GOVERNANCE RETREAT 2006 SUMMARY EVALUATION COMMENTS

S1 – 10:30 Introduction & Welcome

**Next year, tell people there will be no food in the morning and only water or coffee.  Some of us don't drink coffee :) or caffeine and didn't eat because it said REFRESHMENTS (Ok, water is refreshing, but ….)  P.S. All who called were told different things too.

**Loved Jude's warm-up and origami trick

**Orientation needed to be active.  Snacks were a problem for those who had arrived early.  Food in the morning especially for the early people.

**Really liked the President's Comments

**Please have some kind of breakfast food (doughnuts, bagels, muffins) or make it clear that ""refreshments"" means coffee and water - most of us didn't have breakfast - especially those of us who were here at 9:30.

**Perhaps use the money spent on laminated cards for some food"

**should have happened after welcome

**nice to know why we're here; food would have been nice

**Necessary

**Liked having the President list our accomplishments It made us feel valuable

**came in late

**Refreshments should be called coffee, and be more than coffee and water

best part was brevity.  Good job!

**was not present for this part

S2 – 11:00 Governing Concepts - Making Headlines

**Who was that guy in the green shirt?  There was not adequate introductions - there are people here I don't know (and I've been around for a couple years).  We did this exercise and then it was dropped - no closure or feedback

**That was fun!

**Partially I was extremely hungry but also I think that it needed more direction

**Way too much time having to explain what we were supposed to do in the brainstorming sessions, but we had a great time actually doing it.

**too many groups wasted too much time - Let's talk about real issues

**Too much instruction

**Way too vague; not well explained or understood.  The flip charts just got hung up and not discussed.  Good for committee dynamic, however

**Share our ideas ("brainstorm" activity) with others

**not as clear on what was desired

**Good ice breaker maybe set stage for next year

**Point was less clear while doing it than after. Seemed like a good ice breaker and helped staged what there is to come

**was not present for this part

S3 – 11:45 LUNCH

**It would have been nice to have an assignment at lunch so we could feel more useful - I would have liked also to meet others and that wasn't facilitated.  Diversity of food was good, BTW - nice lunch! (At 1 pm, I felt we'd accomplish very little!  I doubt I was alone here.)

**There was nothing for vegetarians to eat (even though I had requested and was promised!)  And no, we don't live on lettuce and a fruit salad.  Last year they made something for us!

**Very few vegetarian options of substance to fuel the day.

**In order to facilitate a sense or team and camaraderie and spirit, it would be nice to have people sitting with those they don't already know instead of reinforcing existing cliques as it seemed to do.

**good food

**ok

**fantastic! (I love free lunch)

**Nice - Thanks!

**We had an engaging discussion about the recent graduation speaker.

**Nice

**lunch was OK, but refreshments were poor

**Simple fare, adequate amounts

**it was tasty.  I'm on a diet so appreciated the salad.  Small tables were conducive to **relaxed conversation.

**was not present for this part

**Nice selections of food choices

S4 - 12:45  A/B/C  (Affect, Behavior, Cognition)

**I got some significant ideas from this that I think will help me be a more informed Senator.  Go bananas!  Go apples!

**Games were fun . . . Enjoyed the discussion too.

**I thought that this session was the most valuable giving us some specific things to implement

**In the session title, Visioning is not a verb

**Maybe not so many warm-up games?

**The divisions of ""fruits"" after the initial ""ABC"" work into fruitbowls took way too long, but the work was interesting

**Need to minimize the jargon laced ""theory"" to introduce the importance of relationships so we can get to work."

**too many groups too much movement not enough substance

**the group work was nice, and identifying issues and how to solve them is very important

**It was puzzling but rewarding in the end

**Never seen this model of Affect, Behavior, and Cognition.  Took too long to understand because it wasn't explained well.  Once I got it, it was useful and I like relating the B and C to A

**As a culture (U.S. mainstream) we have difficulty identifying feelings, so this makes the "Affect" difficult.  "C" was the obvious antithesis of "A", Behavior great idea.

**Could have devoted less time - all came up with about the same thing

**Excellent sharing, I realized many people have similar opinions

**fruit salad, good after lunch activity to melt ice accumulated during luncha nd get in the groove for #5

**was not present for this part

**The groupings worked well for multiple viewpoints

S5 - 2:00 --Governance Scenarios

**This one didn't work for me at all, except to show me if I want to be an informed Senator, the onus is on me!  Silly dogs! Silly geese!

**Very useful discussion

**Informative

**The best hands-on, issue-specific, relevant session I experienced as a brand new senator.  We should have spent twice as much time on this (with follow-up) eliminate session #1 to make room for expanding this.

**make more scenarios for discussions Let's talk more issues

**our group wasn't sure what we were talking about …more details about the situation would have been helpful

**Most real here!

**Why is JW rushing us out of this discussion?  It is the best work we've had so far.  We didn't need a break.  Would have helped to know that these were real scenarios.  I assumed they were made up.

**Productive discussion because there were specific cases to work with, instead of more abstract assignments.

**I learned a lot from veteran members in any group (e.g. there are some issues on which faculty senate do not vote)

**Got into actual problems and solutions

**probably the weakest session

**Good discussions -- excellent suggestions

**Very constructive, maybe its representation made it seem so (roadkill committee), but follow-up seemed to indicate all were excellent

**The issues were talked about and understood, however there was no discussion on implementation on how to really correct these problems

**scenarios/directions were confusing, but overall it sounded that all groups (of animals) decided the same ideas were true across the board: lack of communication, deviations of specifics

**More relaxed free-flowing session.  It fit well into the overall day!

S6 - 3:15 Shaping the Future (Dream Committee Structure)

**We have a great committee!  I enjoyed the discussion!

**Very good discussion in SAC - we solved ALL of our problems!!

**Informative, helpful but hopefully implemented

**I think we needed to integrate the results from the previous session with the question put to small groups in this session.  It was difficult to "envision" a better committee configuration within these existing standing committee groups -- why not cross-pollinate these groups as you did the previous ones?

**this is the most important topic or the day - restructuring is important

**We discussed having positive motivators for senators to serve to increase the value of this role.

**would like to have talked about issue possibilities

**Great teamwork! Nice to know how senators would change the group.

**Standing committees efficient, effective in accordance with GC.  Frequent breaks but we started to run out of steam here. However, overall quite intelligent discussions

**Many on our committee were first-year and so they didn't have any experience to contribute.

**Yearly themes for Senate

**Reward for effective senators (parking spot, travel)"

**Good - looked at desired changes for the future

**probably the best session since my committee was working together

**suggestions made by academic governance were great

**best part of the day, really feel like we accomplished something!

**Working on recommendations within committee groups went well - more discussion on a whole on what should be changed

**great ideas bounced around; some could be played with, some too ambitious; good discussion time per committee

**I think the instructions/directions could have been a little more descriptive!

S7 - 4:15 Summary and Reflections

**I still think Senators should get a sign for their door for visibility.  And a ream of paper for Senators to offset the increased cost of printing.  Maybe the senate needs a small budget for that?!

**Nice & short - not really a summary but I appreciate the President's insights on the problems related to communication.

*Very Good!

**Let's work on the actions, policy information necessary to be a great senator.

**Focus of the projection was off

**Informal time builds better relationships

**good, solid, short

**I think that we should have allotted some time to overall discussion.

Overall Effectiveness (OE)

**I think it was a waste of our time and resources (gas) to make us come to Rock Eagle for this.  Next time, perhaps we could have this in Milledgeville off campus -- surely the money and time saved would equal out! Or promote CARPOOLS!! 

**Also, maps should have been distributed by email earlier than last night.  Better signage needed too on the roadway!  There was some, but you needed more.

**The technology created serious problems - we shouldn't use stuff we don't even know how to use!"

**For those arriving early, could there be something a little more substantial than candy?  Maybe some fruit or muffins?

**Good food for thought hopefully implementation.  Food would be better and help the brain power issues.

**Though I certainly gave you some specific feedback, I don't want you to think I don't appreciate all the work you put into this because I really do and I appreciate the honor and responsibility entailed in being a senator at GCSU.

**Good stuff for a new senator!!!

**Suggestion: Record US meetings and distribute as podcast."

**This was a good opportunity to discuss and vent issues which is important.  However, I didn't feel the closure to the issues.  Good discussion and ideas, but now what?  What happens with this information?

**The shared experience will increase teamwork in our committees and in the senate; I wish more Senators had attended!

** I don't think the qualifiers of the term effective on the retreat evaluation form work

**We do good work

**I appreciate the work so many did to plan & sustain the retreat.

**I found the new senators to be less engaged or less willing to voice their thoughts than I would have liked."

**Its always good to get together, brainstorm, bitch, badger, berate, bemoan, and otherwise better the university.

**Please turn off computer projector when not in use :)

**Facilities were fine! Glad not to have to drive too far.

**Lunch was good!"

**The planning committee did a tremendous job planning and implementing this retreat!  The sessions were informative and productive.  You made my transition into University Senate a pleasurable experience.  Keep up the good work!

**We need a way to record good ideas for all (formal way) -- Hire a secretary to report and then send emails that contain good ideas

**Discussions were good

**Got to know people"

**too long a day would have liked a more convenient location

**I wish I had not had a conflict last year.  I think this type of meeting is very helpful.

great job, J.W. and Jude,

**not here til 2:00 p.m

**Very positive environment.

**Enjoyed the personal interactions with fellow USC members!"

Pre-Retreat Orientation Workshop

**Pre-Retreat wksp eval:  I so appreciate the amount of work that Craig put into compiling all the info.  Since he did such a great job of putting it in writing, I think its unnecessary to have that session.  We can read everything ahead of time.  I rate the session a "1" - have a "model" mini-workshop on introductory debating a motion so we are learning it by doing it.

**Preconference:  needed to go in depthly with the issues - not just put up slides - we have the info already in the folder

**Pre-Retreat workshop:  Nice!  Craig did a great job and it was helpful to know about the structure of Senate and Robert's Rules of Order.

**"Pre-retreat:  Mock meeting to practice Robert's Rules

**Preparation for first meeting in August (Discussion of agenda, post accomplishments)

**Address the limitations of faculty senate (e.g. what are they allowed to vote on?)

**Address how a ""bill"" gets to senate.

**Rated a 3 – effective