facilitator feedback – PRISM EVENTS NAGPUR

Facilitator Feedback Form

VESALIUS 2025 Feedback Form

Full Name

Email

Mobile Number

program evaluation form (facilitator feedback) On a scale with poor and excellent, rate the following

The overall objectives of the FDP were clearly defined and communicated.

Poor

Excellent

The content was aligned with institutional goals and faculty needs.

Poor

Excellent

The program addressed key faculty development needs (curriculum design, teaching-learning alignment, assessment, reflection).

Poor

Excellent

The blended format (online + in-person) was appropriate for achieving learning outcomes.

Poor

Excellent

Participant selection and pre-workshop expectations matched program goals.

Poor

Excellent

The pre-workshop digital resources were adequate and accessible.

Poor

Excellent

Online orientation/pre-session communication was clear and timely.

Poor

Excellent

Infrastructure and digital platform (LMS) supported learning effectively.

Poor

Excellent

Learning materials, handouts, and session plans were well-prepared and contextually appropriate.

Poor

Excellent

The physical arrangements (venue, AV setup, seating, groups with facilitator) supported active engagement.

Poor

Excellent

Division of facilitator roles and session planning was clear.

Poor

Excellent

The sessions were conducted as per schedule and learning objectives.

Poor

Excellent

The instructional design promoted active learning (groups discussions with facilitator, intermittent presentation with feedback and reflection).

Poor

Excellent

Participants engaged actively and collaborated during group activities.

Poor

Excellent

Facilitators provided timely, constructive feedback to participants.

Poor

Excellent

Reflection and debriefing sessions were effectively conducted.

Poor

Excellent

Technical or logistical issues were handled promptly and efficiently.

Poor

Excellent

Participants demonstrated better understanding of teaching-learning principles at the end of the FDP.

Poor

Excellent

Participants could design SMART learning objectives independently.

Poor

Excellent

Participants developed improved lesson or course plans aligned with assessment methods.

Poor

Excellent

Participants applied adult learning theories and instructional design models effectively.

Poor

Excellent

The FDP encouraged reflection, peer learning, and innovation in teaching.

Poor

Excellent

The program met its stated learning outcomes overall.

Poor

Excellent

Overall program rating.

Poor

Excellent

Open reflections:

What went well in this FDP

What could have been better in this FDP

Key participant outcomes / transformations observed

Challenges faced as a facilitator (included both online & offline module)

Suggestions for post – FDP follow up

Your inputs / suggestions to improve future FDP cycles