Fall Training
November 14, 2003
Please click here for evaluation charts
OVERALL COMMENTS
1. Information gained will definitely affect programming. Received some good information and tools. David Garvin is an excellent speaker. Two previous batterers were very helping in understanding abusive behavior and work that needs to be done to change attitudes and behaviors.
2. I felt that the training was focused – like a sales pitch for ADA rather than presenting the steps of the program. There were many good points to presenters. I thought the presenters did a great job presenting the difference between batterers and intervention services and anger management.
3. David is an excellent speaker and knows the dynamics of domestic violence and is clear when he explains topics.
4. David is an excellent speaker – kept my interest; humorous. Presented viewpoints from the ADA program – excellent slide and visuals. Like Jeff’s SDR Plan – hope to implement it in groups.
5. This was an incredible learning experience. This works applies to educating/informing survivors and working with batterers. Thank you!
6. Information not very clear. Jeffrie Cape’s information was very good and well presented.
7. Excellent power point. I would have liked a copy to take notes on.
8. Excellent Seminar!
9. Thank you for being so open and sharing your ideas. Congratulations on getting manual put together.
10. Pro-active!
11. Great topic – felt it could have been more in depth for example: accountability plan. Seems great, but still unsure how I can utilize it.
12. The training was informative and I’ve come away with techniques and tools I can utilize.
13. Presenters were excellent, however, not enough emphasis on the need for anger management classes, as well as, batterers counseling classes. Course material did not necessitate the length of the training, more material was needed.
14. Daniel was very powerful!! Having "real life" stories makes whole presentation more effective.
15. Brochure directions not accurate (from Detroit). Map on brochure. Panel discussion very helpful/informative.
16. Very Informative.
17. Very informative and reinforces our position and intervention.
18. Overall excellent training. I enjoyed the 2nd part more than the 1st as it gave me useable information for group. The 1st part, however, was a good foundation.
19. Keep up the good work!
20. I feel that the testimonies along with the information shared by the speakers have been very helpful.
21. David’s always a pleasure to listen to. The training was great but the facility was poor.
22. I liked the presenter. The ideas are very sound although pretty elementary for a group like this. Next time focus should be more on intermediate/advanced skills training and research.
23. Acquired some helpful tools.
24. Mr. Garvin’s information was excellent, but he is monitored and that creates a problem. Please try to be more animated to grab the audience and retain their attention. Keep up the good work.
25. Cold uncomfortable chairs, hard to hear and see. Otherwise subject was wonderful!
26. I found this information quite informative. It was definitely time
well spent. Also David Garvin is quite an excellent speaker.
Thank you – keep up the good work for us all.
28. David is very knowledgeable and inspires me to want to do better. He is very humane and approachable. I think he and Jeffrie are very knowledgeable and I appreciate their caring!
29. Glad we finally had this as a full topic. Needs to be done again and again, especially in front of lawyers and prosecutors, judges and probation officers and the general public. Good job – Lori and Jeff too. Kevin and Bill to. Special thanks for their courage to speak honestly.
30. This was a "workable seminar". Many things to take back and use. Thanks!
31. Information was informative and beneficial.
32. David Garvin’s presentation was very insightful.
33. This was mostly all new to me. Good presentation both by presenters and information very helpful.
34. It was a well-balanced conference. I liked the presenters and the two volunteers from the program.
NEGATIVE COMMENTS
1. I do not feel the training was beneficial. It did not distinguish the difference between anger management and domestic violence. More could have been discussed.
2. I’m on the fence. SDR sounds like anger management to me, not exclusively D.V./Battering situation. The panel themselves reported how important SDR was in their treatment for D.V. – Conflicting arguments for the same program it seems. Better location and catering. Knowing that location and catering were not the most important aspects of today, it speaks for BISC-MI for those who are not members and potential recruits.
3. There was no clear definition between when anger management is appropriate vs. Batterers intervention. Session should end at 3:00 p.m. Room too cold.
4. The room was cold most of the day.
5. Okay presentation but rigid in defining terms. Exclusionary attitude towards programs that accomplish the same thing using different terminology. Rejection of certain concepts (time-outs, buttons, etc. therapy), based on flawed definitions of those concepts represents abuse of the English language. Please forgive me if I’m being too negative.
6. Chairs were hard on old bones.