University of Edinburgh
 

Outcomes of Paediatric Cochlear Implantation

Presented in February, 2005

Course evaluation

Number of Participants: 25
Number of Respondents: 24

How would you rate the following: Excellent = 1; Poor = 5

1

2

3

4

5

Organisation of the course/event

1.71

 

Content and supplementary material

1.79

Clarity of presentation

1.62

Pacing of course/event

1.79

Overall evaluation

1.71

What was best about the course/event?

  1. The presentation by Agnes Allen was very interesting and provided a lot of information. It was particularly good to see the case study video. The course was run in an efficient manner but was relaxed enough to allow for good discussion.
  2. Organisation and good balance of speakers.
  3. Up-to-date information. Information relating to ADPS Project.
  4. Info on ADPS project. Video clip. The up-to-date info. Really the whole course.
  5. All speakers were easy to listen to, and content of lectures was interesting. Discussion time was very informative.
  6. Honesty of Quentin Summerfield who had fantastic statistics and summed up overall outcomes with knowledge and honesty.
  7. I found the whole course to be very informative.
  8. The whole course was extremely informative, easy to understand and presented brilliantly.
  9. Quentin Summerfield's very clear and informative presentation. Open discussion/sharing time.
  10. Mix of people present, ie, education, health, social work, voluntary organisations and parents. Also a mix of scientific statistical data through to information about 'real people'.
  11. Presentation of Quentin Summerfield. This was clear, interesting and easy to understand and follow.
  12. Information regarding the cochlear implant programme at Crosshouse. Also results of Scottish Survey.
  13. Clear, well informed presentations.
  14. Range of speakers good - time for discussion/questions.
  15. Excellent course, good opportunity to consider evidence base.
  16. Prof Quentin Summerfield - very interesting.
  17. Keynote speakers were very good.
  18. Professor Summerfield's presentation was excellent - statistics made interesting!
  19. Question and answer sessions were interesting. I could relate well to the feedback from Crosshouse video. Interesting discussion on double plantation.
  20. Ernst Thoutenhoofd's review was extremely interesting and easy to understand and relevant to everyone involved in the education of deaf children. His info during question/answer session very interesting and informative. Crosshouse experience very relevant and interesting - video of a success!
  21. Enjoyed watching Crosshouse video because it provided real evidence of what can be achieved. Content very informative. Event well organised.

What could have been better?

  1. Although it was interesting to see the research data, it was not immediately possible to see how these fitted into my day-to-day work.
  2. More detail regarding outcomes of cochlear implantation and less about the criteria required before being allowed an implant.
  3. Possibly more time on ADPS Project.
  4. Print size of handouts from Professor Summerfield could have been larger.
  5. To hear a bit more about the book "Outcomes of Paediatric Cochlear Implantation". Outcomes of Ernst's study not very clear.
  6. Explanation and presentation of data by E Thoutenhoofd.
  7. Coffee lukewarm. Sandwiches not very inspiring.
  8. Bit rushed - due to bad weather - late start. Not organisational fault.
  9. Statistics in second presentation were difficult to follow/understand, which was a pity.
  10. As a teacher, I was hoping for more 'easily digestible' material regarding paediatric implantation and more info on how children were performing/expected to perform but not in the statistically oriented fashion in which it was presented.
  11. Outcomes of paediatric cochlear implantation was too statistical and clinical - not user friendly. No information on rehabilitation.
  12. Bamboozled a bit by all statistical facts. Difficult to relate them to real life and implanted children working with currently.
  13. Graphs and statistics were not always easy to understand.

Any other comments

  1. All three speakers were interesting to listen to, and presented their information clearly and directly. As ever, it was really useful to have the copies of the powerpoint presentations, and the bibliography.
  2. Very interesting and informative.
  3. Very informative, relaxed and enjoyable day.
  4. Surprised at the lack of audiologists. Felt it would have been beneficial for fellow professionals.
  5. May have been interesting to see more video footage - some 'successful' and some 'not so successful'.
  6. Thank you for a very informative course.
  7. Would be good idea to use PA system even for 'hearing' audience.
  8. Wide advertising of day - content of great interest to all professional groups working with hearing impaired children.
  9. Coffee cold. Soup lovely.
  10. An interesting, useful day.
  11. The above is not a reflection on the presenters, whom I found very easy to listen to, but more in the form in which it was presented. I enjoyed the day and found it informative.
  12. Housekeeping arrangements were very good! An enjoyable day overall. Ernst very good at 'chairing' course and condensing feedback from group.
  13. Had hoped to get more evidence of OUTCOMES of Cochlear Implantation. Real-life evidence and not facts and figures. Lunch very good.

Outcomes Assessment

Excellent = 1; Poor = 5

Current research evidence of cochlear implantation outcomes

1.77

The nature of benefit of cochlear implantation for pupils in education

2.14

The link between outcomes and rehabilitation Services

2.23

"Chartered Teacher Standard" components:

 very useful = 1; not useful = 5

your Professional Values and Personal Commitment

2.12

your Professional Knowledge and Understanding

1.88

your Professional and Personal Attributes

2.44

your Professional Action

2.22

Any other comments on course outcomes

Very few parents present - where does SSC literature get distributed?

Rehabilitation services were not really focussed upon.

Most useful information gained from question and answer sessions (particularly in the afternoon).