Draft Evaluation of Dinner & Forum
Question 1 Keynote Speaker
Most people thought the keynote was Rating 3 and up
Question 2. Where are you based?
44 were from Gippsland - 85%
Question 3. Occupation
Question 4a and 4b Improvement of being informed
Note that rating levels were used from 1 to 5, with 1 being
On the National Water Initiative 14 people (20%) cited no
difference. Everyone else experienced being more informed
with most around a rating score improvement of 1.
On the Victorian White Paper 22 people (40%) assessed their
informative state to have improved by 2 rating levels.
Question 5, 6, 7, 8 related to how useful people found various
paper presentations i.e. The White Paper, Mapping Victorian
Water Industry, International Impacts and Environmental Impacts.
Overwhelmingly people rated these all sessions highly. Nearly
90% of people rated these sessions 3 and above and 75% of
people rated them 4 and above. They are more distinguishable
by the lower scores with Mapping of Victorian Water Industry
rating the most (two people on rating 2).
Questions 9 and 10 related to how useful was the information
in the workshops? That is; The Nation, Law and Water, Social
Impacts of the White Paper on Water, and Regional Focus: Gippsland
Again, the overwhelming majority rated these 3 and above.
Four of the twelve who responded to The Nation workshop did
not answer the question but of those eight who did, four rated
it 3 or higher.
The Social Impacts workshop was rated highly, as was the
Regional Focus. Although the latter had a slightly wider distribution
of results. Most people rated both of them 4 or higher.
Question 11 regarding what would people do on returning
to their community?
The most common answer was Share Their Knowledge and Participate
in Other Forums and Events. However, the most common next
answer was seven people saying they'd write to their local
Some of the more surprising Other answers were - Read the
White Paper, Inspiration for lessons and Share Water Saving
Information with the Wider Community.
Question 12 was about recommending such an event to a friend?
Fifty two people said that they would and two wouldn't. One
related to the criticism about it being gender specific and
the other has limited information to understand why.
Question 13 asked what assistance people needed to continue
being involved in water issues?
People asked for regular updates via newsletters and a dedicated
website. Seven people asked for information about setting
up discussion groups or forums (although three had only nominated
setting up a discussion group in Question 11). 25% didn't
nominate any assistance.
Question 14 was about improving on the event.
Most comments related to thanking and commenting on the organisation,
A few people would have liked more question time and another
few wanted it to go on longer. Another wanted fewer/shorter
presentations in the workshops and more discussion.
There were three comments relating to the gender focus, and
promoting inclusion of industry, men, youth etc.
One person wanted to know more practical ideas on what they
One person did not like the venue. Another wanted a workshop
tightened. The only food comment related to it all being sugar/fat.