Table 2. Average Time-Management Workshop Evaluation Scores for Four Different Workshops.
| Evaluation Questiona | EM Residents 08/03/17 (N = 31) |
TY Residents 08/02/17 (N = 12) |
TY Residents 01/04/17 (N = 3) |
EM Residents 02/10/16 (N = 8) |
Overall Average (N = 54) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| This session met its stated objectives. | 3.81 | 3.75 | 3.67 | 4.00 | 3.81 |
| This session information was presented in an organized manner. | 3.90 | 3.75 | 4.00 | 3.88 | 3.87 |
| The presenter created an opportunity for interactive learning. | 3.86 | 3.92 | 4.00 | 3.88 | 3.87 |
| This session referenced current practices and evidence. | 3.77 | 3.67 | 4.00 | 3.75 | 3.76 |
| The scope of topic(s) was relevant to my level of training. | 3.68 | 3.83 | 3.67 | 3.88 | 3.74 |
| This session addressed a specific educational need. | 3.65 | 3.83 | 4.00 | 3.75 | 3.72 |
| I will use information learned in this session to enhance my practice. | 3.81 | 3.83 | 4.00 | 3.75 | 3.81 |
| I would recommend that my colleagues attend this session. | 3.81 | 3.83 | 4.00 | N/A | 3.83b |
| Overall rating of session (1 = Poor, 4 = Excellent) | 3.87 | 3.75 | 4.00 | 3.88 | 3.85 |
| Overall rating of presenter (1 = Poor, 4 = Excellent) | 3.90 | 3.75 | 4.00 | 3.88 | 3.87 |
| Was this session fair-balanced and free from commercial bias? (1 = No, 4 = Yes) | 4.00 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 4.00 |
Abbreviations: EM, emergency medicine; TY, transitional year.
a
Except where indicated, scoring was based on a 4-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 4 = Strongly Agree).
b
Average based on N = 46 after excluding evaluations with N/A response to this question.