Institutional Web Management Workshop 2005: Whose Web Is It Anyway?
Feedback on IWMW 2005

Feedback

The following feedback on the workshop is available:

• General feedback on the workshop (given below)
• Comments on the workshop
• Feedback on the technologies used at workshop

General Feedback

Overall Feedback

The IWMW 2005 workshop, held at the University of Manchester on 6-8^th July 2005 attracted over 180 delegates. A total of 76 workshop evalauation forms were returned. A summary of these forms is given below.

The overall rating for the workshop content was 4.0, on a scale of 1 for poor and 5 for excellent. The full details are given below.

5 (Excellent)	4	3 Good)	2	1 (Poor)	Average
21	37	18	0	0	4.04

The overall rating for the workshop organisation was 4.25, on a scale of 1 for poor and 5 for excellent. The full details are given below.

5 (Excellent)	4	3 Good)	2	1 (Poor)	Average
29	36	10	0	0	4.25

General comments on the workshop we received included:

• Well organised again. Congratulations and thank you. I regret not finding out about JISC and UKOLN until 2004
• Again a very good event. Thank you for organising this. Brian will be a hard act to follow
• Fab-one of the best. Great venue, good having everything in one place. Good to see "web" from a people angle
• Excellent. Good to put names to faces
• Enjoyable and thought provoking
• Grand and great. As friendly and sociable as last year and certainly as useful
• Excellent as always. I've been coming for 6 years and its good to have a cross section of the HE Community

Feedback On The Plenary Talks

The most highly rated plenary speakers were John Dale (average rating of 4.65), David Sweeney (rating of 4.38) and Jeremy Speller/Ian Bartlett (rating of 4.05).

Name	5 (Excellent)	4	3 Good)	2	1 (Poor)	Average
John Dale	52	19	2	1	0	4.65
David Sweeney	41	19	13	1	0	4.38
Jeremy Speller/Ian Bartlett	16	46	12	0	0	4.05

John Dale's talk on "University Blogging: What Happens When Everyone Can Publish?" was particularly well-received, as can be judged from the comments provided on the evaluation forms:

• Very interesting and gave a good start to the conference.
• Most interesting "techie" sessions-very enjoyable.
• Excellent presentation, thought provoking content.
• Very thought provoking.
• case studies are always useful. Entertaining delivery.
• Very interesting. My concerns AUP and Multi cultural users.
• V.interesting to see the freedom Warwick gives its students. Definitely food for thought.
• Fab talk, really interesting and well presented. Good video clips.
• Brilliant, superb examples, high quality presentations.
• Makes me think that this would be applicable to my university.
• well presented, inspirational, amusing.
• Fun and engaging. Great presentation.
• Entertaining. Liked to have known more about how non-techies use it e.g the interface.
• Interesting and provocative start.
• Took the fear out of the blog concept! More useful than I'd realised.
• Interesting to see it in use and not just in the abstract.

Feedback on the Panel Sessions

The panel session on "Responding To The CMS Challenge", chaired by Miles Banbery, reqquired the panelists (Mike Lowndes, Tom Franklin and Piero Tintori) to respond to issues raised in the discussion group sessions and summarised immediately prior to the panel session. The skill demonstrated by the panelists in responding to these issues and Miles's skillful chairing can be guaged from the high marks given in the evalauation forms:

5 (Excellent)	4	3 Good)	2	1 (Poor)	Average
4	17	20	0	0	3.61

Feedback On The Parallel Sessions

With a total of 18 parallel session, from which delegates could only attend 2 it is not possible to make a valid comparison across all of the parallel sessions. However the three parallel sessions with the highest ratings were those facilitated by Stephen Emmott (Managing Stakeholders with PRINCE2), Adrian Tribe (WHS WEB S IT NEWY? - Including Mobile Phone Users in the Loop) and Iain Middleton and Mike McConnell (Hey! You! Get Offa My Web! Hidden Desires and Unforeseen Circumstances in Web Management)

Name	5 (Excellent)	4	3 Good)	2	1 (Poor)	Average
Stephen Emmott	7	0	1	0	0	4.8
Adrian Tribe	6	2	0	0	0	4.78
Iain Middleton/Mike McConnell	4	4	1	0	0	4.4

Comments received on the parallel sessions included:

• Really enjoyed them both - well structured and interactive. Would like to do 3 parallel sessions - so much to choose from
• I found them the most directly useful part of the workshop and would have liked to attend more of them
• Both very good overviews of all topics
• Both were excellent with intelligent answers to questions.
• Probably the best part of the event

Feedback on the Social Events

The social events at these year's workshops included a workshop meal and a trip to the Manchester Museum of Science and Industry. The feedback of the social events is summarised below.

5 (Excellent)	4	3 Good)	2	1 (Poor)	Average
13	39	14	1	0	3.95

 

Conclusions

The feedback provided on the evaluation forms confirm the subjective feelings experienced during the workshop that IWMW 2005 was a tremendously successful event.

We will be providing the speakers and workshop facilitators will more detailed feedback on their invididual sesssions.

We look forward to the IWMW 2006 workshop which will be held at the University of Bath on 14-16^th June 2006.