Aim:

The aim of this evaluation is to provide an understanding of the effectiveness of the National Forum 2000. The results will be used to assess the success for the Forum, determine if it is worth running similar events in the future and how improvement could be made.

Objective

What is one phrase you remember from this the last session?

• "modern management is a source of ideas and concepts that are useful to develop extension";
• "Extension should be an integral part of R&D and to do that, we need ongoing dialgoue";
• "The funder is the client";
• Have valid skills but hiding them under a bushall.

Need to self promote, do good work people cannot ignore;

• Whole government approach;
• Domains;
• "Beware the saviour syndrome";
• "We are under paid and over worked"; and
• Streetwise.

Reflection

What were the highlights (or the best part) of the last session?

• John Cornish’s talk – focused on principles for the future;
• Working the networks;
• Participatory approach;
• Presenters worked well;
• Good presentations;
• Good to get a whole view of the country;
• Buzz groups;
• Chairman – Graham Mitchell;
• Amabel Fulton – same situation as us, experiencing the same; and
• Evidence that shows research bodies understand the necessity for extension as part of the whole RD&E package and looking at extension should not be separate from the others. Still, I wonder how this is effected on ground and the efficiencies of methodologies used. Is there a CI&I going on?

What were the disappointments (or the worst part) of the last session?

• Got a bit repetitive on one hand and disjointed on the other;
• I am not sure that their brief was quite right;
• The lack of time allowed for discussion of each session;
• Rushed;
• Not direct enough;
• Too many speakers;
• Couldn’t see overheads clearly;
• Not enough question time;
• Not enough discussion about what is succeeding in their states and what is not. No nitty gritty’s; and
• Sometimes speakers messages were difficult to access through ‘dense’ presentations;
• Still talked of extension as a vehicle to get information out. Still see themselves as the ones with all the information. Little talk of extension within organisation and its role there. The them us perspective still implicit in these linear ways of doing things.

Interpretation

What new vantage point has this workshop given you?

• Highlighted for me, the idea that intact extension should include a range of approaches and that the taste will be to more clearly recognise and understand those;
• The shift from the typical R&D projects to social learning;
• Keep challenging myself to look at new and different options;
• Keep asking questions;
• Reinforced thinking. Staring to do some really good work but do not have people or time to do it well. Not enough to get resources;
• Balance between providing for needs and public good, as they are not always the same. In this case participatory group work would be very difficult as we may not even be heading toward the same goal;
• Domains;
• More positive view; and
• More evaluation.

Decision

What do you think should be done differently if this session was to be run again?

• Not sure what the buzz groups did really;
• Too many speakers for the time, but speakers very good;
• I don’t think that we should confuse the buzzing from anything meaningful happening.
• Less talking and more time for workshop written take home messages;
• Separate into two groups or 3;
• Ask questions after each presenter;
• More Buzz time;
• More time to interact; and
• It was good.