MSU - CIBER
1997
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS INSTITUTE
for Community College Faculty
Description
Agenda
Speaker List
Participant List
Program Evaluation

Program Evalution


      CONTENTS

Introduction
How this report was compiled ...
Program Components
Accommodations, Facilities and Materials
Questionnaire
Overall Evaluation
Back to the main page


MSU-CIBER HOME PAGE Contact MSU-CIBER
Copyright © 1995 Michigan State University.
Document last modified on November 13, 1997.


Introduction

      The International Business Institute for Community College Faculty was designed specifically to help community college and technical college faculty develop their international business course offerings. The Institute attempts to provide them with the knowledge, experience and resources they will need to internationalize their existing general business courses or develop entirely new courses specializing in international business. The Institute pulls its presenters from the vast resource networks of its sponsors. These presenters are top academic research scholars and teaching professionals, as well as seasoned veterans from the international business arena. The International Business Institute for Community College Faculty and its sponsors hope these efforts will help two-year institutions prepare their students for our increasingly more global future.


How this report was compiled

      Participants were asked to rate the quality of the program components, speakers, accommodations, facilities and materials on a five-point scale ranging from excellent to poor. 39 evaluations were collected and found complete enough to be included in this report. Where a participant circled two or more answers for a given question, the more conservative answer was used. Where a participant neglected to answer a particular question, he or she was removed from the sample. Throughout this report, the number of participants answering a particular question is recorded as the value of N.


Program Components

Panel Sessions

N=35

91 percent of respondents rated this component as "Excellent", "Very Good", or "Good".

Comments

  • Variation was good; nicely planned.
  • Each person should be provided with a microphone and be asked to stand up.
  • I like hearing what others are doing.
  • It was useful to hear short discussions of various topics, rather than comprehensive presentations.
  • They were all excellent. Gave us useful information.
Country Briefings

N=37

100 percent of respondents rated this component as "Excellent", "Very Good", or "Good".

Comments

  • Very interesting. We could have used more time for these.
  • Excellent resource materials.
  • Good information for examples in classes.
  • Very thorough. Good stuff to share with class.
  • Could have used more of these.
  • Speakers who used actual experiences and concrete examples were best.
Area Studies Overview

N=36

100 percent of respondents rated this component as "Excellent", "Very Good", or "Good".

Comments

  • Need to have all presenters focus on the core elements of their disciplines and what the community college student should know.
  • Excellent materials and identification of sources.
  • Especially appreciated the ones that gave us teaching applications.
  • Excellent, covered well with limited time available.
Small Group Sessions

N=35

71 percent of respondents rated this component as "Excellent", "Very Good", or "Good".

Comments

  • Small groups were only as good as the facilitators.
  • Not focused enough.
  • Interaction with other faculty was most helpful.
  • Ranged from very good to poor.
Resource Fair

N=35

80 percent of respondents rated this component as "Excellent", "Very Good", or "Good".

Comments

  • Excellent samplings!
  • Useful. I would have liked more syllabi and introduction to international business texts.
  • Expected more book publishers here.
  • Helped make me aware of the wealth of material available.
  • I like the copy of texts for review.
  • Need more! Have NTDB running all the time.

Accomodations, Facilities and Materials

Kellogg Center - Meeting Rooms

N=39

100 percent of respondents rated this component as "Excellent", "Very Good", or "Good".

Comments

  • I really like the idea of meeting in the same place where we are staying. "All in one" is good. I wouldn't change the format.
  • Temperature problem. Problem with computer [network] getting outside of MSU.
  • The rooms were somewhat cool. The chairs were very comfortable and the technological interface was excellent.
Kellogg Center - Sleeping Rooms

N=38

95 percent of respondents rated this component as "Excellent", "Very Good", or "Good".

Comments

  • The people were quite helpful and anxious to serve. They should be commended.
  • Quite small, but comfortable.
  • Much better than expected.
  • Give instructions on how to use the bus system!
Kellogg Center - Meals

N=39

97 percent of respondents rated this component as "Excellent", "Very Good", or "Good".

Comments

  • I really enjoyed the meals. On time and prepared well. No concerns.
  • Dinner was excellent. Lunches might feature ethnic foods. Breakfasts were best.
  • Fresh fruit in lieu of fat-laden desserts should be offered.
Kellogg Center - Materials

N=39

100 percent of respondents rated this component as "Excellent", "Very Good", or "Good".

Comments

  • Incredible quantity and quality.
  • Need more books, texts and materials.
  • The handouts were most helpful. The generosity of each presenter was most appreciated.
  • Thanks for all the great materials.

Questionnaire

Did the presentation and materials provide you with the knowledge and resources you needed to internationalize general business courses and/or develop international business courses? Was anything left out that should have been included? What changes would recommend to this component?

Selected comments:

  • Good overview of numerous areas, which was beneficial for me at this point of institution's curriculum development.
  • This was by far the best learning opportunity I have been exposed to. Wonderful mix of academic and business speakers. I feel I can return to my institution with more direction and insight.
  • Many wonderful ideas and materials to create international business courses.
  • Next time include some materials relevant to exporting services.
  • I feel one session on the downside of globalization-displaced workers, environmental costs, social costs, etc.-should have been offered. We need to educate our students on these issues! Also, there was no discussion of ethics.
Did the small group sessions help you apply the information you received to the internationalization of general business courses and/or the development of international business courses? Were you able to be an active participant in the small groups? Were you able to be an active participant in the small groups?

Selected comments:

  • So-so. I was active, but found it difficult to keep on task. Too much digression to general community college problems. Perhaps more specific topics would help.
  • This part wasn't as useful as the speakers. I would rather have used the time for more speakers or more time for existing ones.
  • [Request participants] to bring syllabi and course descriptions from our institutions.
  • Small group sessions need to be better organized. I don't think people with little knowledge of the IB arena can effectively develop a syllabus without some benchmarks. I'd rather listen to some experts and what they feel needs to be included.
Was the Resource Fair useful to you? Was anything left out that should have been included?

Selected comments:

  • More multimedia.
  • Provided a wealth of information and leads to additional materials.
  • Perhaps more information about specific texts from publisher representatives.
What did you like best about the Institute?

Selected comments:

  • Networking.
  • Interaction with colleagues and knowledge gained from speakers.
  • The expertise of the speakers, the materials, and the opportunity to get to know my colleagues.
  • Presentations and the interchange of ideas at breakfast, lunch and evenings.
What did you like least about the Institute?

Selected comments:

  • Some presentations were too elementary.
  • Sometimes exhausting. Not sure if panel discussions were always good.
  • Too cold in the rooms. If that's the worst I can find, good job!
  • Start at 9 a.m. It's a long week.
  • Information overload.

Overall Evaluation

N=37

100 percent of respondents rated this component as "Excellent", "Very Good", or "Good".
Copyright © 1998 Michigan State University.
Document last modified on November 11, 1998.