2016 Principal Investigators PI Meeting Feedback Survey

Survey will be administered online at:

https://fs4.formsite.com/DRLO/2016NCERNCSERConfSurvey/index.html 

PI Meeting Feedback Survey

Thank you for attending the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) 2016 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.

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

We appreciate your feedback.

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. [Note: Please do not return the completed survey to this address.]

14% Complete

14% Complete

PI Meeting Objectives

MAKING IT MATTER: RIGOROUS RESEARCH FROM DESIGN TO DISSEMINATION 

This year's theme, Making it Matter: Rigorous Research from Design to Dissemination, underscores IES’ commitment to funding high quality research projects that will lead to meaningful improvements in schools and student outcomes. 

Please indicate the extent to which the overall Conference met your expectations using the scale provided.

	Exceeded Expectations	Met Expectations	Fell Short of Expectations	Not Applicable/No Opinion
Overall, the 2016 NCER/NCSER Conference

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 program officers (or IES staff)
Foster connections with other researchers

29% Complete

29% Complete

PI Meeting Logistics

PI 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
Pre-registration procedures
Usefulness of the website
Conference Program/Agenda
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

43% Complete

43% Complete

Networking and Engagement

NETWORKING AND ENGAGEMENT

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

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied	Not Applicable
Use of the mobile application (app) to connect meeting participants
Use of #IESPIMtg twitter feeds to engage meeting participants
Time for networking
Use of Networking Lounge to connect with other meeting participants

57% Complete

57% Complete

Suggestions for the 2017 PI Meeting

Thinking ahead to the 2017 PI Meeting

Please provide feedback on the items listed below to help inform the 2016 PI Meeting.  For each of the questions, you may provide up to two responses in the corresponding textboxes.

	Suggestion 1	Suggestion 2
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 2017 PI Meeting?
What new topic(s) would you like to see included at the 2017 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?

71% Complete

71% Complete

PI Meeting Sessions (Thursday December 15)

For the next set of questions, we'd like your feedback on the quality of each of the sessions you attended on Thursday December 15, 2016.  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.

Thursday December 15 // 8:30 am - 9:30 am Opening Plenary by Ruth Curran Neild

Please rate the Opening Plenary session using the scale provided.

	Excellent	Average	Poor	Did not attend
Opening Plenary

Please indicate your satisfaction with the Opening Plenary.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s) at the Opening Plenary
The applicability of the Opening Plenary to your research
The format of the Opening Plenary allowing for appropriate dissemination and/or discussion of information

Thursday December 15 // 9:45 am - 10:30 am Commissioner's Welcome

Please designate which Commissioner's Welcome session you attended and rate the session using the scale provided.

	Excellent	Average	Poor	Did not attend
Commissioner's Welcome: NCER
Commissioner's Welcome: NCSER

Please indicate your satisfaction with the Commissioner's Welcome you attended.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s) at the Commissioner's Welcome
The applicability of the Commissioner's Welcome to your research
The format of the Commissioner's Welcome allowing for appropriate dissemination and/or discussion of information

Please indicate the extent to which you feel the 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 public access and dissemination
Setting a positive tone for the PI meeting

Thursday December 15 // 10:45 am – 11:45 am Concurrent Sessions

Please provide an overall rating for the session(s) you attended using the scale provided.
(please rate up to TWO sessions if you attended more than one in a time-band)

For sessions you did not attend, please leave blank.

	Excellent	Average	Poor
Early Career Development & Mentoring Program Meeting
Initial Findings from the Research & Development Centers on Knowledge Utilization
Making the Jump: Stories of Successful Progression through the IES Goal Structure
Ongoing Comparison Studies for Continuous Improvement and Program Evaluation
Pathways to the Education Sciences Program Meeting
Statistical and Research Methodology in Education Program Meeting
STEM 2026: A Vision of Innovation
What Researchers Should Know about the Every Student Succeeds Act

Please indicate the title of the FIRST/ONLY session you attended during the Thursday December 15, 10:45 am - 11:45 am time-band in the textbox below, then indicate your satisfaction with the session. (If you attended more than one session during this time-band, 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 applicability of the session to your research
The format of the session allowing for appropriate dissemination and/or discussion of information

Please indicate the title of the SECOND session you attended (if applicable) during the Thursday December 15, 10:45 am - 11:45 am time-band in the textbox below, then indicate your satisfaction with the session. If you did not attend two sessions, please leave this section blank.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The applicability of the session to your research
The format of the session allowing for appropriate dissemination and/or discussion of information

Thursday December 15 // 12:00 pm – 1:15 pm Luncheon Plenary

Please rate the Luncheon Plenary session using the scale provided.

	Excellent	Average	Poor	Did not attend
Luncheon Plenary: "Universal Interventions: Fully Exploring Their Impacts and Potential to Create Population-Level Change" by Mark Greenberg

If applicable, please indicate your satisfaction with the Plenary session.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s) at the Luncheon Plenary
The applicability of the Luncheon Plenary to your research
The format of the Luncheon Plenary allowing for appropriate dissemination and/or discussion of information

Thursday December 15 // 1:30 pm – 3:00 pm Concurrent Sessions

Please provide an overall rating for the session(s) you attended using the scale provided.
(please rate up to TWO sessions if you attended more than one in a time-band)

For sessions you did not attend, please leave blank.

	Excellent	Average	Poor
Adaptive Intervention in Education and Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial (SMART) Designs (Part I)
Advances in Regression Discontinuity Designs and Standards
Early Learning Programs and Policies Program Meeting
Mathematics and Science Education & Education Technology Program Meetings
New Directions for Promoting Equity in Student Outcomes through Culturally Responsive Intervention Development, Evaluation, and Dissemination
The Risks of “Off-Label” Assessment Use
Training Grants Program Meeting
Transition Outcomes for Secondary Students with Disabilities & Autism Spectrum Disorders Program Meetings

Please indicate the title of the FIRST/ONLY session you attended during the Thursday December 15, 1:30 pm - 3:00 pm time-band in the textbox below, then indicate your satisfaction with the session. (If you attended more than one session during this time-band, 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 applicability of the session to your research
The format of the session allowing for appropriate dissemination and/or discussion of information

Please indicate the title of the SECOND session you attended (if applicable) during the Thursday December 15, 1:30 pm - 3:00 pm time-band in the textbox below, then indicate your satisfaction with the session. If you did not attend two sessions, please leave this section blank.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The applicability of the session to your research
The format of the session allowing for appropriate dissemination and/or discussion of information

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

Please provide an overall rating for the session(s) you attended using the scale provided.
(please rate up to TWO sessions if you attended more than one in a time-band)

For sessions you did not attend, please leave blank.

	Excellent	Average	Poor
Adaptive Intervention in Education and Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial (SMART) Designs (Part II)
Documenting Rigorous Research: Two Initiatives to Support Randomized Controlled Trial Accountability
Early Learning and Early Intervention in Special Education Program Meeting
English Learners Program Meeting
IES Needs You: Meeting Public Access Requirements
Improving Education Systems, Evaluation of State and Local Education Programs and Policies, & Researcher-Practitioner Partnerships Program Meetings
Strategies for Making Your Research Matter
Tips for Success: Responsible Inquiry from Start to Finish

Please indicate the title of the FIRST/ONLY session you attended during the Thursday December 15, 3:15 pm - 4:15 pm time-band in the textbox below, then indicate your satisfaction with the session. (If you attended more than one session during this time-band, 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 applicability of the session to your research
The format of the session allowing for appropriate dissemination and/or discussion of information

Please indicate the title of the SECOND session you attended (if applicable) during the Thursday December 15, 3:15 pm - 4:15 pm time-band in the textbox below, then indicate your satisfaction with the session. If you did not attend two sessions, please leave this section blank.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The applicability of the session to your research
The format of the session allowing for appropriate dissemination and/or discussion of information

Thursday December 15 // 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
Technology Demonstrations
Opportunities for Networking

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

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The applicability of the Poster Session to your research
The format of the Poster Session allowing for appropriate dissemination and/or discussion of information

86% Complete

86% Complete

PI Meeting Sessions (Friday December 16)

For the next set of questions, we'd like your feedback on the quality of each of the sessions you attended on Friday December 16, 2015.  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.

Friday December 16 // 8:00 am - 9:30 am Concurrent Sessions

Please provide an overall rating for the session(s) you attended using the scale provided.
(please rate up to TWO sessions if you attended more than one in a time-band)

For sessions you did not attend, please leave blank.

	Excellent	Average	Poor
At the Cutting Edge: Demonstrations of Statistical Software Developed Through the Stats & Methods Program
Developing and Evaluating College Degree Completion Strategies
Education Science in a Social Media World: How Do We Get Our Work Out There?
Identifying Key Ingredients for Intensive Interventions
Lessons Learned in Working to Improve Reading for Understanding
Listening Session: Perspectives on the Future of STEM Graduate Education
Methods Training in Cost-effectiveness and Benefit-Cost Analysis
Research and Funding Opportunities with Data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)

Please indicate the title of the FIRST/ONLY session you attended during the Friday December 16, 8:00 am - 9:30 am time-band in the textbox below, then indicate your satisfaction with the session. (If you attended more than one session during this time-band, 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 applicability of the session to your research
The format of the session allowing for appropriate dissemination and/or discussion of information

Please indicate the title of the SECOND session you attended (if applicable) during the Friday December 16, 8:00 am -9:30 am time-band in the textbox below, then indicate your satisfaction with the session. If you did not attend two sessions, please leave this section blank.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The applicability of the session to your research
The format of the session allowing for appropriate dissemination and/or discussion of information

Friday December 16 // 9:45 am - 11:15 am Concurrent Sessions

Please provide an overall rating for the session(s) you attended using the scale provided.
(please rate up to TWO sessions if you attended more than one in a time-band)

For sessions you did not attend, please leave blank.

	Excellent	Average	Poor
Evidence-Centered Design for Research and Development
Flash Talks: Lightning Fast Demonstrations of Education Technology
Go Back Jack, Do It Again! Advancing Research through Replication
Initial 50 State Findings from the Center on Standards, Alignment, Instruction and Learning (C-SAIL)
Low-Cost Short Duration Evaluations
Reading, Writing, and Language Development Program Meeting
Single-Case Design: How You Can Use SCD to Enhance your Research
Social and Behavioral Outcomes to Support Learning Program Meeting

Please indicate the title of the FIRST/ONLY session you attended during the Friday December 16, 9:45 am - 11:15 am time-band in the textbox below, then indicate your satisfaction with the session. (If you attended more than one session during this time-band, 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 applicability of the session to your research
The format of the session allowing for appropriate dissemination and/or discussion of information

Please indicate the title of the SECOND session you attended (if applicable) during the Friday December 16, 9:45 am - 11:15 am time-band in the textbox below, then indicate your satisfaction with the session. If you did not attend two sessions, please leave this section blank.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The applicability of the session to your research
The format of the session allowing for appropriate dissemination and/or discussion of information

riday December 16 // 11:30 am - 1:00 pm Luncheon Plenary

Please rate the Luncheon Plenary using the scale provided.

	Excellent	Average	Poor	Did not attend
Luncheon Plenary: "Distilling Your Message." An interactive plenary workshop by Christine O'Connell, Alan Alda Center for Communicating Science

If applicable, please indicate your satisfaction with the Luncheon Plenary.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s) at the Luncheon Plenary
The applicability of the Luncheon Plenary to your research
The format of the Luncheon Plenary allowing for appropriate dissemination and/or discussion of information

Friday December 16 // 1:15 pm - 2:15 pm Concurrent Sessions

Please provide an overall rating for the session(s) you attended using the scale provided.
(please rate up to TWO sessions if you attended more than one in a time-band)

For sessions you did not attend, please leave blank.

	Excellent	Average	Poor
Adult Education Research Program Meeting
Cognition and Student Learning Program Meeting
Developer-Researcher Collaborations: Developing and Educating Game-Based Learning Products and Interventions
Professional Development for Teachers and Related Services Providers & Effective Teachers and Effective Teaching Program Meetings
Researcher Practitioner Partnerships
The IGDIs Enterprise: Development and Use of Individual Growth and Development Indicators to Support Early Intervention and Early Learning of Infants, Toddlers, and Preschoolers
The Many Faces of FERPA: How Data Privacy Laws Affect Your Research

Please indicate the title of the FIRST/ONLY session you attended during the Friday December 16, 1:15 pm - 2:15 pm time-band in the textbox below, then indicate your satisfaction with the session. (If you attended more than one session during this time-band, 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 applicability of the session to your research
The format of the session allowing for appropriate dissemination and/or discussion of information

Please indicate the title of the SECOND session you attended (if applicable) during the Friday December 16, 1:15 pm - 2:15 pm time-band in the textbox below, then indicate your satisfaction with the session. If you did not attend two sessions, please leave this section blank.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The applicability of the session to your research
The format of the session allowing for appropriate dissemination and/or discussion of information

Friday December 16 // 2:30 pm - 4:00 pm Plenary Workshop

Please rate the Plenary Session using the scale provided.

	Excellent	Average	Poor
Plenary Session: “Now They See It: Visual Communication of the Patterns In Your Data.” An interactive plenary workshop by Steven Franconeri, Northwestern University

Please indicate your satisfaction with the Plenary Session.

	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied
The speaker(s)
The applicability of the session to your research
The format of the session allowing for appropriate dissemination and/or discussion of information

PI Meeting Presenters' Feedback

If you were a presenter/speaker at the 2016 IES PI Meeting, please rate your level of 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

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