University of California, Davis
June 25-29, 2006
WAS THE AGENDA FOR THIS COURSE ADEQUATE AND MET YOUR EXPECTATIONS?
 | Yes-for an initial course. |
| Yes, especially sessions by Fred, Alan, David (Ethics) that helped me think bout things in different ways |
| The agenda was definitely adequate. I was pleasantly surprised the course exceeded my expectations. The course leaves me with a lot to think about and tools I can use in the future. |
| Great variety of topics and speakers. Facilities, food and local support were excellent. |
| Generally yes. The breakouts and especially the role playing exercises were helpful. The EPA risk assessment presentations became repetitive. Many of the sessions (e.g., D. Brown, A. Chun) that were directly relevant were most helpful. |
| Yes. |
| I enjoyed all topics for discussions. I felt Chun’s presentation provided the basis for effective risk communication. However, I feel his section was a bit long for what I got out of it. I enjoyed the risk assessors. After all, how can you communicate risk if you don’t know how the assessments are done? I thought the GMO presentation was a great closer. |
| Yes, very good speakers and topics, too much packed into day two! |
| Yes and no. The agenda was well organized and the course provided a tremendous amount of information regarding risk communication to the public, grower groups, and co-workers. But the course did not address working with the media. |
| I thought the agenda was great. However, the risk assessment presentation was too technical-it is a tough topic to cover. |
| It did-thank you for acknowledging the need and pursuing it. |
| This was my first PREP. It was very good. A tremendous amount of information was presented. |
| Very good cross-section of topics. Great collection of speakers!!! And facilitators!!! The agenda was organized well. Good discussion sessions had all been completed prior to exercises. |
| Yes; it exceeded my expectations! The agenda was packed with great topics and impressive speakers who tailored their messages to us! This is a necessary course topic-in a new era. The public has access to so much more information (good and bad)…I learned so much! I know I’ll use this information… |
| Yes, however time was inadequate to cover all the ground. We needed a few more hours, or jettison some content. |
| Yes-very impressive group of knowledgeable speakers and participants, all very willing to share and exchange information. |
| It was adequate. Would have liked more on risk assessment and management (maybe that’s another course). Thought all the time put into developing role-playing scenarios were well worth it. |
| Some portions of the agenda were perfect on target. Other topics were not. |
| Yes-good pacing, good variety of speakers, good to put role-playing/groups after lunch. Alvin’s presentation was great! |
| Some of the presentations were a little slow. Most of my concerns were express on Thurs. afternoon. |
| Yes, I think that did a good job overall and met my expectations. The staff did a good job and was professional. Some of the topics I did not understand, however that was it beyond my level. |
| Yes. The agenda included relevant topics and speakers. It was highly informative for everyone and practical in its applications. EPA OPP Registration-Risk assess/more and how to explain it and use it in your jobs. |
| Yes. |
| The agenda exceeded my expectations in several areas in a positive way (e.g., Prof. Brown, Chris Corwin, Alvin Chun.) |
| Some of the EPA Risk Assessment on day 2 was weak-would not recommend a repeat as presented-this was the weakest component. |
| Yes, it was the reason I requested to come to this PREP. Most of the sessions met my expectations and the tour exceeded them. The presenters were top notch and interesting-Alvin was great. |
WHAT COULD PREP PLANNERS HAVE DONE TO MAKE THIS COURSE MORE USEFUL TO YOU?
| Maybe more on answering questions-not just the safe questions but more like training NPIC would give their employees. Also putting the science-human and eco risk info into terms people understand (expand Fred’s talk) or have everyone do the spinning wheel of risk-that was good. |
| Federal speaker reliance on long power pt. presentations, dry content was a minus-but other presentations more than made up for this. |
| More practice with the media. Practice writing to a target audience or reading level. |
| A whole course could have been spent on registration-risk assessment and toxicology, REDs IREPs TREDs etc, Labelle Hicks would be a good speaker for a course with these topics. |
| I occasionally had trouble hearing all participants in group discussions. It would have been helpful if questions/comments were repeated by presenter. |
| More sessions on "nuts and bolts"-practical measures for risk communications would have been helpful. I was surprised at the number of sessions of EPA background. Perhaps others needed this more than me. |
| Really like the case exercises. Examples are always helpful. |
| Possibly more structured participant discussions-more bout precautionary principal. |
| Maybe offer this course as a team effort (e.g., regulator person and the public information person) from each SLA. |
| Nothing I can think of. |
| More working sessions, but it was really good. |
| I’m one of the non-technical crowd but it presented material I hadn’t really been shown in detail before (risk assessments). A course specifically for public info staff would be great. A one day overview of risk (very simplified) add in Alvin, Dr. Brown, designing materials, maybe a class on social marketing, handing the angry audience. |
| I really would have appreciated a live on-line walk through of how to find things on the new docket system. Evidently it is widely believed it is difficult to use and locate items within the docket so a live example probably would have been well received. |
| You folks are old pros-keep up with the great work! |
| I don’t know, it was very well done! |
| Most of my risk communication is in writing, mostly for the web. So more segments on written risk communication would be useful. |
| Infrastructure of this course (housing, food, etc.) was managed very well. |
| Speaker with long slide shows need to be watched. They tend to read slides and not provide lecture. |
| To increase level of presentation, introduce more technical topics vs. overview. |
| Maybe less lecture, discussion was great. Hook up with NPIC-they have a course to train their own people. Tox 101. After EPA’s presentations I have less comfort in the science. |
| This was the first PREP course that I have attended, so I don’t really have any other course to compare to. |
| There are always small adjustments (see evals.) I was extremely happy with this PREP. It was the 1st offering, yet still was a great success. |
| "Writing" exercises, esp. "6th grade level." |
| Add a presentation on communicating risk through graphics. Including for conveying messages to multi-lingual audience. The agenda invested more time in A. Chun’s presentations than on other speakers. Recommend integrate his specific concepts (eg. Coke) into other components such as the scenarios on day two. Have the scenario presenters identify where they incorporated COKE, etc. Add a segment to develop a paragraph or two to communicate risk or have a couple to edit. Balance scenario exercises, one verbal, one writing. |
| The course, overall, was well formulated and well presented. The role-playing at the end was of limited use. The role-playing on day 1 was much better. The entire class got to see the whole presenting. Some selected groups might be better if entire class could see them. Also experts could comment. |
| Ag and C&T person-the class did not always focus on my needs, but the issues are the same. |
IF THIS COURSE WAS TO BE HELD AGAIN IN THE FUTURE, CAN YOU SUGGEST FACULTY WHO COULD SUBSTANTIALLY IMPROVE THE AGENDA?
| Not specifically other than someone maybe to speak on the marketing (social marketing) aspect and how to do that better. |
| Bring in a leading environmental reporter/editor. |
| Alvin Chun is a must have! |
| Peter Sandman/Vincent Covello-expensive but great at explaining public perceives risk. |
| Alvin was great, should be included if this is a repeat course. |
| Al Rothstein of Media Services Inc. to present working with the media. |
| More time spent on risk assessment info-we really could have gone more in depth-that may have been a good opportunity for breakouts. |
| I saw a presentation from a social scientist with Forest Service. She talked about changing behaviors in relation to forest fires and protecting homes. Very interesting on how ID behaviors and tailor message. Can’t recall her name right now. |
| I personally do not have a lot of info in this area. I would definitely recommend Alvin Chun again to start off…he was a great lead in to the other sections. |
| Dr. Dan Sudakin (OSU-NPIC)-What can biomonitoring, NHANES, etc. tell us? Someone to talk about PDP, tolerance (are they health-based.) Someone to talk about MCLs-how are they set? What about chemicals for which no MCL exists? How to evaluate them when they’re found in water. USGS health-based criteria will be coming out soon. How/should they be used? Environmental literacy: what do most citizens know about common terms and concepts? How do prevent death by lecture-any recommended. |
| Somebody like Wayne Surles to talk about industry’s perspective in product registration-also an environmental person to talk about their perspective. |
| I’ll think about it-seems like Labelle would give a great Tox 101 course. |
| Would like to hear a speaker who actively supports the precautionary principle. This would have made for a more well-rounded presentation. Have you considered a speaker on social marketing? Or a PR specialist? |
| Speakers like those on the last day and Mr. Chun’s and Glenn Brank should be used. We need to learn and how to communicate, and this course can teach it. You can then do the course again. |
| Tox 101. |
| More role-playing. TV/media writer. Env. Group why don’t they get the correct info. |
| Not off the top of my head. |
| I think working in an Ag agency is difficult when it comes to risk communication, so I think that the faculty did a good job. |
| The right people were here and they did a great job. Perhaps the NPIC specialists to help at the breakouts and other training. |
| My original comments on Jack Housenger’s presentation still only applied and the 1st presentation, he did well on his second presentations. Let a state toxicologist who’s experienced in this present with an SLA expert available for question (panel discussions?) Labelle Hicks could present. |
| I recommend Larry Swain of Michigan, an energetic speaker, who can inspire people on outreach/communications. |
| Would like to hear more about Alvin. He was excellent. Also risk ethics could have been expanded. |
| We had a speaker at the Madison National C&T meeting in 2005, she spoke on proactive advertising. She was very good, think her last name was Lee. |
| Course idea-program measurement, how to-consult program measurements for state pesticide programs-what EPA or (OMD) wants and how to collect them. |
ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS?
| Hopefully this will be one of the repeated PREP topics. Other Risk Comm training is available but none specific to our needs in pesticides and the learning in this course was good I think because we were able to relate everything to the pesticide risk aspect. |
| I could definitely see some of this as relevant to inspectors in a PIRT course since they often deal directly with the public. Thanks again to UC Davis and the PREP organizers for a well organized course. Always a professional workshop! |
| Case studies (real life) are valuable –a bit more free time would be nice –the field trip was super and very relevant to the course content. |
| I was very surprised at the variation of knowledge and roles among the agencies. We do everything, and have made it our business to become "expert" on many aspects of pesticides. I actually want less on Tox 101 - that is another PREP. |
| I would copy slides 2 per page rather than 3 per page to increase legibility. |
| Good course, but certain presentations did not either 1) provide guidance on risk communication or 2) provide the basis of risk communication, thus I questioned the inclusion of them. |
| Suzanne and crew did another fabulous job!!! Great going. |
| The ecological risk assessment presentation was beneficial, lots of information of 24(c) registration. |
| Another well-planned PREP. |
| We also could have utilized participant experience more. The response about the cancer questions at the end/having Labelle talk-was awesome. |
| Pre-PREP weigh in and weigh out. Excellent food, excellent facility!! I really enjoyed meeting staff from other states. If you do a specific public info course-include a section (possibly) on how web sites and preparing material for the web. I’m going to recommend that our new pesticide specialist attend this course. |
| This was an excellent course and something I can definitely apply in the day to day communications with public ass well as colleagues. It’s always a bonus to be able to meet with other SLAs. |
| Great food and accommodations! You have built a great culture for learning-it’s welcoming and comfortable. Even though it should be intimidating with these wonderful people, it’s not. Good job. |
| Comments on the Blue Cross Video-Before the introductory anecdotes a preface to explain that these are opinions, not facts. Fix the errors of fact-synergy, "label" doesn’t address chronic effects, one exposure causes cancer. |
| I really appreciate the opportunity to participate in this course-to learn useful things to keep in mind (COKE!) and to interact with my counterparts in the states and regions. Let me know if I can help with this class in the future. |
| Still think there’s a need for a pesticides 101 PREP course. Though the role playing was very useful. It’s really very helpful to hear state perspective and issues. Next time you might want to include Superfund community relations expert in the planning committee. They have tons of experience in risk communication. |
| Need more media expects and relations. Have more small group exercises to utilize. Could do a film and shoot and reply the person on a TV. The cancer thing on day 5 could have been replaced by another exercise. It did nothing for me. |
| PREP is very useful, informative program, helps a lot with networking. |
| UC Davis people-great support. Meeting room, accommodations, lunch. Thanks! More risk ethics-need a framework to see how all this stuff fits in. Great sources of info-web sites-examples. Outside speakers-excellent! |
| We covered most of these ideas on Thurs. afternoon. |
| I think that course touched every of the issues that we come into contact on a daily basis. |
| Great job to all especially John, Suzanne, Amy, and all the OPP staff. Thank you! |
| Labelle’s cancer discussion was great, see above. More focus on training? But group maybe to huge for "media communicate" on video. |
| Risk communication and education are a 2-way street. We need to educate, but the public needs to educate itself availing itself of our materials and really reading them, it would be interesting to hear about what the public need from a member of the public. Tough to do, I know. But, we heard many time this week that we need to do x, y, z to communicate with the public, but then we hear "we have no way to measure results/effectiveness of all communications." So, how do we know were teaching the correct things about how to communicate? The vector control visit was very interesting. I’m not sure how to address this, but there was a significant difference between how some agencies responsibilities compare to others and this affects how individual attending do their job. Thank You! Perhaps a general announcement can be made to introduce the class in general, so this is more easily recognized and make people feel more comfortable about the mix of attendees. One final suggestion-How about an event after class where people can interact that is not based on happy hour? A hike? The area seems full of natural resources. Perhaps an option not everyone will do, for those who want to take part. |
| Some way to bring out the "quiet people" would be helpful to hear their story and voice. Would recommend that this course be repeated in the future. |
| Staff did a great job (as usual.) Thank them. Room was a little cool. Would like to see end time on Thursday moved up so could leave for home late Thursday flight back to East Coast. Take all day Friday-Friday evening it would be nice for many to be able to make the 8-10 departing Thursday evening to arrive on Friday AM instead of leaving for the airport at 4:00AM to catch a 6:00 flight. I agree the graduation dinner is nice and but it is a long week and when class is over at 4:30-5, I am really ready to head home. Thanks for everything, keep up the good work. |