HiPERiSM - High Performance Algorism Consulting
How customers rate HiPERiSM's training for HC2
This table shows the ratings for the HC2 training course in July, 2002, at the ABB, CA, site.
The evaluation ratings are for a sample of N=11 with a rating scale Strongly Agree=5, Agree=4, Uncertain=3, Disagree=2, Strongly Disagree=1.
| Question | Mean |
Standard Deviation |
| The Instructor: | ||
| 1. Presented material clearly | 4.9 |
0.30 |
| 2. Encouraged student participation | 4.8 |
0.40 |
| 3. Managed class discussions well | 5.0 |
0.0 |
| 4. Responded to questions satisfactorily | 4.7 |
0.47 |
| 5. Was helpful during workshops | 4.6 |
0.50 |
| 6. Used available time effectively | 4.8 |
0.40 |
| The Facility: | ||
| 7. Was conducive to learning | 3.9 |
0.94 |
| 8. Terminal availability was satisfactory | 3.4 |
0.81 |
| 9. Computer response time was satisfactory | 3.4 |
0.81 |
| The Course: | ||
| 10. Prerequisites were valid | 5.0 |
0.0 |
| 11. Was well organized | 5.0 |
0.0 |
| 12. Length was appropriate | 4.9 |
0.30 |
| 13. Student materials were supportive | 4.8 |
0.40 |
| 14. Workshop supported course objectives | 4.7 |
0.47 |
| 15. Stated objectives were met | 4.7 |
0.47 |
| 16. Met my needs | 4.5 |
0.69 |
| Mean of each respondent's mean (1:16) | 4.6 |
0.20 |
| Mean of each respondent's Std Dev (1:16) | 0.70 |
0.14 |
HiPERiSM Consulting, LLC, (919) 484-9803 (Voice)
(919) 806-2813 (Facsimile)