Evaluation Results

1
Poor

2
Needs Improve

3
Adequate

4
Good

5
Excellent

Pre-conference publicity and information

2

7

11

10

Conference registration (efficiency and friendliness of staff)

5

25

Lodging arrangements

2

5

8

12

Food services

1

8

20

Meeting room facilities, comfort, acoustics, etc.

1

4

24

Quality of presentations

13

21

5

Adherence of the program to its publicized content

1

15

14

Relevancy of what was presented to what you wanted

1

3

16

8

Overall organization of the program

7

23

Your overall rating of the conference/activity as compared to others you have attended

1

12

17

Length of the entire program

3

13

14

Length of the individual sessions

17

13

Amount of relaxation and/or social time

2

2

10

16

Opportunity for discussion

4

8

8

Opportunity to have your questions answered

1

13

11

Please evaluate the keynote presentations

4

9

16

Overall evaluation of the Conference

1

12

16

Responses from 30 Program Evaluations received

7

47

169

252  

Like most

Like least

Suggestions for next conf

Combination of scientific talks and growers experiences

Overrepresentation of topics

Au ibt. Network approach

Interaction between delegates

Too many sweats

Incl symposium on analytical techniques to measure GLS and ITC

Place of mtg and facilities close by

Communicating a lot with other researchers/growers

Nematodes – wanted more info about soilborne diseases

Mix of technical and practical discussion

Personal interaction

Some tasks poorly done.

English a problem for some speakers

Break up talks more. Difficult to sit and listen for so long.

Evolution of biofumigation to additional benefits & management systems

More social time

Diversity of people attending – growers, scientists, consultants

Lack of computers for internet

Better computer facilities

The warmth and camaraderie of the participants

How the participants presented their papers (oral)

Hope it will be held in Canada

Well organised; good interaction; more knowledge about biofumigation + varieties

Understanding accents. Researchers not presenting yield data. Reducing pest no. with biofumigation should be related to crop performance

Measurements of soil health before and after growing and biofumigation & measuring affect on crop

Broad scope of conference highlighting some of the good science at these which I ws not aware of

Would be good if there was a paper session where growers and scientists were able to develop a ‘best management' practice for these crops so as an agronomist I can go to growers and get them interested

Development of a ? and management guide that can explain in plain English for growers the excellent information which is out there

Organisation and timekeeping

Some content not applicable

No

Scientific content and current relevant to industry problems

Need to focus more on $ returns/benefits to farmers

Need for equal mix of scientific/commercial content

Being able to network, access to info from others

From a growers level, the detail was over done in first day

Need to target an outcome of (i) varieties, incorporation, general target for growers to work from

Talk to the world's specialists on biofumigation and hear their most recent results and opinions

It is a pity that the delegates were not accommodated on the same location, since the best discussions and getting to know each other happens during breakfast and dinner

Accommodate most delegates in the same location.

Organise a workshop in order to start new cooperative projects, written down new ideas, etc.

Farmers' experiences and general overview talks

One really long farmer's talk wasn't quite ‘tight' enough in terms of timing

Information and discussion – contact to ‘real' farmer

Cold temperature outside

It to another (integrated pest management, crop health ….)

The exchange of information; interest also in post harvest treatment

The little economic data and expansion on what growers need to adopt biofumigation as part of their strategy to manage pests

Combine with Biocontrol conference – Pilkington, NSWDPI

Learning from other researchers is my main interest in coming and also to present and share our work in biofumigation

The cool weather because I am not used to it

Discussion and ability to meet informally

Apart from dinner – no weak points

Don't tinker too much – relaxing conference. Keep the practical focus.

Size, casual atmosphere, topic coverage (ie science – farming)

A few speakers were very difficult to follow

The venue should be similar to this one.

Interactions with others

Not enough microphones to use in Q & A sessions

To decide publication of proceedings ahead of time

Participation of people from different areas of expertise including growers experience and relaxed atmosphere

The growers session was rushed to make time for the field trip, not allowing sufficient question time for discussion

The organisation of the program (check)

The pre-conference information

Val could not read it

The variability in the program and the chance to speak with colleagues

The long talks of the Spanish + one grower

To provide case studies of success stories using a standard format for growers (ie what crops, ITC levels, soil health varieties, etc). Limit to 10 slides

The size of the group and the common interest of the delegates. The general discussion about common assessments in a ‘network'. The easy way to discuss together during sessions or during breaks.

Maybe disequilibrium ??? because of Brisbane nematology conference. There were many nematologists and maybe not enough agronomists and pathologists

Maybe a round table on common assessments everybody should collect (growing-crushing-soil health parameters.