The 12th Biennial Conference of the Society for Community Research and Action: Evaluation
and Recommendations
SCRA
Montclair State University
“Realizing Our New Vision:
Values and Principles for Practice, Research and Policy”
June 19-21, 2009
Evaluation Team
Rhonda K. Lewis-Moss
Jamilia Sly
Shani Roberts
Shoshana Wernick
Felecia Lee
Chris Kirk
Wichita State University
1
12th Biennial Conference of the Society for Community Research and Action: Evaluation and
Recommendations
The 12th Biennial Conference of the Society for Community Research and Action was
held in Montclair, New Jersey, June 18-21, 2009. The conference was hosted by Montclair State
University, Department of Psychology, and lead by Drs. Milton Fuentes and Sandra Lewis (cochairs). The theme of the conference was “Realizing Our New Vision: Values and Principles for
Practice, Research and Policy.” The goal of the evaluation was to provide feedback to the
Society; and help future hosts in planning for the Biennial. This article reports on the results of
the 12th Biennial evaluation. For the first time conference evaluations were conducted on-line
with the vision of going green by saving paper.
Overview of Evaluation
The evaluation team consisted of researchers from Wichita State University which was
lead by Dr. Rhonda K. Lewis-Moss. The evaluation team developed the evaluation survey in
collaboration with the Society for Community Research and Action 12th Biennial Conference
Co-chairs and the SCRA executive committee.
Method
Procedures
An online survey was developed from past evaluation surveys and a few new questions
were added (Woods & Wilson, University of Virginia, 2005). The survey consisted of
demographic questions, questions about conference content, logistics and how satisfied
conference attendees were with conference activities. In addition, the research team also
conducted interviews with conference attendees to gather qualitative information (i.e. roving
reporters). In order to save paper the on-line survey was constructed and a few paper copies of
2
the survey were available at the conference registration desk. In each conference packet a sticker
was placed on the inside flap of the conference packet directing conference registrants to a
website that conference attendees could complete the survey on line. Conference registrants were
reminded to complete the evaluation on-line by the conference co-chairs and the evaluation team
wore “Its All about the E” buttons to encourage participants to complete the survey. The onlinesurvey was made available two weeks after the conference and reminder emails were sent to
encourage people to complete the survey on-line.
Instruments
The evaluation survey was adapted from the instrument used for the 2005 Biennial
(Woods and Wilson, University of Virginia, 2005). This survey was used to collect information
from the conference registrants.
The survey also collected data on the following areas:
1. Conference arrangements
2. Program content
3. Overall assessment of the 12th Biennial
In addition, the Wichita State University evaluation team developed a list of questions for the
roving reporter idea to collect qualitative information from conference registrants. The
questions were as follows: How satisfied were you with the conference sessions?; How
satisfied were you with the poster sessions, What did you like most about the conference?
What did you least like about the conference? and In ways might you improve the
conference?
Participants
3
Forty-six percent (237/514) of the conference attendees completed the evaluation survey. The
46% response was pretty good given the fact that the surveys were online for the first time.
There 208 on-line surveys completed and 29 paper surveys completed. IT WOULD BE
GREAT TO GET A COMPARISON OF RESPONSE RATES WITH OTHER RECENT
BIENNIALS
Results
The following pages present quantitative and qualitative data on four overarching areas:
1. Demographics of the 12th Biennial Conference
2. Conference arrangements
3. Program content
4. Overall conference assessment
5. Themes from the qualitative “Roving Reporter”
Demographics
There were 514 participants who attended the 12th Biennial Conference. A total of
237 people completed either the on-line or paper survey. Of the 237, 45% identified
themselves as students, 44% were from academic institutions, and 5% were from
Government/Other Non-profit, or a Community-Based Organization. Four percent of the
respondents reported working for a mental health agency, advocacy group or other. The
vast majority of respondents were SCRA members (89%) while only 40% reported being
APA members. I WOULD LIKE A BREAKDOWN OF HOW MANY PEOPLE
ATTENDED THE CONFERENCE FOR HOW MANY DAYS, AS WELL AS ANY
OTHER DEMOGRAPHICS WE HAVE ABOUT THE OVERALL SAMPLE. I
4
WOULD BE GOOD TO KNOW HOW MANY DAYS, AND WHICH DAYS,
RESPONDENTS TO THE SURVEY ATTENDED, BUT WE MAY NOT HAVE THI
INFORMATION. Nearly 80% of those completing the survey either had their doctorate
or master degree WE NEED A BREAKDOWN BY DEGREE, EVEN FOR THE
MASTERS, BECAUSE IT’S INTERESTING TO SEE THE RANGE OF DEGREE
TYPES WE HAVE. and 18% reported having a Bachelor degree and three reported
other.
Table 1 provides a summary of the conference attendees that completed the
evaluation survey. The majority of individuals that completed the survey were women
(63%) compared to 36% who were men. Approximately 72% of the people surveyed
were Caucasian, 10% were African American/Black, 5% were Asian, 3% were Latino,
1% Biracial, 2% reported other, 2% reported being International ARE WE ABLE TO
DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN, FOR EXAMPLE, AMERICAN ASIAN AND
INTERNATIONAL ASIAN? MIGHT INTERNTATIONAL HAVE BEEN USED AS
A KIND OF “OTHER” FOR PEOPLE NOT FROM THE U.S.? and 1% Native
American. Approximately 33 people refused to self-identify AGAIN, IT WOULD BE
IMPORTANT TO KNOW HOW REPRESENTATIVE ANY OF THIS IS WITH THE
OVERALL ATTENDEE POPULATION..
A total of 229 of the 237 respondents provided information on previous Biennial
attendance. For 42% of registrants this was their first biennial. Forty-Three percent
reported attending the last biennial in Pasadena. AMONG OTHER THINGS,
BREAKING DOWN DATA BY FIRST/NOT FIRST BIENNIAL WOULD BE
ILLUMINATING, I WOULD THINK.
5
Conference Arrangements
Forty-one percent reported staying in campus housing, 47% stayed in a hotel,
7% stayed with family or friends and about 12 people commuted from home, New York
city or stayed in another hotel. Table 2 shows the mean scores for the list of conference
arrangements. The likert scale ranted from 1-6, 1-being very negative to 6-being not
applicable. The highest mean score was a 4.86 for conference conversations. Overall the
means were fairly high and none fell below a 3.00. This suggests that people were
positive about the conference arrangements. When registrants were asked about their
travel from airport to hotel/campus housing had a mixed response. The mean score was
3.68 of a range of scores from 1-very difficult to 6- not applicable. Registrants were
asked about travel from campus to conference site. The mean score showed that the mean
score was 3.57. This suggest another mixed review. Registrants who reported didn’t find
travel from the airport very difficult but they also didn’t find getting from the airport to
the conference very easy.
Program Content
Participants were asked about reasons for coming to the biennial (i.e., acquire new
ideas/theories, learn new developments in the field). The scale used a 5 point likert scale
(5=very important, 1= not very important). The top three reasons people came to the
conference were to lean about new developments in the field, acquire new ideas/theories
and meet new people. Table 3 gives the number of respondents, the mean score and the
range of responses. The mean scores closest to strongly agree were overall quality of the
program was high, reflected the values of our field and reflected the scope of our field.
Table 3 outlines why people come to the conference. The main reason people was to
6
learn about new developments in the field (4.35) followed closely by acquire new ideas
and theories (4.20)
Conference Content
Registrants were asked about the conference content. Table 4, shows that lower scores
indicate registrant’s agreeing with the items. The scale ranged from a 1-strongly agree to
5 strongly disagree. The item with the highest approval was that the overall quality of
content was high. The mean score with the second highest mean score was the item
“reflected the values of our field.”
Overall Conference Assessment
Overall registrants rated the value of the conference on a scale from 1 to 10 with 1
being the lowest and 10 being the highest, the mean score was 7.43. When asked how
likely it would be for them to attend the next Biennial? Registrants reported out of a 10
point scale (1 being the lowest and 10 being the highest) the mean score was 8.24. Table
5 shows satisfaction surveys for each of the plenary. The closing symposium received
the largest score of 5.09 out of a 1-6 point scale, 1-being very dissatisfied and 6-being not
applicable. The not applicable category may have contributed to this extreme score given
that there were a number of people who probably did not attend the closing symposium.
So maybe we need to analyze the data with the 6’s removed. Registrants responded that
Beth Shinn (4.76) and Kevin Cathcart (4.73) were their favorite sessions.
Roving Reporter Themes
Roving Reporter Report
There were approximately five overall conference themes that emerged. They included:
overall comments about the conference, transportation and lodging, the location (Montclair State
7
University), Food, Programming issues, and suggestions. We need some information about the
Roving Reporters- how many were there, and how many registrants did they each speak to, so
we know where the information derives from.
Overall, the conference comments were positive and registrants reported liking the sessions, the
people and connecting and networking with colleagues. In regards to their favorite sessions
registrants reported liking the World Café, Beth Shinn’s presentation, the session on
methodology, the mentoring sessions, and Kevin Cathcart. Registrants also appreciated having
the conference in one building.
Transportation and lodging
The reports from registrants were mixed. Several people reported having an easy time
with getting back and forth from the airport and the hotels and others reported that transportation
was difficult and expensive.
Location
There were a number of comments about Montclair State University being confusing to
get around. In addition, people were upset about the lack of information about getting access to
food/restaurants in the area. The registrants felt that the lodging was too far from the conference.
Food
Registrants made several comments about the food. Again there were mixed results.
Some registrants thought the food was good and healthy choices were available. Registrants
particularly commented on the snacks (healthy) and the brownies during snack time. On the
other hand, several registrants commented on the crabs available in the morning and the lack of
vegetarian options. Registrants also wanted to see more food available and coffee.
Suggestions
8
A number of registrants felt that the conference was packed with wonderful sessions
however they were all at the same time and this was frustrating. Recommendation- have fewer
sessions at the same time.
Have more recycling available.
Have computer interact access in the dorms.
Program was difficult to read at a glance.
Student mixer should be at the beginning of the conference
We need to have more information on getting around Montclair
Time should be allocated for the session which would allow more time for discussion. DOES
THIS MEAN LONGER SESSIONS OR THAT SOME RULE BE IN PLACE TO ENSURE
MORE DISCUSSION TIME WITHIN SESSIONS… REGARDLESS, THE POINT IS CLEAR
FOR THE NEXT BIENNIAL ORGANIZERS… MORE DISCUSSION TIME!!!
9
Table 1
Table of Gender and Racial/Ethnic Group
Male
Female
No response
African American
Caucasian
Latino
American Indian
Asian
Biracial
Other (Asian/Caucasian, Latina/White, Middle
Eastern, Pan-Ethnic, White/Native American
International (Scottish/Irish British, South Asia,
Indian, White African)
No response
Total
N
82
141
14
21
147
7
3
11
4
6
Percentage
36%
63%
5
2%
33
237
14%
10%
72%
3%
1%
5%
1%
2%
Table 2- outlines how participants felt about the conference arrangements.
Tell us how you felt about the conference
N
Mean
Range
arrangements
Online registration
231
4.52
1-6
On-line abstract
230
4.48
1-6
Housing Arrangements
231
3.38
1-6
Dining arrangements
230
3.22
1-6
Conference meeting rooms
231
4.23
1-6
Scheduled social events
229
3.95
1-6
Informal social opportunities
232
3.95
1-6
Opportunities for interest group meetings
228
4.00
1-6
Assistance from conference volunteers
228
4.22
1-6
Community Conversations
229
1-6
4.86
Overall Site Quality
228
3.73
1-6
Range of responses (1=very negative, 2=negative, 3=neutral, 4=positive, 5=very positive,
6=not applicable)
IF THE 6’S WERE INCLUDED IN THESE DATA ANALYSES, THEN
EVERYTHING WILL HAVE TO BE REDONE WITH THE 6’S REMOVED… EVEN
THOUGH IT HELPS INFLATE THE WONDERFULNESS OF THE CONFERENCE!!!
10
Table 3 Why did you come to this Biennial Conference?
Question
N
Mean
Range
Acquire new ideas/theories
231
1-5
4.30
Learn about new developments in the field 230
1-5
4.35
Concern about the overall state of SCRA
228
3.68
1-5
and CP field
Acquire new factual information
229
3.92
1-5
Meet new people
229
1-5
4.20
Receive mentoring from knowledgeable
228
3.49
1-5
professionals
Learn more about community psychology
230
3.56
1-5
Present my own work
230
4.17
1-5
See old friends/colleagues
229
3.73
1-5
Take a break/vacation
228
2.68
1-5
Connect with special interest group
229
3.00
1-5
Learn about community practice
230
3.62
1-5
Learn about career paths using community 230
3.18
1-5
psychology
Other reason
128
3.09
1-5
(1-Not Very Important; 2=Not Important,3 Neutral, 4 Important, 5=Very Important)
Table 4 -Content of the Conference
Question
N
Mean
Reflected the scope of the field
231
2.14
Reflected the values of the field
230
2.08
Gave sufficient emphasis to research that
228
2.23
contributes to theory
Represented social policy issues sufficiently
227
2.50
Gave sufficient emphasis to research that
228
2.34
contributes to action
Represented applied settings sufficiently
227
2.41
Overall quality of content was high
230
2.05
(1=Strongly Agree; 2=Agree, 3=Neutral, 4=Disagree, 5=Strongly Disagree)
Table 5- How satisfied were you with the various sessions at the Biennial?
Question
N
Mean
How satisfied were you with the opening plenary?
230
4.67
How satisfied were you with the opening plenary
228
4.76
Keynote Speaker Kevin Cathcart
How satisfied were you with the Community Practice
Award Session’s speaker Beth Shinn
11
227
4.39
Range
1-5
1-5
1-5
1-5
1-5
1-5
1-5
Range
1-6
1-6
0-6
How satisfied were you with the Cocktail reception?
231
4.68
2-6
How satisfied were you with the poster sessions?
231
4.19
1-6
How satisfied were you with the Legacy Award
226
4.60
0-6
Ceremony?
How satisfied were you with the Closing plenary?
223
0-6
5.09
How satisfied were you with the roundtable of
227
0-6
4.73
roundtables format?
How satisfied were you with the local Montclair Red
220
4.58
0-6
Hawk Programming?
(1=Very Dissatisfied, 2=Dissatisfied, 3 No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Very Satisfied, 6 Not
Applicable) AGAIN, WE HAVE TO GET THE 6’S OUT. I WAS AT THE CLOSING
PLENARY AND EVEN I WOULD NOT GIVE IT A 5.09!!!!
12
APPENDIX
Do you have any other comments about the conference arrangements?
1) Sessions that were similar in content were all scheduled at the same time, making it difficult to attend
all presentations of primary interest to me. 2) Two of my presentations were scheduled at the same time,
making it difficult to give attention to all individuals' questions. I did notify the conference organizer and
received little assistance in resolving the issue. 3) Additionally, the student housing at Little Falls was
horrible--dirty, no lights in some rooms, keys were not make available, shower flooded the bathroom
floor. Not recommended as a conference venue again.
A little more food would have been nice
Airport shuttle would have been helpful and financially beneficial to the SCRA. A cab cost 70 dollars per
trip. Don’t run out of veggie foods More snacks throughout the conference and reusable water bottles!
airport connections were not well explained or evident (train schedules and transfers, taxi fare estimates,
etc.)
alot of the details regarding presentation and even detail agenda was not provided in a timely manner.
parking - obtaining passes was a problem as personal was mainly only available at session times.
Although I did not use the shuttle service, I heard many stories of problems and I helped out a few people
who were left stranded by giving them a ride. The limited availability of shuttles to/from hotels was a
major factor in my decision to have a car at the conference. I was glad that all sessions (besides posters)
were in one building so we didn't have to navigate around the campus. However, the hallway on the
second floor was over crowded. It would have been nice to have used rooms on the adjoining hallway as
well so there was more space and less noise in the hall during sessions. There were not enough good
spaces for informal networking. A prime draw of the biennial is the opportunity to network, but this is
best facilitated when there are ample places to converse and ideally when there are coffee houses, bars or
small restaurants nearby. Having one main conference hotel also helps with networking rather than
having to juggle how to meet up with people who are staying at other hotels.
Although Montclair State University has a beautiful campus, the cost and the difficulty involved with
transportation to and from the airport to the hotels and conference site made the experience rather
negative. For example, cab fare was extremely expensive and some of us are not used to catching
multiple buses and trains to get to our destination. Fortunately, we rented a car, but the location of the
conference, overall, was inconvenient.
Audio Visual equipment was excellent.
Beautiful setting and facilities at Montclair
13
Biggest issues: - very hard to search the program online; no general lay out of the days that was easily
accessible (a large pdf is not easily accessible) - lack of vegetarian food and the food quality in general
was VERY POOR - the rooms were great except that there was no way of knowing how to turn on the
projector
breakfast & lunch did not reflect healthy choices
Check in at dorms should have had info about the conference (e.g., what time registration ended, campus
maps, etc) Other things to do were too far away, couldn't get to much without a car/ paying for a taxi
Dorms were NOT clean, some lights didn't work, linens had stains on them, the facility smelled Needed
more info up front on shuttles during the day. The info shared in advance made it sound like there was
only a shuttle in the morning and evening, when really there was a campus shuttle all day. Needed more
info on transport from the airport to the conference site. Many people used shuttles, when the train was
actually much cheaper and not that hard to navigate (once you asked for help).
Coffee needs to be available the whole time not just the first day in lobby even if we have to pay for it
that’s fine
Deficiencies of the site: very difficult to attend only part of the day given limited (or alternatively,
expensive) transportation to hotels; campus was pretty barren - the only place to purchase anything on
two of the four conference days was the diner. No other place to get coffee or anything else for that
matter. Positives - university hall was a nice facility, conference rooms were comfortable and spaces
were usually adequate for the presentations they contained; food not so good but snacks were a nice
touch; could have done more in terms of creating formal social opportunities. Other conferences have had
banquets (or more casual arranged events such as the picnic in Las Vegas) and these were an important
part of their respective conferences I felt
Distance between conference and hotel
Everything was extremely well organized and went smoothly. The university rooms were excellent;
appropriate sizes and sufficiently comfortable seating.
Everything was great! My only complaint was the shuttle service to the hotel from the conference--it was
very unreliable.
Everything was just fine, and I am grateful for it.
Food particularly at lunch was small in quantity and limited in choice. Snacks needed more protein to
keep people going. Ice cream was fun and good idea though. It was great to have most of the talks in one
place, that contributed to networking, but housing and disparate dining options made it very difficult to
connect with people and travel around.
Good conference but located in the middle of no-where. The conference organizers must have done a
good sell job convincing the Division 27 exec committee that this was a good site, located near NYC and
airports. Nonsense! Also, the organizers should have arranged for beverages besides water to be
available during the day at the conference. One shouldn't have had to go out to the diner to get coffee or
juice.
Great job by Milton and Sandra
14
hotels scattered people too far and it was hard to meet once deposited at our hotels unless you had a car.
A car seemed a necessity which did not make sense for such a large conference wanting to remain
"green"
Hotels were too far from the conference. This made it very difficult to move around. Most people felt
stuck at the conference site all day with few options for getting a cup of coffee with a colleague, etc.
Having nearby (walking distance) lodging options or regular transportation options should be a
prerequisite for future site selection.
Housing needed repairs which couldn't be done during conference - lights, heat. Needed basics to make
tea, coffee pot, kettle anything great
I always enjoy when the conference site is a bit more walkable. This makes dining arrangements a bit
more flexible and makes the overall experience a bit more enjoyable.
I am very very satisfied for attending conference, for quality of contributions and for pleasant meeting
with colleagues coming from all over the world.
I especially liked the healthy snacks! Thanks also for attention to ecological issues! You folks were
spectacular!
I felt that only one of the discussion groups I had attended was a bit disorganized and disappointing. The
discussion group was for work and family balance, which I and a few other students were not aware of
the fact that it was more geared toward those who were currently (or soon to be) family planning. We
then were broken up into smaller groups and didn't have the opportunity to speak with the other leaders,
because we were kept to a single speaker the entire time. This may not have been a big issue if it weren't
for the fact that the woman in charge of our personal group session was unprofessional, boastful, and
argumentative. This, understandingly, is a fluke... though I feel that if the discussion group branched off
and dispersed, it may not have been as noticeable.
I felt that pertinent information (i.e. parking, meals provided, etc.) was not shared in a timely fashion.
Many people have to get those things approved by their org's ahead of time or pay on their own and get
reimbursed. The latter is not convenient! Also, the parking passes were a last-minute arrangement and
were not coordinated well on site. Other than that, I felt the conference was wonderful. I especially liked
the keynote from Lamba Legal and the sessions on global climate change.
I felt the food options could have been more balanced nutritionally - breakfast had no protein or fruit,
some snacks had no healthy options. Also, on one day veggie meals ran out out lunch (Susan handled it
great, but it was not a good situation for those trying to go to lunchtime meetings).
I found transportation to be extremely difficult, and on the 1st conference day there were no food options
(for vegetarians) or coffee provided, although we were there all day and had payed an extra 40 dollars for
workshops.
15
I had two posters that were scheduled in the same poster session and were not placed next to each other.
This significantly impacted my ability to attend to both posters and respond to attendees as needed.
Also, the site itself was very inconvenient to get to. The shuttles did not run often enough. Perhaps a
'lunchtime' run would have been helpful as well. On Saturday, having to remain on campus for 11hrs
between shuttle runs was outrageous and awful.
I have several comments. First, I was disappointed that multiple sessions on the same topic were offered
during the same timeslots (e.g. gender, photovoice). Second, while the facilities at Montclair State Univ.
were great, the area surrounding Montclair is very limited in types of public transportation (e.g. no train
service on weekends), ease of getting to/from airports, and in means of getting to restaurants and other
amenities. As for the conference content, I found the range of topics and presenters to be very good and
look forward to future conferences. Thank you to the organizers for all of your work!
I liked the Lamda Legal plenary speaker the most. More generally, I think all the plenaries could have
been shorter. The space for presentations was very nice. The food provided during the conference was
very good, but I would have liked to have had more coffee breaks, or more access to coffee. Hats off to
Milton and Sandra. They really did a great job organizing and facilitating the entire meeting!
i made the mistake of staying on campus... i should have rented a hotel room. campus lodging was
depressing and lonely. i was stuck on campus with no car and no place to eat :(
I missed not having a banquet
I stayed at the Village. You need to have phones available in the rooms or in the lobby of each building
for safety reasons.
I think that the organizers did a terrific job. I liked that the site was near a major city. The site itself was
isolated in terms of being near hotels, restaurants, etc (apart from the diner). I loved the afternoon ice
cream - a nice touch. I found the conference organizers VERY responsive to questions and
communication. Thanks for all of your efforts.
I think the shuttles from the hotels to the conference site would have worked better if a schedule was
posted and/or they were in communication with the hotel staff. The hotel staff did not know what was
going on at all. A bit more information about women's night out would have been nice - like, "we'll meet
at the restaurant at 6:30". I assumed since it was "within walking distance" that we would meet
somewhere on campus and walk over together.
I think there should have been more of a partnership between hotels and transportation and the
conference. The transportation was expensive to/from airport. I stayed at a hotel and used the shuttlewhich meant I was stuck at the conference site all day, without any options. Also, the lunch service was
disappointing, and the conference ran out of vegetarian meals, even though it was requested.
I thought the Campus Village was a bit expensive. I appreciate having the conference at a non-hotel
location, but I was disappointed that there was absolutely nothing near the campus to walk to for food or
even coffee (besides the diner, which once was enough for me). For those without a car, it was difficult to
get around. This made creating informal social networking opportunities extremely difficult.
16
I thought the campus was very nice but the location seemed very isolated. It was difficult to get around
without a car and there wasn't much open late in the evening that was accessible. Also, it would be
helpful to have larger rooms available for sessions that might be bigger, for example the methods
sessions. These sessions were packed and it would have been great to have a bigger room to
accommodate the interest in the topic. Regarding housing, I had many issues with the way housing was
taken care of and the condition of the rooms. Our room was not clean and had urine on the toilet seats.
Also, there was some confusion with housing arrangements and the way that was dealt with was very
unprofessional.
I thought the conference was lacking environmental stewardship. The carbon footprint for this conference
was unnecessarily high. It would have been nice to have a common meal during lunch with common
areas to sit rather that just to pick up a box lunch which was of really poor quality. And, why not order
only vegetarian lunches so that you do not run out of vegetarian lunches every biennial? Most if not all
meat eaters are okay not to eat meat once in a while ... I think the conference fee was too high for what
was offered.
I thought the location was excellent. The main building was terrific, easy to navigate with good
presentation spaces. Getting around campus with a car was challenging! More signs would have helped.
I thought the location was very inconvenient. Public transportation arrangements were difficult and
expensive. More assistance should have been offered with this on the website with estimated costs in
advance of needing to book airfare. Acceptance and the program came out too late. The Village needed to
be furnished with trash cans in the rooms and better blankets.
I thought the lodging (on campus) was terrible. The rooms were very dirty and it seemed unorganized
(especially the check out process). Besides the lodging, I think Montclair University did a good job.
I thought the range of accommodation didn’t cover people for whom money is an issue.
I was most happy with the availability of food at the conference. I was surprised that there was not a
dinner, but was ok with it because there was so much other food. I would have liked more information on
places to go to eat, or places to visit in town or nearby, or transportation.
I was very disappointed in the housing. The dorms had not been cleaned and the linens were dirty. I was
disgusted! The staff on-site was very unprofessional and not helpful. I thought the lunches were
extremely wasteful with all of the packaging. There was no coffee, and the water was in such small
bottles that it created a lot of waste. The program was poorly designed, making it difficult to refer to.
Overall, I feel the conference arrangements were poorly done and not in alignment with what SCRA's
strives for.
I wish there had been WiFi access during the conference.
I would have liked more options for lunch. Other than that it was a great conference!
I would prefer that the conference be in an urban location where we could leave the campus more easily.
Or be located at a campus that had more options for food/drink/amenities.
17
I would rather not have meetings scheduled first thing in the morning. Our interest group meeting was
very, very poorly attended in comparison to past biennials and the informal feedback I received suggested
it was due to the 7:15am start time.
It was nearly imposible to travel between hotels and Site
It was difficult at times to find conference rooms; Hotel-campus buses didn't run reliably; No coffee/tea
available for conference attendees
It would be nice to have lodging closer to the conference.
It would be very helpful for the online registration to provide a receipt that includes the last 4 digits of the
credit card and a confirmation number so that our accounting department can verify the payment for
reimbursement It was unfortunate that the site didn't have restaurant's nearby to promote informal social
interaction Travel and logistics were very difficult for this site. I think the organizers made the best of
the situation ... just an inherent drawback to the site. Once on campus, the site was very good. Having
the dates avoid Father's Day in the future would be helpful. Perhaps the conference could move to a
Wed-Saturday format with the closing Saturday night? Sunday was very low attendance and I know of
many people who left for Father's Day. I think it was helpful that conference avoided finals weeks for
those academic sites that have a quarter system
It would have been better to arrange with the University to enable wireless internet connection throughout
the premise of the conference. Most people have hand-held devises and without the internet it becomes
inconvenient to communicate using those devises.
it would have been good in the campus accomdations to have facilities for making tea/coffee
It would have been nice to have better coordinated rides to and from the airport because the airport was so
far away from the conference site. Having a conference site where housing was closer together so that we
could socialize outside of the conference easier would have been better. Without a car my options were
very limited.
It would have been nice to have garbage and recycling available in the dorms, or clearly marked if it was
available. In addition, the internet access was not wireless as was advertised in the housing information.
Meal options were poor as there were not enough vegetarian meals available, alternate breakfast options
were not available for those with dietary restrictions, and the food available for snacks and evening
socials was also not friendly for dietary restrictions. It would be nice to see the default option be
vegetarian with a meat option available on request so that everyone is able to eat. This would also assist
with environmental concerns. Please use less plastic, or have larger bottles of water so that less waste is
produced.
It would have been nice to have more information about the difficulty of driving from hotels to
conference site. Route 46 was extremely difficult to navigate
Larger space for the research methods sessions. Perhaps different structure for keynote addresses - was
very difficult to remain engaged in such a lengthy talk especially during the second address (Beth
Shinn's) at that time of the day and after the distribution of awards.
18
Location was not great. Housing was dirty, It was impossible to get anywhere without a car. The shuttle
helped but there was no accessible dining options
Lots of terrific programming made for difficult choices
loved the snacks and food!
lunch on-site was very helpful in making the most of the program. parking situation a little unclear, but
signage was helpful once on site.
Make sure that conference attendees have easy access to local public transportation for all segments of the
conference.
Meals were either too much or not enough food
Milton, Sandra, Mo, & staff were exceptionally accomodating, friendly and helpful. Both before and
during.
More info should have been provided abt MSU shuttles that could take people to NJT transit stations. Not
everybody stayed in Montclair.
More substanial food
Mr. Fuentes was rude to several students at my program as well as myself. Further, this was a horrible
location to choose for a conference. There was limited access to non conference activities (ie resturants,
bars, establishments off site). The train to NY only ran during the weekdays.
Much of the information was anywhere from good to excellent. The info on ground transportation gets an
F. The train was wonderful on Wednesday, but I had to figure it all out by myself. For a long time, there
was NO information that there was a train that ran to Montclair. And where did the train leave one?
How did one get from the station to their destination? You get an F on this one. Provide extensive
information on how to get from X to Y so that people can make good decisions, save time and money.
My main problem was transportation. It would have been useful to provide participants with detailed
driving directions to and from the hotels and conference center and to the airport in our packets and on
the website. NJ roads are not intuitive, Google maps led me astray, and I spent almost 3 hours total
driving around lost as a result. The shuttles were also a problem - on Friday I waited for a scheduled
shuttle at the Ramada and nothing came for an hour. I heard that several others had issues like this with
the shuttle. The setting was good, I liked the variety of presentation formats and social/mentoring events,
and the food was a very nice touch!
Nice campus. Some of the rooms were too small for the number of people at the session, but overall they
were good.
no
No
No convenient transportation to anything interesting, or even to downtown Montclair.
19
Not providing dinners at the conference made it very difficult for those of us without transportation and
with a limited budget to find something to eat a real hassle. I think interest groups should have been
scheduled during dinner time. Having to catch transportation for breakfast meetings was difficult. The
Village was clean and spacious -- a great place to have people stay.
Of all the biennials I've been to, for some reason I felt this location was the most isolated and isolating.
Also, there was a problem with vegetarian food. In the past, I've enjoyed a big event on Saturday night
too.
Overall - conference was well run and had a good experience. Biggest concern is that the housing
arrangements made it difficult for networking...everyone was very spread out, organizing to get together
in the evenings was logistically difficult. My preference would be that we locate SCRA at a venue where
it's possible for folks to stay near or at the conference site. Poster sessions were nice opp for networking
- could have been in a larger room. Holding the interest group meetings at 7:00am - particularly given
travel logistics- was not overly conducive to generating interest in the groups.
Overall did good job. I wish we were warned a bit about getting from hotel to campus would not be so
easy and maybe rent a car. The bus in the morning and evening was not good. there should have been at
least one every hour or two hours through out the day. Ambivalent about missing dinner component.
The food at socials were excellent. So sort of in the middle on that.
Overall very good conference. Larger rooms for some of the sessions were needed, better directions with
on-campus housing, and more seating for the social night.
Please pick a conference location that has more diversity in dinning and activities during downtime
without jumping in a cab.
Please stop picking these "off the beaten path" conference sites that cost $200 just to taxi in from the
nearest airport. With such a small conference, the meetings should afford breezy access to one's hotel
room (i.e., in the same hotel or at least within short walking distance), as well as to decent restaurants
(our cab cost $20 to eat somehwere besides the "diner").
Public transportation to and from MSU was poor (especially at weekends!). More info before the
conference would have been helpful.
Rated the transportation to and from site as negative because the campus was difficult to navigate and the
building hard to find. Posters and signs would have been of great utility (e.g., SCRA this way ---->). It
makes sense in terms of efficiency for conference organizers, but the lack of transportation throughout the
day was difficult for some. So was the apparent lack of a transportation schedule. I know that I provided
transportation for an exasperated and anxious stranger. Site was excellent once you found it. Snacks
were ample and volunteers friendly.
Recycling was not available at breaks and particularly during lunch time when lunchboxes and plastic
containers. Tips for making the conference "greener" were not taken very seriously. Tips for making the
conference more inclusive - particularly for participants from outside of the US - were not followed at all.
Scheduling could have been better. Conf. pdf program was not able to open.
SCRA submission process is flawed, but that has nothing to do with Montclair State.
20
Shuttle from hotels was difficult and inconsistent. Shuttles should run all day as some would like to
return to hotel in middle of day. Hotels were too far from conference site.
Shuttle services were not sufficient or adequate given the distance to hotels and local establishments. This
made days very long and limited my ability to tend to personal matters as I was "stuck" at the conference
site for 11 hours. Additionally, at past SCRA's I've attended, social events often happen informally at off
site venues and the lack of shuttle service to any particular town or common place with restaurants or bars
made it difficult to meet with colleagues informally.
Shuttles were not convenient. Public bus service from the airport took a very long time. Car rental
worked just fine. Hotels were a little far from the university, but that is not the conference planners' fault
-- seems to just be part of the set-up of the city. Milton & Sandra did a fantastic job in organizing the
conference!!!
Site did not allow for much informal gathering after session hours.
talked w/ people with serious concerns about the quality of accommodations (villiage) & negative
interactions with staff working to address concerns (e.g., lack of cleanliness, isolation from walkable
areas with restaurants, etc). spoke with people pulled away from their poster presentations (some were
first time SCRA presenters) to deal with payment issues related to their lodging - reportedly a mix up they had paid, but were asked to provide cash and were denied a receipt. concerned about the lack of
attention to "green" issues. bottled water, lunch packaging and content (all lunches should be vegetarian excludes no one). veg lunches gone almost immediately. built environment facilitated more travel time
and isolation from events. conference organizers must consider environmental implications. SCRA
conferences should be in hotels that lodge attendees or are within walking distance. no bottled water or
non-recyclable materials. we can do better and should do better.
Thank you for all the hard work that went into planning! I liked being close to NYC but still on more
quiet university campus.
Thank you to all the conference organizers for your hard work on our behalf! It was a lovely conference,
and the only negative for me was the lack of availability of coffee throughout the day! (How can it be that
there's only one diner with coffee on the whole campus?!? Where's Starbucks?)
Thanks for providing food continuously throughout the conference. Organization/preparation was
commendable. Thank you. Job well done.
The biggest problem was that the hotels were a fair distance from the conference and a lot of time was
spent driving. The roads were confusing, and too much time was spent in traffic. Also, there was no
conference dinner, and the restaurants were a distance from the university, and no list of restaurants was
provided. Too much time driving and trying to get to hotels and restaurants. That was a headache.
The breakfast and lunches were either exclusively or mostly white flour based. Many people have diet
restrictions or lifestyle limitations that make diets heavy in white flour a problem. Some ideas, rye
flour,whole wheat breads or high fiber wraps, produce (e.g., salads, carrot sticks) or cottage cheese as
additional breakfast/lunch/ or snack options.
21
The built environment was not conducive to meet and socialize with conference attendees. There were
too few vegetarian lunches. The lunches had large amounts of non-recyclable packaging.
The campus housing staff were unorganized and not all that helpful. The rooms were dirty (i.e., blood on
the pillow, urine on toilet seat, hair on bathroom floor). Also, the housing online/mail-in procedures were
very confusing and misleading. The on campus housing situation for the conference was a huge
disappointment and EXPENSIVE!
The campus was very much secluded from opportunities to explore New Jersey. Although housing was
not bad, there was nothing close enough (or we weren't given enough information about if there were),
and we did not have internet access. We weren't told in advance that we had to bring our own internet
cable.
The conference itself was good, but the location was terrible. It would have been much nicer if both the
lodging and establishments (i.e., restaurants and bars) were closer to the conference, or were closer to
each other. The two main hotels and the dorms were removed from each other, and were not in locations
with other places to go. In combination with expensive cab rides, people tended to go back to their
lodging after the conference.
The conference needed more space for discussion and interaction between all participants. There was a
great deal of rushed talking head which excludes those who are slower to speak or have lower levels of
English fluency. The World Cafe was a good idea, but it's placement late in the evening was difficult to
negotiate after a long day of presentations. In short, less formal presentations and more opportunity for
discussion and interaction throughout the day.
The conference site was far from hotels, airport, etc. The shuttle was running at inconvineint times, only
early in the morning.
The conference was great and I loved the university setting. My major complaint was that the hotels, or at
least mine, was pretty far away and the shuttles ran infrequently. I didn't arrive at a "standard time" and
had to pay $25.00 for a taxi ride from the hotel to the conference site.
The distance of the hotels from the conference site made it difficult to connect with people informally. I
commuted by public transport from NYC and that took nearly 2 hours each way given the distance of the
conference site from the train and bus stops, and also given the relatively limited transport schedule. It
would have been nice to have some more specific info about this ahead of time on the conference
website.
The environment impact of this conference was much larger than nec. There were lots of busing people
around, no place to walk for food/activities, lots of packaging with meals etc.
the food was mediocre during lunch times. Money should have been spent on coffee/tea throughout day
and better lunch rather than on expensive social dinner and SCRA magnets, labeled notepads, etc. I think
the distribution of spending was not balanced well.
The hotels were too far away from the conference site and the shuttle bus pick-up times were not
convenient. They should have been running more often and been planned so that we would not arrive on
campus late for the morning activities.
22
The international travel awards were not open to students. We were told this was because there was a
separate pool of travel awards available to students. However, the student travel awards were only for
domestic students. This created needless back-and-forthing and frustration. The SCRA student
representatives appeared to lack both an understanding of the situation, and also power to resolve it.
One week before the conference, a group with whom I was to present a 2 hour 30 min workshop was
told that we were being rescheduled to another time slot and given only 1 hour 15 min. This created a
lot of problems, as we, a team located across multiple sites, had to cut our presentation by one-half at the
last minute. Running out of vegetarian lunch options on Friday was completely unacceptable.
The lack of green options (transportation, recycling, responsible conference paraphernalia, etc.) was
reprehensible. No wireless either. The school is nice but a poor choice considering its location and lack
of sustainable options.
the location was not ideal. there was little to do around campus, and driving was difficult there.
The MSU conference facility was outstanding. The technology was relatively seamless. Nice to have
everything in one location or a very short trip away.
The on campus housing option was nice, but it was a little too sparse. For example, there were no
trashcans anywhere in the apartment and only produce bags for trashbags (kitchen & bathroom both).
The box lunch on Fri. was good but Sat.'s (chicken pesto) made myself and others I know sick. I was
also surprised that the lunches did not include any beverages besides a small water. Either a regular
sized water or a choice between water or soda would have been preferable. Finally, it would have been
helpful to have received a campus map when we checked in at the on campus housing since that was our
first stop. The map in the back of the program was ok, but would have been better if it'd been looking
straight down onto campus. It might not have been as pretty, but it would've been possible to see where
all the streets went instead of the streets disappearing behind buildings which made it more challenging
to use. The programming was excellent!
The on-campus facilities were fantastic, but the off-campus arrangements made it difficult to have the
kinds of informal interaction we had in Pasadena. NJ is just very difficult to traverse if you're not from
the area, non-conference transportation was very expensive and unreliable. The hotels were not that nice.
I'm not sure if the cost-saving measures of not having it in a hotel made sense both financially and
overall.
The on-campus housing was well below my expectations. We were misled to believe that we would
have several amenities that were not actually available (e.g., in apartment telephone, stove). I wish I
would have stayed in a hotel, which was a comparable price. It was not worth the effort to try to be
close to the conference site.
the only suggestion i have is that there be a dance on Saturday nights. After sitting for a few days, this
engaging social activity really brings the crowd together. and it's fun.
The program schedule could have been better coordinated. For example, in one session there were 2
LGBT related presentations and 2 related to assessing fidelity. It would have been nice to have these
spread across the entire conference rather than grouped in one session.
23
The reason I have a negative mark on the dining situation is that, as someone who requested a vegetarian
meal, I would have appreciated them being set aside for us. SCRA members are that type of
demographic where they might choose a veggie option if it's there, so the meals people signed up for got
taken up by liberal omnivores (god bless em) before I could get the one I'd requested.
The registration table was not always staffed, and it was not always clear where to go to find someone
with drink tickets, directions to places, etc. The staff was friendly when they were available!
The shuttle buses to the hotels could have been better organized. The drivers knew that it took a full hour
to complete a loop, but this was never communicated to us. Also, one day, a shuttle never came and I
needed to present early that morning. The vegetarian lunches were a problem. The first day, I had a
bagel instead of a sandwich. The second day, I had a sandwich made up of a very small amount of pesto
and a whole lot of onions. This was all that was on the sandwich.
The shuttle system was a disaster, but everything else was good
The site was difficult to get to if at hotels and the accommodations on site were not desirable. There was
little near the conference location to enjoy for socializing and it was difficult to make informal
connections given the dispersement of conference attendees over the geographical area. I would not
recommend this site in the future, although the campus was pretty and the conference building was
pleasant and comfortable.
The transportation (from airport to conference/hotels and between the hotels and MSU) could have been
better. For example, the hotel-MSU shuttles did not run a continuous circuit in the morning time, but
would wait outside our hotel for 30+ minutes until 8:30am (the last shuttle) to take everyone, by which
time we'd be late for breakfast and the first event of the day.
The transportation arrangements were horrid. I feel as if I were penalized for choosing not to stay on
campus. The shuttle service was terrible, as it only ran for a couple hours in the am and pm AND it
came only two or three times. Plus, you never knew when it was coming. I routinely waited an hour at
the stop in the rain. I took a cab the 5 miles to the site, and was charged $37!!!! It cost only $3 more to
take a cab to the airport through a reputable vendor that the hotel (Ramada) found for me. Why such
unethical transportation providers??
the transportation from the hotels was a real problem. several of my friends could never get a ride in the
mystery bus. they actually never saw it.
The University Grounds provided a good site for the Conference
The university housing (Village) did not have internet access which was a huge disadvantage for trying
to get work done. There was also no fruits available during breakfast - only carbs. More fresh vegetables
during meals would have been better. Coffee should be available throughout the day.
The village accommodations were less than desirable given the cost. The overall location of the
conference was inconvenient. It was an expensive hassle to travel to and from the airport. The meeting
rooms were also less than ideal. Things appeared to be unorganized (registration at the village and at the
conference). Lunches were not adequately prepared, leaving no options for vegetarians.
24
The Village at Little Falls was spacious, but it looked like it had not been cleaned. The floor hadn't been
vacuumed, the bathroom floor was dirty with hair, it was quite gross. I appreciate that these were budget
accomodations, but I expected them at least to be clean. It also would have helped if we had been
notified in advance that an ethernet cord was needed to access the internet from the Village. Several of
us brought laptops, but did not bring with us an ethernet cord. The availability of food at the conference
was terrific! It was great to have fresh fruit between sessions as well as other snacks throughout the day.
Very good!
There needed to more easily accessible caffeine! Holiday Inn shuttles were pretty unreliable!
There was much to be desired in Montclair. The city itself did not have much to offer nor did the
campus. Also, how in the world is one to hold a conference full of community psychologists without as
much a dorp of coffee anywhere on campus?
There was not suitable space for chatting where the snacks were served on the second floor. The first
floor was a better option - especially liked the opportunity to get outside on the patio
There were issues when I had to return the key (key person was not very helpful and mean at times),
there were no garbage bags in rooms, no internet, and you had to walk a mile to get to a restaurant other
than the on-campus diner.
There were no social amenities within walking distance besides two sub-par diners. It was a $60 cab
fare from the airport. The only thing MSU had going for it was a NJ transit line to Manhattan, which
unfortunately did not run on Sunday. Also, Milton Fuentes was a bit stuffy. A friend of mine needed
to get on-line for his symposium and Fuentes decided that this was a risk to the security of MSU.
Instead, my friend contacted a person from our university who simply told him the username and
password. I noticed that the vegetarian lunches went quickly and by 12:05, they were gone. Next
biennial should make up for this. I say that lunches should--by default--be vegetarian. People should
check a box to indicate that they need meat for lunch and not the other way around. This way,
everybody is able to eat, as omnivores can eat vegetarian but not vice versa.
There were not many options for food and informal social opportunities. It would have been nice to
have had some way of getting to NYC on the weekend when the train did not run (i.e. organized trip via
bus or other train line, etc.). Also, housing options were limited. The hotels were not very close and the
shuttle was not convenient for most people.
There were problems with room sizes. Large sessions were almost always to crowded with people
forced to stand or sit on the floor. In one instance the entire room was rearanged and seating brought in
from several other rooms and there was still not enough room for many of the people who wanted to
attend. At the same time a roundtable session was placed in the large auditorium downstairs. I know
this will be in everbody's comments but COFFEE. There could be no food, no seating, and late start
times but with the absolute lack of coffee that there was no other concern seems as important.
This conference was not a good value for the $ paid. Food and especially beverages were sparse.
Content of conference and scientific/professional meetings were excellent.
This is one of the best organized conferences I have attended. Thanks for such hard work.
25
too bad hotels were so far apart
transportation from any airport was very inconvenient, particularly for anyone traveling on a budget.
transportation was a challenge unlesss you had a car No place to eat nearby unless you had a car
Very well-organized, especially regarding scheduling and timing
we should try to have the hotels closer to the site so we can have more "community" and informal
meeting opportunities.
When we checked-in at the dorm, we had to wait for them to get us into the suite using a master key and
then for them to bring in a locksmith to create keys for us to use. We were told the shuttle to the
conference only ran at the beginning and end of the day-not true. The rooms were dirty, had no trash
cans, the ceiling leaked, and we were led to believe there would be internet. Given the circumstances, it
was greatly over-priced-we paid almost as much as we would have for a hotel room. Next time, provide
information on what train stop to use, or what bus lines. Being that far away from the airport also
greatly increased travel costs and travel time. Dining options within walking distance of the dorms were
very limited which is a problem for those with a limited budget or who need special food
accommodations. In the future, SCRA should seriously consider how near food options and the airport
are as accessibility issues. One session had to relocate to a different room because the room was booked
for a class.
While the conference venue was nice, its considerable distance from the lodging made life difficult for
all attendees. It would have been preferable to be able to go back and forth between one's room and the
conference with ease. The relative difficulty of getting from any airport to the conference site was also
problematic. While the food was very good, I wonder if something less fancy would have better
reflected the values of community psychology. I was very much concerned that the catering made few
efforts to be green, using small disposable water bottles, no reusable cups (perhaps ask people to bring
their own), etc. I also felt that the days were over programmed with activities starting too early in the
morning and extending too late into the evening/night.
While those organizing the biennial on-site really worked hard to pull things off, there were several
issues: 1) The on campus housing was substandard for this kind of event. I've stayed in residence halls
before (and know they were a popular choice here, likely due to the reduced cost), but this is really the
first time that my room did not meet threshold for cleanliness. I expect a dorm room will be rather
spartan, but this was more like a soccer camp gone wrong than a professional conference. The
mattresses were quite well-used, my floor was stained, the bathroom (especially the shower) was rather
gross... 2) There were some issues with the shuttles, especially early in the conference. 3) I know MSU
is a largely commuter campus, but many of us were hard-pressed to believe that there were so few
options for food (or coffee!) on or near campus. Several meals were provided; however, it was
challenging and/or expensive to get food off campus... And the only close option seemed to be a small
diner.
Would have been nice to have a social event with meal on Saturday night as well (similar to Friday's
wonderful event).
26
Would have enjoyed coffee between sessions to encourage staying involved all day
would have liked the interest group meetings to be scheduled a little later, i.e. after 8am
Would have liked to have had local information about grocery stores, restaurants, transport available,
etc.
What did you like most about the Biennial Conference?
-very nice conference participants -interesting and engaging keynotes -good presentations -nice poster
sessions
* The food was excellent - always ongoing availability of a variety of snacks throughout the entire day,
and all were HEALTHY and tasty. This was really great. * I like that this conference continues to
attract participation from leaders in the field. * I was very impressed by the significant number of
international visitors and programming related to other countries. I also like the interdisciplinary
interactions. * There were numerous travel grants and other supports that people could apply for,
which was very helpful. * Everyone is friendly at this conference.
An opportunity to get feedback about our work
As a graduate student, the mentoring was a definite highlight for me.
Being here fostered a lot of ideas for my own work
Being with other community psychologists and hearing about common issues in our work.
Breaks that were long enough to connect with others
Chance to connect with colleagues
chance to meet face to face with colleagues i work with over phone or email
Colleagues
connecting with colleagues
connecting with colleagues
connecting with other colleagues and discussion about current practice
connecting with others
connecting with others to present the work I do as a community organizer and non-academic
Connecting with people - old friends and new ones. Hearing about work in the field. Having an
opportunity to present.
contact with the diversity of people and concerns at SCRA
Content, access to new ideas, meeting researchers I know and don't know, access to research, diversity
of issues, making contacts in my research area
27
Enjoyed the sessions and opportunities to network. Would like to see more opportunities for
networking available at the next biennial.
Facilities were outstanding and staff were very helpful.
Fellowship with other members.
food. availability of mentoring sessions. time for discussion. symposium format
Formal and informal networking and socializing opportunities.
Friday night's event
Getting to know through formal and informal interaction what is going on in the field.
Getting to see the people and the work they were doing.
Getting to see the people and the work they were doing.
Getting together with colleagues and meeting new ones
Good food at the poster session. Good way to attract people.
HARD TO SAY.
Having the opportunities to present perspectives from Canada
i appreciated the engagement with other scholars on issues that mattered to me.
I enjoyed connecting with people in the field.
I enjoyed the mentoring program, and was pleased with the opening reception and cocktail social.
I liked that there was a variety of symposia at the conference. I especially liked that there was a lot of
time between symposia.
I love the causal nature of the conference.
I loved meeting people and having the opportunity to see presentations by leaders in the field.
I really enjoyed the networking I was able to do at the conference this year. I was able to connect with
several others who are doing work/research that is similar to what I am doing.
I went to several sessions on teaching, and they were all very good and useful.
increased visibility to LGBT issues
Informal atmosphere, openness of participants, mentoring
informal interaction with colleagues
Informal networking
informal networking opportunities
informal networking/interactions
Information from specific sessions I attended, getting a picture of what the Bi-Ennial has to offer as a
first time attendee, and meeting fellow CP's
Innovative sessions, and symposia
Intellectul stimulation with peers.
28
Interacting with other like-minded people.
interaction with other community psychologists
interesting sessions
It was an occasion for me to know better CP and the US research context. Thank you
It was very evident the planners put a lot of work into the planning- The cocktail social Friday night
was very nice.
Learning about the research
many new
Meetig new people-found many with same interests and goals
meeting in person the people I communicate frequently with primarily by phone and email
Meeting new colleagues and catching up with colleagues.
Meeting new people.
Meeting others in the field and a very hands-on workshop I attended.
meeting people
Meeting people
Meeting people with similar research interests and talking with them about the similarities/differences
we see in our work.
Meeting up with old colleagues.
Mentor sessions
Mentoring sessions and the statistics-related sessions.
Mentoring sessions. Innovative panel with Watts and foundation head. Beth Shinn's address.
My impression was that the program content (presentations, workshops, etc.) was richer than at some
prior conferences; while I think a dinner event would have been nice, the conference had a laid back,
comfortable atmosphere, maybe more so than some prior ones
Networking
networking and seeing old friends and colleagues
networking and the session I attended were interesting
networking during sessions: meeting people doing exciting work in my area that (1) I had never met in
person or (2) never even knew about before the session
networking opportunities, friendly and welcoming atmosphere for students
Networking with colleagues and friends, plenary sessions, methods symposiums
Networking with different people
Networking with other professionals, women's night out
29
Networking with other SCRA members
Networking with others and the presentations
Nice conference facility
Opportunities to connect with people who have similar values.
opportunities to hear and speak with the leaders in the field and those doing community psychology
from the students to the experts
Opportunities to interact with other community psychologists and see what new types of things are
going on across the world
Opportunities to meet leaders in the field and to connect to current and future students
opportunities to meet people
Opportunities to network
Opportunity to connect with like-minded researchers and practitioners.
Opportunity to connect with old friends and colleagues and to learn about new research taking shape.
Opportunity to meet community psychology scholars
Opportunity to meet new contacts and be exposed to new ideas. The snacks during the day were
AWESOME - really helped give a pick-me-up.
opportunity to meet people and receive formal and informal feedback and support
Opportunity to meet with colleagues and opportunities to present.
Opportunity to network
Opportunity to network and share ideas with others in the field.
opportunity to re-engage with my community psych colleagues and reconnect with the field; I got a lot
of great ideas from attending
Opportunity to see colleagues and discuss community psychology
re-connecting with people whose work I respect; feeling connected to this network of people
really great sessions. Liked central locations with everything in one building. learned alot
Reconnecting with colleagues from around the country and world is always the best. Second to this is
hearing about all of the work being done in the CP field.
Renewing connections to people and the field. Thinking about new things and in new ways.
Scientific importance
seeing colleagues
Seeing good friends, meeting people, presenting at a symposium.
seeing my colleagues and hearing about other's people work
Seeing old friends, new colleagues, learning new work
Seeing people I hadn't seen for 2 years and the session on grant funding for social justice research
(organized by Rod Watts).
30
Seeing people I hadn't seen for 2 years and the session on grant funding for social justice research
(organized by Rod Watts).
seen good friends
Session with Gloria Levin, Anne Mulvaney, et al sharing their experiences as women in the field (titled
We've come along way baby, or have we -- or something like that), and mentoring session with Meg
Bond about work/life/family balance.
size accessibility of presenters
so many sessions on photovoice!
Social networking as a means for intellectual and social support
Speaking one on one with professionals in the field
Stimulating and thought-provoking
Stimulating ideas. Most sessions I attended ran on time. Presenters were well prepared and there was
time for Q and A.
stimulating presentations
Stimulating sessions
Opportunities to catch up with old colleagues and hopefully inspire future new
ones (i.e., current students)
The Applied Research Methods session and World Cafe
the attitude and atmosphere
the breadth of subject matter and the collegiality and advocacy
the buses given the non-walk ability of the Montclair campus
the casual feel
The chance to catch up with colleagues and the fact that this conference had enough unscheduled time
to meet new people and visit with friends, without feeling a rush or time crunch.
The chance to network with colleagues and friends, and the opportunity to hear about innovative
methods as I lay plans for my dissertation.
The chance to spend time with colleagues and see visionaries in the field talk about their ideas and work
and achievements
The community--the participants were genuinely friendly and hold similar research and scholarship
values and interests.
The fact that it is a Biennial -- every two years keeps it from getting too stale.
the feminist panel on friday- it should be recorded and/or redone at the next SCRA. It was the best
rountable i went to in a long time!
The focus on Practice, the international representation/involvement, and the innovative sessions.
The food and conference bag/materials were great.
31
The friendly atmosphere and range of topics discussed. I enjoyed the practice-oriented sessions and
those sessions that were more interactive.
The high-quality research
The innovative sessions and social interaction time. I appreciated how conference events were held
primarily in the same building- it increased networking opportunities. I also valued the availability of
the computer center. I was very glad that there were times set aside for social interaction. I thought the
hall where most of the presentations were held was nice. I love the inclusion of innovative sessions and
workshops.
the kind of people who attend
the large number of health related sessions
The location was really nice.
The mentoring session
The methodology session and the sessions on PSOC
The opportunities for networking and the facility (the professional MSU rooms, the fact that all sessions
(except for the posters) was in one building).
the opportunity for my students to participate
The opportunity to interact with others and share ideas, and create innovative sessions with them
The opportunity to meet and network with a wide range of CP professionals and practioners. The free
exchange of ideas that naturally occurs allowed me to think differently about my own research and
action.
The opportunity to see old friends and meet new ones. A chance to network and get a CP booster shot!
As a practitioner I don't get as many opportunities to delve into academic subjects, and it was good to
immerse in it for a few days.
The opportunity to see old friends and meet new people with shared values and commitments.
The panel: "We've come along way baby....but are we there yet?" This was excellent and should be at
every biennial!!!
The people
the people always make the conference.
The people who attended. Learning about new community work.
The people!!!!
The pre-conference workshop (with David Julian) networking the methods symposiums
The quality of presentations and information shared was excellent.
the setting
The symposia, and hearing from SCRA leaders -- such as "We've come a long way Baby," and Bill
Berkowitz's sessions on neighborhoods
The various topics presented
32
The vast opportunities for interaction between students and professionals. Mentoring sessions
The warm, welcoming atmosphere
the warmth, friendliness, generosity of attendees
The workshops and poster presentations.
The World Cafe discussions.
There were many opportunities for networking, and the cocktail social was very pleasant and more
effective than a "sit-down" dinner.
To see and talk with the authors and their work in vivo
Variety of presentation formats, opportunities to meet others, food
various sessions & topics discussed
World Cafe Social time Bill Berkowitz's address Committee time Pre-conference
What would you most like to see changed about the Biennial Conference?
-Logistical planning (make sure hotels are a lot closer to conference site or at least run shuttles more
frequently)
-more focus on being green -lodging and conference venue within easy walking distance (or even in the
same hotel) -more diversity in awards winners
* fewer speeches * do not schedule two keynotes/speeches in the same plenary session * more
interactive, co-learning opportunities
* It would be easier if the venue was in a larger city with a larger nearby airport and more
tourism/visiting options.
1) Proposals should be accepted from individuals rather than groups. Having presenters organize their
own symposium is a flawed approach that discourages boundary-spanning across organizations and
disciplines. When presenters must organize themselves at the proposal stage, they reach for those they
already know, and thus the same old folks end up presenting together. That is why there is little
organizational diversity within symposiums. I saw poster sessions that would have been better as
presentations and vice-versa. Some poster folks told me they would have preferred presenting, but alas,
weren't part of a symposium club. Conference organizers should accept oral presentations at the
individual level and assigning presenters to sessions. This is standard practice. 2) Need discussants to
respectfully critique presentations. Too much head-nodding, not enough intellectual tension
3 days rather than 4 days long
A better balance in the program schedule to ensure that related topics don't cluster together in one
session, but are rather spread over the entire conference.
33
A stronger connection to current social and political practices and polices. Focusing on LGBT issues this
year was a good example of this--in light of the hateful Prop 8 legislation and current struggle for
marriage equality. It would be great to focus more deeply on current policy issues and equitable
responses to unjust policies and practices every year.
add a dinner; program was difficult to navigate
Add more interactive sessions or gatherings like the world cafe
Adding a pre-conference institute on community practice
Adding dinners. Roundtable leaders who had personal experience with what they were discussing (in
the session concerning balancing work and family life, one woman made it clear to our group that she
didn't have to worry about this as much because she came from an affluent family, and thus didn't know
where to start the conversation). A more formal student mixer. There was no food! Only left overs from
the early mixers. It made it pretty clear what SCRA thought of the student members.
Airpot Shuttles would have been very helpful More snacks in between workshops
All the Symposiums and sessions where you just sit and listen for 2 hours and don't get to participate
An emphasis on practitioners, their work, their contribution, and support offered for the work that they
do and institutional mechanism put in place to shine light on their work and provide assistance when
needed.
Another cocktail hour
As far as I could tell, there was no rural interest group meeting (I showed up for the breakfast and no one
was there--although I was late because of the shuttle bus!) So I would like to have the rural group meet-Be in a walkable location, more vegetarian food available
better access between hotel,airport, and conference
Better accommodation for persons with physical disabilities.
better accommodations to facilitate informal interactions
better food
Better food and better information available online (and for the scheduling to be done sooner so that
airplane tickets can be bought!)
Better integration of technology, e.g. twitter, WiFi, etc...
better location so not so much driving
34
Better location. I think it is good to hold the conference in cities/communities that are more in need of
economic support than others, but Montclair was really a poor choice for location in terms of its
remoteness and distance away from restaurants. It also seemed that at times the conference was
logistically a little disorganized. For example, when we came in it was difficult to find University Hall,
and then after we found the building it was confusing to know where to register. It would have been
helpful to have more signs. A better conference program - specifically list the titles of each presentation
in a grid so we can quickly see where things are. Again, check out AEA's program. There was no coffee
served throughout the day. This was painful.
better lunch, Asked for veggie - none available first day all gone and not good on Friday
better lunches offered, interest group meetings later in the morning or afternoon
better opportunities to network
Better organization in terms of transportation/directions and getting the schedule out sooner. Also the
schedule could be made more searchable/easy-to-follow.
Better site with more to do near the site, more food choices.
better transportation
bring back the awards dinner
clean housing and a location that is walking distance to food etc. Better dining options
Cluster a roundtables-only time slot to maximize the strengths of this format, while decreasing
competition with symposia. While I believe the intellectual experience is more important than
logistics, Montclair was a little rough logistically--taking shuttles to on-campus housing was a pain, and
it would have been useful to have more concrete, step-by-step tips on how to get to/from airports/NYC,
as well as around the suburban layout (e.g., where to go out for dinner with colleagues on Fri and Sat,
taxi #'s, etc).
Colistic
Conference location and lodging location, Need to be more accessible and easy transportation
conference program booklet was hard to follow because the days were not listed at the top of the pages
convenient location for housing
Dietary options & environmental concerns.
Different location
Distance from lodging to sessions should be an easy walk.
DON"T EVER HOLD IT IN A PLACE LIKE MONTCLAIR STATE UNIVERSITY AGAIN
Dont have the conference on fathers day
Fewer concurrent sessions. The schedule seemed to packed.
Fewer sessions scheduled simultaneously; perhaps this would require a lower abstract acceptance rate
but it would boost attendance at any given session.
Have it in an urban location
35
Have lodgings be closer to the conference site - within walking distance is preferable.
healthier food choices
Hold conference in hotel closer to an airport
I disliked that there were programs running from 7:00am until 10:00pm. I like to attend as many sessions
as possible because the conference is so short and only every other year, but it is impossible to have time
for yourself when there are so many things going on all day.
I just wish there was better, easier hang-out space and a more walkable venue - where you could leave
the event and walk to restaurants, etc.. (Iike in Pasadena).
I like when the conference is held in one hotel and most people stay in that hotel. I think that it makes it
much easier to network and socialize.
I think having it on a college campus that can either house all or has hotels adjacent so that we are all
together would help.
I think our days get a little overbooked. Perhaps space for ground up sessions or more networking time
would be valuable. I suppose we just take it where we can.
I thought it was very good, except for the transportation snags.
I thought the plenary sessions were a bit long...attention of attendees was drifting.
I was in at least two sessions where presenters had difficulty with the technology and could not present
their presentation visually (i.e., computer, projector wasn't working). This is disappointing for the
audience and certainly frustrating for the presenters. It would have been nice if the volunteers could
have more effectively helped in these situations. Also, it was great to receive so much information via
email before the conference. However, some of the information was sent very "last minute" and it was
difficult to keep track of the several emails with different information. Receiving one email about a
week before the conference with all needed information would have been more helpful.
I was unable to attend all of the interest group meetings that interest me and my regional meeting, too.
Unfortunately, nobody showed for the SW/Rocky Mountain group or the Children and Families Group.
Few women showed for the Women's Committee, and some said it was just too early. Not sure what
you can do about that, but 7 a.m. is tough!
I would have liked to have more time for open debate and discussion. I also would have liked the events
to follow the recommendations, such as having people be conscious of second-language English
speakers in the room, having people introduce themselves before they speak, and having a facilitator
moderate the conversation, etc.
I would like it to have more children friendly policies and resources, pumping/children lounge, child
care contacts that work and even create a sheet about what to expect both for parent and presenters when
children are in a session
I would like more emphasis on speakers sticking to their time constraints so that there is actually more
then 3-5 minutes of discussion time afterwards.
36
I would like the location to be one that is more conducive to travelers without cars. Also, the program
was not very user friendly. It would have been really helpful to have a spreadsheet of the speakers,
presentation names, and location for each of the sessions in addition to the descriptions provided. It
would also be helpful to put the date at the top of each page so that when you are reading descriptions
you can easily tell what day and time those descriptions are linked to.
I would like the next conference to take into account the extraneous costs of travel (not just airfare). I
would like more sessions to be theoretically-oriented. I would like more sections to highlight qualitative
work and methods.
I would like to see better conference arrangements made.
I would like to see focus complementary scholars from related fields invited to give symposium on their
fields
I would like to see the conference in a more centrally located location with access to more things to do.
This conference location was very isolated. Also, more structured social events/opportunities on
Thursday and Saturday nights. The student social could have been a bit better planned in particular.
I would like to see the Legacy Program continue. I would also like to see a "works in progress" part of
the program, where people could get consultation on practice, policy, teaching, and research issues that
they are currently working on.
I would like to see the presentation & minutes/notes from the material presented at the conference be
shared somewhere
I would prefer a site that allows for attendees to be located in one place
I'd like to see programing organized for students of Color. We have so few faculty of Color and I'd like
graduate students of Color to be able to connect with one another and others.
In addition to the 3 days spread over 4 days, I do not like giving up both weekend days to the
conference. It makes it very difficult to get back focused to work on Monday.
In the program, put the day/time at the top of each page. It was very hard to dtermine "where you were"
in the program.
Including more community members - actual practice - broaden the field - not just research and
academics - but include more policy makers, and ngo workers as presenters. Also, international
development wasn't really covered and could be.
informal opportunities for exchange
less academic focus, more people from the community involved
Less high order language use and drop the acronyms please!
37
Less structure - it was difficult to take breaks with such a tight schedule. Cheaper Registration - the cost
is too high to be able to bring or invite community partners. less Academic Focus - Being that this is
supposed to be a community-based professional conference I would think some of it should be
accessible to community groups not just academics. More Community Involvement - I'd like to see less
research and less academics and more about the experiences and struggles of community members in
creating social change in their communities. What are the current problems they are dealing with and
how can the tools developed within this field assist them? The conference cold be a place for that kind of
exchange.
location, cheaper dorm housing
Make it more environmentally friendly
Many sessions felt very rushed. Could there be an option for symposiums to be allowed more time?
mentoring sessions should have some structure (at least one informational/talking point to present to
students). There is so much packed in a day, esp if you attend lunch and morning sessions. Coffee is
needed/ OR 1 short break with nothing going on. I hated having to miss a session/interest
group/mentoring to recuperate, but didn't want to sleep while someone was talking! Student pricemaybe 100? Hotel for so many days (and travel) make this pricey affair. every little bit helps (e.g., food
included)
more cafes
More centralized location
More community building events. More drive on part of leadership to press for social and community
change.
More emphasis on training in the core competencies that will help practitioners. More emphasis on
pragmatic public policy training. Many past Presidents in their Presidents' Columns have repeatedly
emphasized the need for attention to public policy but it mostly falls on deaf ears...Yet there is where the
greatest opportunity for expanding CP influence lies...
More informal connecting opportunities
More integrated campus/venue situation
More interaction
More interactive sessions and opportunity for conversation. More balance between the need for
academic presentation and a community conversation about the issues that matter.
more interactive workshops
more methods symposiums, (see previous comments on venue)
more organization prior, lower cost
More paper presentations with more topics.
More people of color needed on the program
more practioners
38
more public policy oriented programs
More sessions geared to innovative practices in the field. Due to lack of funding, these are often not
yet evaluated, so screening them can be tricky. Overall need more to appeal to practitioners, which
means you need some practitioners on the next planning committee.
More sessions on methodologies + more sessions where empirical research is presented
more sessions/workshops that will draw CP practitioners
more space for discussions,
More symposia focused on methodology and a greater emphasis on methodology in all symposia
More walkable/communal area for the conference, accommodation, and socializing.
n/a
needs to be in a more walkable location
Not sure. Add back a dinner or social event Saturday night.
Nothing
nothing.
Offer more food/coffee
On campus housing was horrendous and not affordable for graduate students.
overlap of related presentations
please integrate the voices and perspectives of students and diverse others into the plenary and awards
sessions.
Possibly consider starting a little later in the morning (i.e., 8 a.m. instead of 7 a.m.). Starting at 7 a.m.
can be difficult for those who have travelled a greater distance to attend. The early time can also be
difficult for those who have attended sessions until 10 p.m. the night before.
Pre-conference communication, particularly around funding possibilities / supports.
Programming org! Several sessions on the same/similar topics were at the same time. Possibly tracks
like at AEA. Breakfast provided should include more than just carbs. Poster session needs more space
to for talking & walking b/w posters. Program was hard to follow (list type of session, make more
obvious the separation of times for ea session). Would like indication of whether sessions are for
beginners, all skills, advanced, etc. Magnet & live band seemed excessive (nice, but an unnecessary
expense). Similarly, do we really need servers supplying appetizers? Can't we just have a table and get
them ourselves & save money? Disposable water bottles are bad for the environment. Would prefer to
have the option of receiving a reusable water bottle (instead of the magnet and live band) and have water
coolers available. People could also bring their own Would like options other than water at least once
after breakfast (coffee, tea, etc after lunch) Would prefer the breakfast started later.
Remind people who have known each other for a long time to be inclusive and welcoming of new people
Schedule presentations on similar topics at different times, and be aware of scheduling conflicts for
presenters.
39
SCRA needs to be greener; It was embarrassing how little effort went into having a green conference
(except for the T-shirt design). Too much structure.
See recommendation to expand Poster Session to Research Forum that includes anyone with a published
book to display and attend an Authors Table. This method is used by one of my other research
organizations.
Some sessions that were very popular (particularly those on methods in community psych) were very
popular, and were crowded because they were in smaller rooms. In the future, sessions with a big draw
could be held in larger spaces.
stop isolating us in the middle of nowhere. Montclair is not accessible.
Student social earlier in conference to give students a chance to connect and make some relationships
the "greening" of SCRA
the book program was extremely difficult to read and transportation was bad
The conference program needed tabs to differentiate between the days, as well as better markers of the
type of sessions available (e.g., research or practice/action session) Overall the quality of presentations
were good. Some rooms were not large enough to accomodate all the participants and other rooms
weren't appropriate for the session type. For example, my colleagues and I were scheduled in the
auditorium which was not suitable for a roundtable session. The seats were stationary and the tables
could not be moved to promote a more intimate discussion.
The conference should be held in a more urban area.
The conference should be in line with the values of the Society. (Please refer to the tip sheets the
International Committee has provided.)
The food!
The location
The location. Naturally, it will be a different location, but this venue was just the most inconvenient
with regard to logistics. Also, I wish that we knew the conference schedule much further in advance. It
was extremely last minute and made it more costly to purchase air fare tickets. Definitely, more concern
is needed for logistics -- particularly, how would someone for the first time visiting a location be best
served with regard to such basic things as transportation and its related costs.
The logistics/accommodations/ and organizations. Think about the location, travel to the airport and
local dining as accessibility issues. Don't admit victim-blaming presentations.
The morning start times were too early (interest groups at 7 am!), especially for folks coming from
different time zones. We had very little participation at our interest group meeting, which was too bad
given that it is the only opportunity we have to meet face-to-face.
The number of presentations were a bit overwhelming and there were too many competing one's. I think
taking an early poll about what people are likely to attend would help organize based on popularity so no
two "popular" presentations are competing.
40
The only complaint I have is the conference program booklet format. It would have been helpful to
include a table in the booklet that included the titles of all the presentations for each day, instead of
having to go through each abstract. It's nice to have the abstracts but it would have been better to also
have a "cheat sheet" to quickly see what was going on each day. I found the program booklet a little
cumbersome to go through and figure out what I wanted to do.
The pre-conference structure. We need more notification and WAY in advance. Also, the preconference instructions for presenters was not answered in a timely manner. And, the conference
website was not helpful in that there was not a quick program reference; something that listed the basics
like on pg. 9 of the large conference itenerary. That needs to be made way in advance so that we can
plan our meals, travel (airfare, car rentals, etc), and our time at the conference itself.
There were way too many concurrent sessions. It made it difficult to choose which sessions to attend,
and it meant that folks had meager audiences for many of the sessions. As a presenter, I resented the
amount of time and effort that I put into my presentation for only 8 people because there were SO
MANY other sessions going on at the same time.
Timings. 7 am is too early in the day to start considering one is going to be present till late in the day.
To the extent possible, much attention should be given to enabling conference attendees to meet
informally outside of structured conference activities.
Too many sessions occurring at the same time.
Transportation for members
Try to achieve more participation until the end of the Conference
What was your favorite session at the conference? Why?
"We've come a long way baby" because these founding women of SCRA described not only their personal
experiences, but put their lives into the greater context of the time periods. It was really telling. Very
moving, inspirational, and gave me a real grounding into women's roles within SCRA and academia in
general.
"We've come a long way baby". I loved the innovative format and the opportunity to have more personal
interactions with people in the field and to engage in less structure, more novel and meaningful discussion.
"We've come along way baby....but are we there yet?"
(one of my favorites) ku workgroup; very organized, variety of topics covered, logic model/tools used
(Those I was part of... (<:)
#117--Evaluation Capacity Building, because this was about the work I do.
195 Becoming a competent community psychology practitioner, there was a good mixture of students &
professors
a couple of the symposia that I attended I particularly liked because of the quality of the work; poster
sessions were of high quality (sorry, I chose more than one)
41
A session (don't recall title or persons at this moment) that included academics and community members
and talked about the process of coming to a comfortable place in the labels used to describe each other (in
this case, calling each other "poor" and "rich", not using terms like "low-income"). It was a frank
discussion of topics and processes relevant to our community work and included community members
equally.
a workshop that was very hands-on applied
Adapting Evidence based practices to work with immigrants
all the ones I attended were good.
All were good and informative
Although I couldn't go because my presentation was scheduled at the same time, I was most excited about
the : 051. Innovative Methodological Approaches to Community-based research: Theory and Application
(1); 2 was also very interesting.
Beth Shinn's address! It was a fantastic combination of theory and application in community psychology!
Beth Shinn's address. It introduced new ideas to the field and could be formative for both practice and
research
Beth Shinn's plenary. I find capability theory facinating and relevant to CP values. This was the first time
that I had heard of this theory but found it to be very applicable to the research that I am currently doing.
Regarding sessions, there was an innovative session conducted by some folks from Canada that discussed
class-related issues that I found facinating. I feel that all two often we get stuck in "PC" terms and are
afraid to use terms like "poor" and "rich" in our academic circles. This session addressed this head on and
created some great discussion about what it means to work across class lines.
Beth Shinn's- she showed the practical side of community psychology relevant to the global world
Climate change session. It felt relevant.
Content Analysis Presentation. Contained lively debate of how community psychology addresses
diversity.
didn't have one
don't recall--something about youth development in afghanistan, sri lanka, and kenya. It was directly
relevant to my current projects, and I learned knew things.
Empowerment symposium session. I think it is the core issue of CP.
Faith based community organizing, series learning dilemmas
Focus on change, Organizational research in community psychology-brenda Nowells use of complex
adaption systems as a frame for evaluation was excellent
Foreclosure and Homelessness. Dealt with housing.
Future directions of global CP
Gary harper, Am 830 - 12pm, topic of interest, presented very well I learned new things
Gender in ecological perspective - relevance
42
housing policy... met great people doing important researc
I enjoyed all of the session
I enjoyed beth shinnin's talk. Most directly revelant to my work learned a lot
I found the syllabus exchange and discussion the most useful.
I liked a symposium on housing I attended with Susan Saegert's students and Beth Shinn... it gave me
ways to think about housing and foreclosures.
I liked our symposium Treating Gender as an Ecological Variable because it was nice to get a broad range
of perspectives on ideas that had previously only been shared among 5 or 6 people
I liked the documentary on racial integration - stimulating conversation followed, good chance to dialogue
with community practitioners.
I liked them all; each was different. I also especially like poster sessions especially when there was music
and snacks and opportunity to mingle with lots of people and see lots of posters.
I loved the opening plenary session, the speaker was engaging and the topic was very interesting. I
enjoyed getting a perspective different from academia. I also really enjoyed the methods sessions.
I really can't pick a favorite session. I liked Beth Shinn's talk mostly because it was interesting.
I really enjoyed the session on innovative methods. The presentations were interesting, but more exciting
was the number of people present. I like the idea that we are continually evolving in our approaches to
ways of knowing. I believe CP has a critical role to play in the generation of knowledge and I want to see
that part of our field remain vital and vibrant. These sessions reflected that for me.
I was looking forward to the canceled session, "Hit my Heart" responses to racism for students. However,
my favorite session was on participatory action research with young people at 8:30am Friday.
I went to a session on Cultural Competence that was excellent. Also, I was surprised at how informative
the session on media and self-help groups was.
I would like to see more sessions that focus on methods & stats -- clearly there is a need, as these few
sessions were overflowing.
I'm not sure that there was one session that I liked, but there were qualities of many sessions that I liked. In
general, I like to be taught something new - either "How to" do" or issues that arose during research and
how they were dealt with. I like to learn specifics about methodology and data analysis, or hear
recommendations regarding dealing with important issues (professional or otherwise).
Innovative Methodological Approaches to Community-Based Research: Theory & Application (1&2)
innovative methodologies - I can get content from papers but harder to get methodological understanding
Innovative session about domestic violence, and sessions about methodological approaches
International CP roundtable because it helped to put CP in a global perspective
It is a tie between the LGBT session and the global climate change session.
Kevin Cathcart's plenary session - I found it very informative and he provided a lot of easy action-oriented
steps that any of us can engage in to support the equality of LGBT people.
43
Latest research advances -- most useful to my interests
Learning about mentoring for culturally diverse students. I looked the informal presentation of the session
with valuable insights from top professionals in the field.
LGBT Workshop
Media Matters Workshop because Joe and Hugh conveyed the practical realities of dealing with media and
journalists. With Joseph's experience as a journalist he was able to convey the other side of the story and
why CPs need to understand and engage with representatives of the media. Secondly, we broke up into
subgroups that was very helpful in talking through a specific scenario. Excellent workshop training that
conveys critical practical skills. The CP is the face of the field and interacting with media could have
profound public impressions, positive or negative, of the field.
Mentoring lunch. I was able to get a lot of the session.
mentoring pre-conference workshop very individualized and interactive
Methodological challenges in measuring
Methodological session with Campbell and others on HLM and GIS. Rod Watts innovative session with
foundation leader.
Methodology sessions
methods
Methods in community psychology because it was cutting edge.
Methods symposium on Friday - great overview
My favorite session was entitled Evaluation Capacity Building: Conceptualization, Application, and
Measurement. My research largely centers on capacity building, and this session provided me with ideas
to apply in my work and research.
n/a
Native American healing symposium: unusual, fascinating, nice audience exchange
No favorite.
not sure
On theological issues and assessment
one of the lectures on community, culture healing and wellness, very relevant to my new research area
great pictures
Oppression and immigration. Great diversity in presenters
Peer support and social policy. Both were interesting for different reasons.
Photovoice sessions. It is a new innovative method.
plenary sessions
poster presentation-got a better idea of the research going on
44
Poster sessions with food/drink are nice. The cocktail social was also nice. Both are good opportunities to
network.
pre-conference workshop - learned the most and was able to meet people interested in the same things I
was interested in
presentations on innovative methods -- epidemiology, survival analysis, latent class analysis, and personcentered approaches.
Research with GLBT methods roundtable (Sat).
Robin Miller et al.'s symposium on fidelity and Nathan Todd et al.'s symposium on faith-based
communities: Although the projects presented were in a particular substantive area, the information and
ideas presented were more about methodology and practice and so could be applied to other areas as well.
Rod Watts' session on funding for social justice research because it was practical and had information that
was very useful and relevant to me.
Round table on mentoring
Roundtable - Community Psychology and Global Climate Change
Roundtable discussion about sense of community- I liked the discussion format a lot, and thought it was
very helpful in having a meaningful discussion about core ideas/theories in the field.
roundtable on community psych and climate change. facilitated networking, discussion, and a plan for
action. it was the only formal session devoted to this issue - should (and will) be more of this.
Roundtable on graduate education and practice. I participated in it (that's not why I liked it so much) and
found the discussion really stimulating and worthwhile. A lot of good ideas came out about how to
transform graduate education in CP to do a better job of training students for practice careers.
Roundtables - more important
session on gender issues because i was able to learn about the lived experiences of research participants/
people i was unfamiliar with
session we organized about developing an international network
Session with Gloria Levin et al on women's experiences in the field (personal histories etc). It was
fantastic to hear the lived experiences and struggles of women who have done so much and who seem like
"giants" to those of us who are just starting out. Normalized some experiences and just made you feel
more connected to the history of the field.
Sessions with Isaac Prilleltensky and Ken Maton and Geoff Nelson. I never fail to learn a great deal from
them. The teaching-related session attended on CP around the world was quite valuable in that many
perspectives were shared. I also found the posters to be of unusually high quality.
sights, policy, community organizing, tools for community psychologists
Talks on methods
The acculturation and sense of community session on Sunday morning. All of the papers worked so well
together. It was very informative.
45
The CHIG symposium. Because I helped organize them and really learned a lot from the presenters.
The discussion on health care policy. Lots of audience discussion
The discussion on sense of community and applied research methods organized by Lenny Jason
the feminist panel- it was real, informative, hit close to home, made me think about my work and the
future of my research.
The KU work group's session on their CPBR because the content was applicable to my work.
The methodology sessions- gave me new ideas for my own research
The Methods symposia. This should be an ongoing focus for SCRA.
The one on shared safe spaces, which was the last one I took on the Sunday, it was lovely because it was a
discussion and involved a degree of spontaneity and intimacy which had def been lacking at other
workshops.
The opening plenary. Loved the guest speaker.
the pre-conference workshop and the methods symposia because I gained knowledge about new tools I
could use to conduct participatory research and to analyse complicated data
The round table discussion on the impact of CP on Humanity with Tom Wolff because it was highly
representative of our international community. It was amazing to learn how other countries are using CP
values and practices. It was also very nice to learn from them how we could take a more critical look at the
way we do things in our field and in our own country. I hope to learn more from our international
counterparts in the future.
The round table on doing research in the cross-section of CP and the environment on Friday morning
The roundtable about the future of Community Psychology. It was the opportunity to realize the diversity
of approaches
The session about Community Action after Disasters - becuase it had concrete steps attached to it.
The session about Community Psychology and Ethics with Brad Olson, Serdar, Almeida Eduardo.
The session about liberation psychology applied to immigrants. And photovoice by students from SC and
Brett Kloos.
The session chaired by Robin Miller on assessing adaptations made to the MPower program was very
interesting and relevant to my work. It also led to some thought provoking discussion following the
presentations.
The session on human rights and ethics with Brad Olson
The session that Pennie Foster-Fishman & her students did on CCI evaluation. It was very relevant to my
own practice work, but also provided new information.
The statistics sessions on Friday (HLM - neighborhood mapping) and Saturday (survival analysis, factor
analysis, etc)
The stats/methods section
46
The symposia I was able to attend..One Coordinated by Pennie Foster-Fishman, and my fellow presenters
on the Symp coordinated by Beth Shinn and Nicole Allen
the two sessions on innovative methodologies--lots of good info tightly presented
The World Cafe. Because discussions led to the identification of concrete ways to respond to community
challenges.
Too many to name
Too tough to pick just one, but if I have to.... #177, The New Neighbors... Because it was lead by
practitioners who used innovative visuals (video) to describe a successful practice. I could duplicate this
effort in a community with the right resources (mostly people)
Town Hall Meeting for SCRA Task Force on Disaster, Community Readiness, and Recovery because it
was an exemplary example of Community Psychology and embodied the idea of giving psychology away.
Using feminist approach when working with trauma victims. This session seemed to discuss real practical
concerns within the context of real community challenges. Very good conversation.
Viva Live Oak: demonstrated how PAR can lead to civic engagement and leadership development for
change. UCSC connected with a non profit and the non profit is a member of a broad base organization.
Viva Live Oaks - This was a very good way to see a project from start to finish. Opening with a brief
description, allowing time to look at and discuss posters, and a practice town hall meeting allowed us to
discuss different aspects including research and practice, and gain resources to use in our own
communities.
we've come a long way, baby--fascinating
We've come along way, baby session on stories of feminist women in CP. Glorious to hear the history
from actual people, nice to meet other feminist CPers.
Women and academia, very relevant to where I am in my career
women's focus - tenure preparation
women's focus - tenure preparation
work/life and family very interactive an dwonderful conversations
Workshop II on new quantitative methods for CP. It was very substantive and pertinent to the research I
conduct.
Workshop related to ethical challenges in CP because it allowed for discussion in small groups related to
various challenges and not just being "talked to" about challenges.
World cafe
World Cafe because I got the chance to interact with other community psychologists around real issues
What are three specific things that you are taking away from the conference that you
believe will help you develop professionally?
47
- Meeting luminaries in the CP field. - Being exposed to new/expanded theory. - Being exposed to wide
array of research pursuits.
-systems thinking ideas and references -contact info for individuals interested in health/obesity prevention
-theories to further research for master's thesis
-that evaluations of this length are entirely too long
....perhaps, networking is important and there is much work in the community to be done.
1 - new connections/networking with individuals with similar research & practice interests 2 - great
conversations about research I presented that will help me to move it forward 3 - reconnecting with
professionals I've met at previous conferences
1. Meeting people and making connections 2. Learning statistical techniques that I can use in the future 3.
Learning more about my content area of interest
1. New methods 2. New understanding of problems like foreclosures 3. New contacts
1. One or two community pratice ideas 2. Interesting research results with implications for my
community practice 3. Increased involvement with SCRA
1. Some methodological things I learned at the second innovative Methods session (I missed the first). 2.
A chance to better network with the organizational and community practitioner groups. 3. Some specific
content that gave me ideas for my work (i.e., psychological sense of community).
1. Capability theory and how this is a natural extension to some of the theories we have highly regarded in
the field. 2. New friends and associates. I had the opportunity to connect with both individuals that are
working in my specific research areas and those working in other fields that share concerns and needs. 3.
The opportunity to present my current work to my peers. I was able to gain some important feedback from
some highly productive individuals in my area of interest.
1. Cards from others doing similar research 2. Resources for understanding and achieving work life
balance 3. Knowledge about funding resources ad possible collaborators
1. contacts that I made through interest groups
1. made good contacts with people working in my area of interest 2. got good ideas on new ways to
approach certain issues
1. Making connections to others who are doing similar work/research. 2. Learning strategies to help
balance work, life, and family. 3. This conference always seems to provide me with a renewed source of
energy/excitement around my work/research.
1. methods ideas that I hope to use 2. new professional conections 3. interest group ideas
1. Motivation to do more youth participatory action research. 2. Wetting of the appetite for incorporating
new research methods. 3. A better understanding of the direction of the field and how I can contribute
1. new ideas about community wide intervention 2. new thinking about community psychology practice
48
1. some ideas for ice-breakers and innovative formats that I will use in the classroom and/or action
research projects 2. inspiration to see some of my friends and colleagues awarded for their contributions to
the field 3. Exposure to and reconnection with my community psychology friends who are "outside the
Ivory Tower" - to see how they have made successful careers with similar training
1. Specific ideas about an intervention that gives voice to participants (from the poster session) 2.
Identifying others with similar interests 3. Understanding what is currently being done in the field.
1. Staying connected to members and new contacts. 2. Inspired with new research ideas. 3. Develop
mentor relationships.
1. We need to value Practice work equally, if not more, than purely academic contributions. 2. Theory is a
useful tool but it's not the most important thing in working to creating community change. 3. Students need
to understand the various options available to them within the field of CP/community action.
1. work-life balance from discussion at mentoring sessions. 2. statistical analysis (desire to take more
classes in a wide range of statistical analysis)
1) An expanded professional network 2) Some expanded theoretical frames 3) Knowledge that other
scholars and researchers are conducting applied research using CP guiding principals in the effort to
transform inequities and create communities we want to participate in.
1) Connections with others doing work in the field, including 2) opportunities for collaboration on
research, and 3) opportunities to be mentored by successful community psychologists.
1) meeting new people 2) developing professional alliances 3) practice delivering presentation skills
1) opportunity to support and mentor students presenting work (poster sessions were good for this). 2)
opportunity for networking / informal interaction w/ colleagues 3) useful information from sessions (e.g.,
stories from feminists of the field, practical info on how to access and secure foundation funding).
1) People are always happy to speak with like-minded individuals, even if they are only students. 2) There
is room for everybody's interests. 3)You really can put your research into action and make positive, viable
change.
1) Sense-of-Community is not always a good thing. 2) Contacts
1) The need to actively try to make sure you aren't secluded in academia.
A couple of new theories to explore. A couple of new methods to explore. A couple of new ideas for
innovative sessions.
Acquaintance/re-acquaintance with colleagues in cp
Additional contacts with women in the field More stories of how women balance work/ life/ family Ideas
for teaching/ community-based research with undergrads/ service learning
Advancing our agenda with the SCRA Council of Education Programs.
Awareness of new stats/methods
Better childcare arrangements need to be made. Several people commented to me of the poor quality of
child care arrangements.
49
Challenges faced by other CP programs Resilience of CP in the U.S. New ideas for teaching CP
Community psychology is dying It is not concerned with mental illness It is not concerned with treatment,
just prevention
connection & community
connection with colleagues who are doing similar work in other geographic areas
connections made with faculty and students
Connections to other community psychologists. Some ideas about teaching community psychology.
Inspiration from the preconference workshop on infrastructure tools.
Connections, examples of others' work, and inspiration
contacts and networks, the tool box, knowledge about different venues and organizations in SCRA
Contacts in my new research area, new ideas in community practice, new research friends
Contacts New ideas on systems thinking mentoring advice from older collegues
Contacts, concepts, and ideas.
Contacts, wider understanding of theory and concepts, motivation and excitement to apply what I learned.
During the mentoring session, one mentor talked about work-life balance in academia and with her
children. I got great ideas about how to talk to the media from the first session I attended. I also learned
about some new data analysis techniques from one of the innovative sessions - not enough detail to be able
to do the same analysis, but enough to know I need to read more about it.
G15 - network analysis, new ideas about PSOC
Grant strategies, Contacts, Program and research Ideas
Great insights from the mentoring opportunities.
Helpful feedback from conference participants on my poster; Interesting perspectives/things to consider
when thinking about the intersection of culture and sense of community; New connections with people in
the field
how to prepare for tenure writing tips for publication mentoring / youth empowerment
I believe that we need to have more conversations about how the research is being used in the
communitites, passed publications and more about community impact and actual social change
I found: many points of contact between SCRA research context and mine new ideas And I'm more
empowered!
i learned how conferences work, new ideas in the field, networking
I learned that I will be charting my own career path, carving out a niche. I found comfort in not being the
only one to do this.
Ideas for Teaching Some contacts for future work Inspiration for the work we do
ideas for using websites, TCP to promote, support teaching of CP, Work for CEP with practice
50
importance of intersections community research and action model from ku internationalization of
community psych
increased knowledge of methods new knowledge of capability theory new knowledge regarding
techniques for service learning
Increased relationships/networking, experience presenting, ideas on issues on studying systems.
information from the presentations, experience presenting, knowledge about the practical aspects of the
career
Information, contacts, research ideas.
Ken Maton's empowerment model The idea the developing school-related teams is parallel to the creation
of coalitions and so these literatures and practice areas are convergent and synergistic SCRA is a valuesbased organization that can be understood in similar ways as faith-based organizations.
Knowledge of new capacity building tools for local organizations to use evaluation. Knowledge of models
of capacity building for prevention in communities. Knowledge of developments in web based technology
to share resources for creating community change.
Knowledge of social action, experiences in academia, and the importance of disseminating community
psychology
Learning more about participatory research methods. Making connections with some researchers whose
work I appreciate. Meeting other graduate students through their posters.
Link with others, optimism about change, inspiration
Made a significant number of professional contacts.
Meeting other community psychologists Exposure to new theories
mentoring, involvement with special interests groups, meeting people that I had heard about, read their
articles.
Methodology
More connections to others in the field.
more teaching skills, more interpersonal connections, and resources
Mostly I am taking some contacts away that I hope to be in touch with.
Need to present more at conferences.
Networking
Networking is critical. Field is growing quickly. Need to focus on core Community Psychology Values
networking opportunities, opportunities to present my work, opportunities to see what others are doing in
the field
Networking with certain people. Information about funding and framing research. A idea that I was able
to communicate with another about the possible SCRA book series.
Networking with others in the field. Content from sessions that relate specifically to my work and will
enhance my own work. Continue practice with presentataion skills.
51
networking, resources
New and renewed network connections. New environmental interest group and task force (I hope). New
publishing opportunity.
new contacts and applied research methods
new ideas, networking, friendships
New opportunities for collaboration New information to improve our work Development of students in
their preparation, opportunities to present, and expanding their understanding of career opportunities
New opportunities for collaboration on research & writing, some new ideas, new resources
New professional contacts, more programs in justice
New theories: Capabilities, Bifurcation. The concern for ethical values.
Newer relationships with experts in their fields. Ideas about community planning programs Importance of
globalization
Not sure there are such three things ...
notes about new ideas and research to pursue ideas
ongoing relationships.
opportunity to learn from and interact with colleagues chance to develop a new network potential
research collaborations
People - networking, World Cafe style of development for strategic thinking
personal contacts, presentation skills, info on career opportunities for community psychologists
Personal contacts. Presentations to list on my CV. A newfound connection to peers from my own
institution (thanks in large part to travelling together).
possibility of a specific new student to work with in the future a conversation about environmental
affordances possibility of a postdoc who might work with me in the future
Potential new interest group addressing Global Climate Change within Community Psychology New
connections with peers and colleagues
professional contact and connections, presentations to add to my CV
public policy important, always open symposiums to listserv to get people from around the world,
networking
qualitative method, evaluation, participatory action research
Recognition that my research interests are shared by fellow community psychologists (I am working with
marginalized alt-sex communities which have not historically been a topic of community psych). The
concept of bifurcation. New methods of conducting research with marginalized communities who have
not had a voice in psychology.
Relationships, reflection on the future, strengthing of community psychology identity
research/methods advances; people met
52
Resources and research from other communities
resources on practice and teaching
Social connections, goals for action before the next biennial
That conception of clinical psychology can be expanded to include community psychology aspects
The field continues to be filled with excitement; however, it is important to keep pushing for innovation -especially with moving into electronic media and ways to communicate.
The need to focus more on my own work. The need to support and be supported by colleagues. The need
to be a better public speaker.
The notion that women are still working to find their place in the field and in academia. There is a balance
between holding onto your values from when you are from (social class) and where you are going
(academia).
The research commitment
Theory Exposure to presentation styles Investment in Community psychology
There are many paths to post graduate employment, ask others who they learn from, become
multidisciplinary
tools for engaging stakeholders new techniques for analyzing data increasing my profile within the SCRA
community
World Cafe
What suggestions do you have that would address these concerns at the next
Biennial?
- Be sure presentations and sites are accommodating to people with disabilities. - Choose a site that
makes it easier to network with attendees outside of the conference program. - Keep a strong focus on
Community Practice.
- Make it more eco-friendly. Maybe include a travel mug or water bottle to cut down waste. - Include
daycare on-site. - Make the program more user-friendly
(see other comments)
1) more emphasis on practical training for students and practitioners and also academics who may
incorporate practice in training. 2) more emphasis on workshops including for continuing education
credits because the effect is to establish a quality or competence standard against which all workshop
presenters will be held. 3) more emphasis on public policy practical training
A bigger room for the poster sessions, with posters more spread out would be nice.
Add a cocktail hour to the second poster session
again, more interactive skill development workshops, methods symposia (with more space), and more
structured activities for networking
53
Already stated these
Be more conscientious of communication with attendees, more organized and choose a location that is
better.
Better online information and scheduling done sooner. Better food. Bigger rooms for symposium and
more chairs. Perhaps assigning a university representative to each room to help with technical issues
and chairs, etc.
better transportation options
Bring in clinical psychology Address the mental health coinsequences of social problems Recognize
the value of secondary prevention Bring in other disciplines
Bring more Community Based Organizations into the room. Collaboration is the key to action in the
community. Don’t forget the A in SCRA.
Closer site to airport and highways. Recycle more. Less junk (bags, paper, etc.). More informal
networking/sharing opportunities between sessions. More sessions about sustainability and
environmental justice!
Conference (bag shirt etc) should have a picture on them
Diversify the planning committee and invite as multi-generational a panel as possible.
Divvy up the conference responsibilities among more people that way those few are not overwhelmed.
Either choose conference sites with housing in close proximity and central towns/villages for attendees
to visit or provide adequate transportation. Note, in some past conferences we have had chances to
interact with local community organizations or people as part of the conference and that was missing
from this conference.
Establish an environmental committee that ensures that the conference is green. Create more space for
community especially during lunch time.
Find a different location. Make sure on campus housing is well organized. Make sure those running
the conference are professional and polite. Rework the program so that it is easier to use.
Get proof readers drawn form the general public cost if they cannot understand the sessions then they
need rewording so the language is inclusive of all!
Higher critical review of poster & session proposals.
hold conference in hotel that can lodge attendees or is within walking distance of lodging. "greening"
of food, packaging conference dinner w/ cocktails to bring all together w/ key talk during dinner
I assume you mean the concerns that I noted in the question before the last. I think we simply have to
cut down on the number of presentations. I know that I didn't say to reduce the number of
symposiums, panels, etc. But it isn't about reducing any particular kind of presentation. We just need
to reduce the number of choices for each time block.
54
I felt that a symposium proposal required collaboration with multiple presenters unified on a common
theme (and I apologize if this was not the case--I don't recall the specific parameters). As someone
who studies marginalized alternative sexuality, it was not easy to find fit with the work of others; I
think it would be wise to allow for symposium presenters to submit as a stand-alone presentation.
Perhaps the call for proposals allowed for this, and please forgive me if this is the case. It should be
noted that, for some of the most cutting-edge topics, it is not easy to garner related presenters to do a
collaborative symposium.
I really think that the conference needs to either be more selective about the programs that they allow
or add more time so that participants can see more sessions that they'd like and see better quality
sessions.
I think a question about concerns was omitted. That concerns me, and not omitting the question would
address that concern.
I think there should be more work that focuses on doind community psychology with Aboriginal /
Native communities and participants
I would like to ask that future conference planners keep the later June dates, as was done for this
conference (June 17-21). For those students & faculty who are on the quarter system, we go until midJune (graduation is usually around June 15), so the timing of this conference was 100% better than
previous years. In previous years, we have had to skip classes, miss graduation, take finals early, etc.
This is a major burden for those who really want to come to the conference. So, bravo for this years'
conference planners -- they listened to this request & it made a big difference! Thank you!
inclusive concentration, discussion-focus on fostering belonging in the group
It's hard to pick a place where people can congregate together, attend sessions together, and stay and
eat in proximity while keeping the cost reasonable. I thought this conference was very high for the
amenities. The physical building itself was great, but the rest was ok.
larger rooms, provide written directions & people who can assist with specific clear directions
less formal
Locate the conference in a better area. Use less packaging for food options, reduce the cost of
registration
Make it easier for participants to spend time together by centralizing activities and lodging (NOT
multiple hotels all over the region, NOT away from good restaurants, NOT shuttle buses that only run
in the am and pm)
Make sure organizers are on the same page about what funding is or is not available to international
grad students. Don't send us from pillar to post.
Make sure that the interest groups meet. Continue the teaching exchange sessions. Offer other
preconference workshops on evaluation.
55
make sure the conference is in a more centrally-located place, with options for entertainment within
walking distance (or by affordable & available transportation). Organize structured/semi-structured
social events for each night of the conference- preferably one or two would be centered around local
attractions of the community in which the conference is located (like in Atlanta with the reception at
the Fox Theater).
More colistic
more convenient site, lower cost
More feminist sessions, more GLTBQ focused sessions.
More interactive session
More mentoring sessions. More sessions where leaders in SCRA describe how they used their
research to help others.
More qualitative sessions on empirical research and on methodology. More sessions based on theory.
More small group interactions. The poster session was an opportunity to discuss research and theory
with others--perhaps putting us in small groups with some learning prompt or goal to build
community, network and exchange ideas.
More workshops, more international focus and exemplars of international research.
n/a
No real concerns.
none
none at moment
offer a catered lunch
One concern that I have is about food. We could have an entirely vegetarian conference. I don't know
why we don't do this, as it would really reduce our carbon footprint and then everyone could eat the
food served. Now that I live on the west coast, having a conference on the east coast is quite difficult
b/c of the time change. I think I would prefer they be in the Midwest. I think this would also increase
the number of people who stay until the end. It would be very nice to have the conference at a
location where we could be walking distance to lodging, food, and the conference site. It would also be
nice to be able to take inexpensive public transportation between the airport and the conference
location.
Overall I was satisfied, Suggestions above
Partner with local IT to better integrate technology at the conference.
Please improve lodging accommodations.
professional development/early career stuff
Provide better information on transportation and ground transportation. Have conference at university
that can house all or house all in adjacent hotels (e.g., like at University of South Carolina).
Provide more session focusing on research methodology
56
question not clear....
Read my previous comments...I would like the housing to have garbage cans and internet or at least
some info about what will be in the rooms. I would like more restaurant options that are within
walking distance and more workshop type sessions.
See comments about a pre-conference institute More opportunities for informal gathering (e.g,
proximity to coffee shop, restaurants)
See my earlier comments.
See previous notes
see prior comments on workshops
Should have conference and lodging at the same site.
Skills that are not taught in grad school
The Women's Committee is currently working on options for childcare at subsequent biennials. We
encourage the 2011 biennial planning committee (once formed) to collaborate with us on these efforts.
This question makes no sense.
Try to critically assess the possibility to achieve a set of common values worldwide. Start thinking
about cognitive justice
What concerns? Maybe you could figure out a way to better space out the Interest Group and Regional
Meetings. Like if all Regional meets were at the same time and nothing competing, people might
network better with their regions.
What concerns? This question seems out of place.
which concerns???
Do you have any comments on this year’s Conference Evaluation?
1) With all the demographic questions you could very likely identify respondents. Are they really
needed? 2) Too many questions. Keep it to some core questions. 3) "No opinion" is not the same as
neither being satisfied nor dissatisfied (my opinion is that I neither really satisfied nor am I dissatisfied).
I would not use the No Opinion as the middle option.
a little long
A little long, but good to try to be comprehensive.
a little on the lengthy side, one of the likert scales seemed misexecuted, if there isn't going to be an
"other comments" field that should have been included; some of the likert scales were weird (having "no
opinion" and "not applicable" in the same scale)
appreciate the evaluation.
be careful - one of your response scales was opposite of what i expected (when i noticed, i had to change
my answers). it is an agree-disagree one
57
Cong!
Generally good except for the failure in the early question to recognize that some people presented
Workshops during the session which fell through the cracks. Again, indicative of the neglect of
workshops during the conference in practice and in awareness. Also, the conference program had no
listing of the workshop venues offered. All future conferences should have a separate listing of each
venue so attendees do not have to read the narrative of every single offering in order to find workshops,
for example.
Good evaluation.
good job.
good that this is done regularly
Great idea to do it online. I think it is hard in the middle of a conference to remember to fill out a paper
form. It was easy to do it online--and thanks for the e-mail reminder!
Great job thanks
Great work to the NJ team! It was a terrific conference and I greatly appreciate the effort it took to pull
it together. Really excellent!
I like doing this online. Much better than handwriting it.
I like the convenience. It would be good to have feedback for presenters as well (after each session).
I like the on-line format!
I like the online format!
I liked that it was online - Go Green! Plus gives you more time to reflect and share in a thoughtful
manner. Hard to find the time and space to fill out forms when you are with friends at the conference.
I liked the online format instead of paper format. It's more "green" and having an e-mail reminder to
complete it was a good reminder.
I loved the convenience of having all the sessions in one building. There was plenty food offered
throughout the day.
I think it was a great conference, but a shuttle to and from town would have been good
I think it was very well organized
I think Montclair State University did a good job. I especially appreciated the food and beverages
available during the day. Although, I must confess that coffee was very hard to find.
I think the evaluation is excellent. However, I would put the demographic information at the end, rather
than the beginning of the survey. It's somewhat off-putting to start with the demographics.
I think you need to proof it a bit better. :)
I thought that the woman who was collecting comments of conference participants with a tape recorder
was GREAT.
58
I was a bit shocked to see a few of the accepted presentations being victim blaming, that was a little
disturbing and contradictory to the theme of "values." It seemed that in several session blocks there were
several presentations of the same topic (i.e., a few on PAR). I found myself having several sessions I
wanted to attend in one time block, and then none in the other. Perhaps we need to do a better job
scheduling the sessions out by topic track.
I wish I could go back to the question, but I'll add one more comment here on the conference overall students who applied for & were rejected from being allowed to volunteer to waive the registration fee
were given no idea of the criteria used to select those who were allowed to do this. The process was not
transparent & therefore seemed very unfair.
It is a very complete evaluation. Congratulations.
It was fine
It was good and thorough. Thanks!
It would be helpful if it were more structured rather than relying heavily on open-ended repsonses.
it's kind of long... sorry, i couldn't answer the last few questions. also, i was surprised to not see
questions on the standard issues like food, transportation, etc. finally, i forgot to mention that the legacy
plenary was so very long that it was exhausting to listen to those speeches
it's too long
Just a little too long...
like the online component
Longer than 12 mins
lots of stats- poor you. well done
maybe more space for open-ended responses.
Milton Funetes did a great job organizing
Mostly functional.
n/a
Nice job!
no
No
No.
on line works well - time to reflect more on experiences after the conference
On-line is good, but I believe you switched the agree/disagree sides, which confused me (and probably
others).
One of the scales seemed inappropriate - Not Very Important, Not Important, No Opinion, Important,
Very Important (seems the first two options don't make sense ordinally)
Overall, good conf.
59
Please pilot test your surveys - this was frustrating to complete due to gaps in options, incomplete terms,
poor formatting, and cognitive load
probably could be paired down to increase response rate - seems a little more fine grained than it
probably needs to be...
Providing terminals with internet connection at the conference would be an easier way to do the eval when it is fresh on everyone's mind.
Put page #s of the conference book also consider shading
remove race and ethnicity questions
Should have included more room for qualitiative feedback and had more questions on specifics of the
accomodations.
Some "other" items didn't allow you to enter information. Items weren't sequenced well. For example,
after the question, what 3 things will you take away from the conference, the survey asks what
suggestions do you have to address these issues? Questions don't clearly link with response options. E.g.,
did you register is followed by options regarding costs with options for too much to to low. Needs more
clarification.
Spelling errors indicate that the survey was not double-checked.
thank you for online evaluation rather than paper - a good step toward "greening" - makes sense for
reducing data entry hours.
Thank you!
Thank you. This is a wonderful community
Thanks! I think it was very well run and I appreciated the opportunity to come check out the SCRA
community. Nice job, and thank you for putting all of the hard work in.
The evaluation seems very thorough, and as a result, seems a little long.
The last question was confusing. The on-line format is great -- saves paper, and compiling.
There was not an ability to enter specific information when it was requested. For example, the
accommodation question asked for specification if a hotel was selected but there was not way to type
information into the survey.
There were a couple of glitches in that I was not able to add information where it said "other" or
"specify" and some of the response choices were unclear, e.g., not important vs. not very important, and
in one case, important was listed as two choices. Otherwise, a nice mix of quantitative and qualitative
questions. Note that Beth Shinn did not give the Practice Address but gave the second keynote at the
saturday plenary, which may lead to some ambiguity because a rater might not be sure if you wanted a
response about the Practice Address or Beth Shinn (and they were quite different), and it turns out that
the Roundtable of Roundtable format was cancelled, so I would not expect anyone to validly say
anything about it.
60
this form was a little sloppy -- asked for specification of 'other' responses without providing space;
switched valence of response scales between sections; 'no opinion' response option difficult to
distinguish from 'not applicable'. all minor errors which would be fine if survey design wasn't a core
competency of community psychology.
This was my 1st conference and I found it to be beneficial. I plan to attend other conferences in the
future.
To get higher return rates, needs to be done on site. And it needs to be done when you have a captive
audience, with as many as possible in one room. In this case, I speak from direct and extensive personal
experience in conference evaluation, including evaluations at previous Biennials.
Too long....use survey monkey next time so that you can just check off demographics.
typos and the "other - specify" had no place to type.
typos??
very good - comprehensive and allowed space to voice different ideas/concerns. Thanks!
very good, and also easy to filling
very thorough and well-designed, easy to take.
Would be better to have free writing space provided with all questions asked please for those of us who
do not fit boxes well.
Yes. Survey design could be improved. See earlier comments.
61