expectations	Met Expectations	Fell Short of Expectations	Not Applicable/No Opinion
Discuss IES and the U.S. Department of Education priorities and programs
Address challenges and solutions in the field of education research and practice
Spotlight 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 NCER and NCSER program officers and other researchers working on similar problems or issues
Foster connections between IES fellows and others who may be seeking new research or career opportunities, and individuals who want to build new partnerships or fill open positions

Meeting Logistics

MEETING LOGISTICS

Please indicate your level of satisfaction for each of the logistics items listed below using the scale provided.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied	Not Applicable
Conference announcement
Timing of the conference
Pre-Registration procedures
Conference website
Usefulness of the website
Conference Program/Agenda
Mobile application
Usefulness of the mobile application
Meeting space
Hotel accommodations
Hotel location
Overall conference experience

LOGISTICS SERVICES

Please rate the logistics services provided by NCER/NCSER’s contractor, Manhattan Strategy Group (MSG).

Please indicate how effective you found each of the services listed below using the scale provided.

	Very Effective	Effective	Ineffective	Not Applicable/Did Not Use this Service)
Timely, accurate, and courteous responses to questions and concerns
Onsite registration process
Onsite assistance as needed
Quality of overall logistics

Suggestions for the 2016 Meeting

Thinking ahead to the 2016 PI Meeting

Please provide us with feedback on regarding the items listed below to help inform the 2016 PI Meeting.

	Suggestion 1	Suggestion 2
Please provide up to two topics/sessions you would like to see included again at the 2016 PI Meeting
Please provide up to two topics/sessions not presented this year that would be of interest to you at the 2016 PI Meeting
Please provide up to two suggestions you have to improve the 2016 conference in terms of meeting logistics, networking opportunities, and/or general feedback.

Meeting Sessions (Thursday December 10)

For the next set of questions, we'd like your feedback on the quality of each of the sessions you attended on Thursday December 10, 2015.  Using the scale provided, please rate each session you attended.  If you attended two sessions during a time-band for at least 30 minutes each, please rate both sessions.

Thursday December 10 // 8:45am-9:45am Welcome and Opening Plenary

Please rate the Welcome and Opening Plenary session using the scale provided.

	Excellent	Average	Poor	Did not attend
Welcome and Opening Plenary

If you attended the above session, please indicate your satisfaction with the session.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The relevance of the session
The usefulness of the session
Time allotted for presentations, interaction, and discussion
Your ability to now apply what you learned to your own practice

Thursday December 10 // 10:00am-10:45am Meeting with Center-Specific Grantees/Designate NCER or NCSER

Please rate the Meeting with Center-Specific Grantees/Designate NCER or NCSER session using the scale provided.

	Excellent	Average	Poor	Did not attend
Meeting with NCER Grantees
Meeting with NCSER Grantees

If you attended one of the above sessions, please indicate your satisfaction with the session.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The relevance of the session
The usefulness of the session
Time allotted for presentations, interaction, and discussion
Your ability to now apply what you learned to your own practice

Thursday December 10 // 11:00 am – 12:00 pm Concurrent Sessions

Please provide an overall rating for the session(s) you attended using the scale provided.
(please rate all sessions you attended for at least 30 minutes)

	Excellent	Average	Poor	Did not attend
At the Cutting Edge: Demonstrations of Statistical Software Developed through the Statistical and Research Methodology in Education Research Program [PDMA]
Beyond Academia: Alternative Careers for Education Researchers [PDMA]
Reading and Writing in the Content Areas [RR]
Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and the Education Sciences Reform Act (ESRA) [EPP]
Researcher-Practitioner Partnerships from the Education Agency’s Perspective [PC]
Secondary Education for Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) [RR]
Supporting Students in Early and Late Adolescence with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: Developmental Challenges and Opportunities in Service Provision [RR]
Unlocking the Potential of Translational Science and Effective Dissemination Strategies [CDS]

Please indicate your satisfaction with the session you attended (as indicated in the above section) during this time-band. (If you attended more than one session during this time-band, please rate the first session here. An opportunity to rate the second session is provided in the next question.)

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The relevance of the session
The usefulness of the session
Time allotted for presentations, interaction, and discussion
Your ability to now apply what you learned to your own practice

If applicable, please indicate your satisfaction with the SECOND session you attended (as indicated in the above section) during this time-band. If you did not attend a second session, please leave this section blank.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The relevance of the session
The usefulness of the session
Time allotted for presentations, interaction, and discussion
Your ability to now apply what you learned to your own practice

Thursday December 10 // 12:15 pm – 1:30 pm Award Recognition/Keynote

Please rate the Award Recognition/Keynote session using the scale provided.

	Excellent	Average	Poor	Did not attend
Award Recognition/Keynote: Data Visualization for Education Research [CDS]

If you attended the above session, please indicate your satisfaction with the session.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The relevance of the session
The usefulness of the session
Time allotted for presentations, interaction, and discussion
Your ability to now apply what you learned to your own practice

Thursday December 10 // 1:45 pm – 3:00 pm Concurrent Sessions

Please rate the session(s) you attended using the scale provided.
(please rate all session you attended for at least 30 minutes)

	Excellent	Average	Poor	Did not attend
Adaptive Interventions in Education and Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial (SMART) Designs (Part 1)– Introduction to Adaptive Treatments [PDMA]
Is There A Role for Cognitive Processes in Reading and Math Intervention? [RR]
Mixed Methods in Education Research [PDMA]
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Datasets and Research Opportunities [PDMA]
On-Track to Graduate (Thanks to Early Warning Systems!) [RR]
RELs as Dissemination Partners [CDS]
Researcher-Practitioner Partnership Collaborations: Lessons Learned from Preschool to Kindergarten Transition Partnerships [PC]
You Say ‘Puh-tey-to,’ I say ‘Puh-tah-to’: Lessons Learned from Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration [PC]

Please indicate your satisfaction with the session you attended (as indicated in the above section) during this time-band. (If you attended more than one session during this time-band, please rate the first session here. An opportunity to rate the second session is provided in the next question.)

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The relevance of the session
The usefulness of the session
Time allotted for presentations, interaction, and discussion
Your ability to now apply what you learned to your own practice

If applicable, please indicate your satisfaction with the SECOND session you attended (as indicated in the above section) during this time-band. If you did not attend a second session, please leave this section blank.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The relevance of the session
The usefulness of the session
Time allotted for presentations, interaction, and discussion
Your ability to now apply what you learned to your own practice

Thursday December 10 // 3:15pm-4:15pm Concurrent Sessions

Please rate the session(s) you attended using the scale provided.
(please rate all sessions you attended for at least 30 minutes)

	Excellent	Average	Poor	Did not attend
Adaptive Interventions in Education and Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial (SMART) Designs (Part 2)– Introduction to SMART Studies for the Development of Adaptive Interventions in Education [PDMA]
Building Generalizations: Tools for Increasing the Relevance of Your Results [PDMA]
Developer-Researcher Collaborations: Developing and Evaluating Education Technology Learning Products [PC]
Early Intervention and Early Learning in Special Education Program Meeting [PM]
Reading and Writing Program Meeting [PM]
School-Family Partnerships from PreK-12: Challenges and Opportunities in Developing School-Based Interventions [PC]
The Disconnected, Dislocated, and Low-Skilled: Responding to New Federal Policies with Research on Youth and Adults [EPP]
Two Sides of the Same Coin: Rigorously Measuring Teaching and Defining What We Mean by “Teaching” [PDMA]

Please indicate your satisfaction with the session you attended (as indicated in the above section) during this time-band. (If you attended more than one session during this time-band, please rate the first session here. An opportunity to rate the second session is provided in the next question.)

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The relevance of the session
The usefulness of the session
Time allotted for presentations, interaction, and discussion
Your ability to now apply what you learned to your own practice

If applicable, please indicate your satisfaction with the SECOND session you attended (as indicated in the above section) during this time-band. If you did not attend a second session, please leave this section blank.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The relevance of the session
The usefulness of the session
Time allotted for presentations, interaction, and discussion
Your ability to now apply what you learned to your own practice

Thursday December 10 // 4:15 pm – 5:45 pm Poster Session and Networking

Please rate the Poster Session and Networking using the scale provided.

	Excellent	Average	Poor	Did not attend
Poster Session
Opportunities for Networking

If you attended the Poster Session, please indicate your satisfaction with the session.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The relevance of the session
The usefulness of the session
Time allotted for presentations, interaction, and discussion
Your ability to now apply what you learned to your own practice

Meeting Sessions (Friday December 11)

For the next set of questions, we'd like your feedback on the quality of each of the sessions you attended on Friday December 11, 2015.  Using the scale provided, please rate each session you attended.  If you attended two sessions during a time-band for at least 30 minutes each, please rate both sessions.

Friday December 11 // 8:30am-9:30am Concurrent Sessions

Please rate the session(s) you attended using the scale provided.
(please rate all sessions you attended for at least 30 minutes)

	Excellent	Average	Poor	Did not attend
Beyond the Transition from Early Intervention to School Entry: Follow-up Efficacy Projects [RR]
Can Students Write? Strategies for Assessing Writing Skills and Quality [RR]
Cognitive Science and Math, Part I - Developing Effective Fractions Instruction for Children with Math Learning Difficulties: What Have We Learned? [RR]
Could Your Grant Help to Improve Education for ELs? Facilitating Attention to English Learners in Research Grants [PC]
Increasing Diversity in the Education Sciences [RR]
Postsecondary Program Meeting [PM]
State and Local Program Meeting [PM]
Teaching, Professional Development, and Related Service Providers Program Meeting [PM]

Please indicate your satisfaction with the session you attended (as indicated in the above section) during this time-band. (If you attended more than one session during this time-band, please rate the first session here. An opportunity to rate the second session is provided in the next question.)

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The relevance of the session
The usefulness of the session
Time allotted for presentations, interaction, and discussion
Your ability to now apply what you learned to your own practice

If applicable, please indicate your satisfaction with the SECOND session you attended (as indicated in the above section) during this time-band. If you did not attend a second session, please leave this section blank.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The relevance of the session
The usefulness of the session
Time allotted for presentations, interaction, and discussion
Your ability to now apply what you learned to your own practice

Friday December 11 // 9:45am-11:15am Concurrent Sessions

Please rate the session(s) you attended using the scale provided.
(please rate all sessions you attended for at least 30 minutes)

	Excellent	Average	Poor	Did not attend
Can Analyses of Randomized Control Trials that Ignore Clustering be Corrected After the Fact? [PDMA]
Cognitive Science and Math, Part II - The Art of Applying the Science [RR]
English Learners Program Meeting [PM]
Is College Worth It, and for Whom? [RR]
NCSER Forum: Keeping the “Special” in Special Education Research [EPP]
Statistical and Research Methodology in Education Program Meeting [PM]
They Don’t Know What?: Understanding and Addressing the Hidden Needs of Many Adults [RR]
Using the Curriculum Research Framework to Develop Research-Based Curricula and Address Student Achievement in the Early Grades [PDMA]

Please indicate your satisfaction with the session you attended (as indicated in the above section) during this time-band. (If you attended more than one session during this time-band, please rate the first session here. An opportunity to rate the second session is provided in the next question.)

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The relevance of the session
The usefulness of the session
Time allotted for presentations, interaction, and discussion
Your ability to now apply what you learned to your own practice

If applicable, please indicate your satisfaction with the SECOND session you attended (as indicated in the above section) during this time-band. If you did not attend a second session, please leave this section blank.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The relevance of the session
The usefulness of the session
Time allotted for presentations, interaction, and discussion
Your ability to now apply what you learned to your own practice

Friday December 11 // 11:30am-12:45pm Luncheon Plenary - Communicating Education Research: A Discussion with Journalists

Please rate the Luncheon Plenary using the scale provided.

	Excellent	Average	Poor	Did not attend
Luncheon Plenary - Communicating Education Research: A Discussion with Journalists [CDS]

If you attended the above session, please indicate your satisfaction with the session.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The relevance of the session
The usefulness of the session
Time allotted for presentations, interaction, and discussion
Your ability to now apply what you learned to your own practice

Friday December 11 // 1:00pm-2:30pm Concurrent Sessions

Please rate the session(s) you attended using the scale provided.
(please rate all sessions you attended for at least 30 minutes)

	Excellent	Average	Poor	Did not attend
Cognition and Student Learning Program Meeting [PM]
Communicating Education Science and Engaging the Public [CDS]
Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-Benefit Analysis – Part 1 [PDMA]
Integrating Research and Practice: Lessons from the National Center on Scaling Up Effective Schools [PC]
Single Case Design [PDMA]
Social and Behavioral Program Meeting [PM]
The Multiphase Optimization Strategy (MOST) [PDMA]
Training Grants Meeting [PM]

Please indicate your satisfaction with the session you attended (as indicated in the above section) during this time-band. (If you attended more than one session during this time-band, please rate the first session here. An opportunity to rate the second session is provided in the next question.)

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The relevance of the session
The usefulness of the session
Time allotted for presentations, interaction, and discussion
Your ability to now apply what you learned to your own practice

If applicable, please indicate your satisfaction with the SECOND session you attended (as indicated in the above section) during this time-band. If you did not attend a second session, please leave this section blank.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The relevance of the session
The usefulness of the session
Time allotted for presentations, interaction, and discussion
Your ability to now apply what you learned to your own practice

Friday December 11 // 2:45pm-4:15pm Concurrent Sessions

Please rate the session(s) you attended using the scale provided.
(please rate all sessions you attended for at least 30 minutes)

	Excellent	Average	Poor	Did not attend
Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) Program Meeting [PM] (Part II *Session will begin at 3:30pm)
Collaborating to Move STEM Education Research Forward [PM]
Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-Benefit Analysis – Part 2 [PDMA]
Early Learning Programs and Policies Program Meeting [PM]
Estimating and Reporting Impacts Using the RCT-YES Software [PDMA]
State Administrative Data As A Backbone: Development of Research and Partnerships - Center for the Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research [PC]
The National Center on Assessment and Accountability for Special Education (NCAASE): What Do We Know About Achievement Growth for Students with Disabilities? [RR]
Transition Outcomes for Secondary Students with Disabilities Program Meeting (Part I) [PM]

Please indicate your satisfaction with the session you attended (as indicated in the above section) during this time-band. (If you attended more than one session during this time-band, please rate the first session here. An opportunity to rate the second session is provided in the next question.)

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The relevance of the session
The usefulness of the session
Time allotted for presentations, interaction, and discussion
Your ability to now apply what you learned to your own practice

If applicable, please indicate your satisfaction with the SECOND session you attended (as indicated in the above section) during this time-band. If you did not attend a second session, please leave this section blank.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The relevance of the session
The usefulness of the session
Time allotted for presentations, interaction, and discussion
Your ability to now apply what you learned to your own practice