FDIM Questionnaire Analysis (long)


From: Robert J. Gobrick (rgobrick@worldnet.att.net)
Date: Sun Jun 01 1997 - 19:13:57 EDT

QRP-L Gang and FDIM Attendees,

As promised, the FDIM gang (Bruce W6TOY, Bob AB7ST, Preston WJ2V and Bob
N0EB) is posting the following summary from the Questionnaire handed out to
the 130+ attendees of the FDIM QRP Symposium. As Bob Follett AB7ST said
"send compliments to the FDIM team but send "complaints" to Bob (actually I
added the last part - hi)

We solicited feedback from the attendees in order to make the "show" for
next year even better. This is our second year presenting the QRP
Symposium and Proceedings and it getting better every year. As I mentioned
in a previous post we are attracting some of the most talented QRPers in
our hobby to write technical papers and make presentations. As all
attendees can attest - the speakers we had last year and this year were
just great. We hope to continue that tradition next year.

Next year we are going to be working on some new ideas for the QRP
Symposium. I'd like to see some papers that would allow for a 2 hour
tutorial on a subject like receiver design etc. In general, most of the
talks will be less than an hour with a Q&A session included. Let us know
what you think of the 2 hour tutorial idea.

Also the QRP Symposium team of FDIM will be looking at spinning off the
Vendors evening which was started by Bruce Preston of the FDIM team. QRP
ARCI, the FDIM sponsor, will be reviewing that program for next year.

Finally, Bob Follett AB7ST (by the way Bob is our Executive Administrator -
we thought that was a good title) will be shortly submitting to the
attendees and QRP-L a financial statement for the QRP Symposium. The word
is we have kept our heads above water once again (albeit with some last
minute printing increases).

Thanks All and we will be soliciting your comments for next year's QRP

73/72 Bob N0EB - FDIM Publicity Chairperson

  Four Days In May QRP Symposium – Questionnaire Summary


The feed back questionnaire asked eight questions, with some
sub-questions with replies in narrative
format. 100 forms were handed out, and 55 were returned.
Thus, this analysis only represents a sampling
of attendees and only those who chose to respond.
Given the narrative nature, I have attempted to translate
remarks into a quantitative form, where possible.
I have also added a summery of MY qualitative
conclusions in an attempt to capture the 'Flavor" of
the overall responses.

QUESTION 1: "How was the second Annual FDIM Symposium?"

No response: 6 Good: 16 Very Good: 19 Super: 14

QUESTION 2: "Were the QRP topics of interest to you? Suggestions for next
year? More technical/Less Technical? Antennas? Rigs? Operating?" (Broken into

Were the QRP topics of interest to you? Single Yes: 11 No: 0

Technical level of presentations: Right Mix: 18 Less Technical: 4 More
Technical: 14

Like more emphasis on: Antennas: 19 Rigs: 19 Operating: 16

Specific comments or suggestions for next year:
"Less computer stuff", "More design and construction", "Skip the computer
stuff", "more technical would be better", "troubleshooting", 'talk by
experienced backpack qrp'er" , (3responses) "More Rev. Dobbs",
"More equipment design", "more technical, rigs", "Using tuners,
Baluns/broadband xformers, Understanding transistor specs.", "More
technical, antennas, rigs", "Some CW games, i.e., CW
bingo/crossword, or CW speed in multi-choice format – with
prizes at banquet", "filter design a bit deep
for me", "more rigs", "more operating and antenna related",
"samples of homebuilt (not kit) rigs", "Talk on
operating in foreign countries, how to HB keys, operating tips", foxhunting
techniques", "More practical – less math", "AV presentation on identifying
non-ham sounds in the HF spectrum", "more antennas and

AB7ST Comments: This question drew the most diverse set of responses, as one
would expect. While most felt the technical and non-technical mix for the
group was about right, there is a significant minority
who would prefer ALL technical—but not necessarily "More Technical" in terms
of difficulty. Several felt any computer related topics were not appropriate.

QUESTION 3: "Use of Audio/Visual aides…"

Poor: 5 OK: 41 Great: 1

Suggestions/comments: "better miking - with cord that reaches the overhead
projector", "Brighter overhead projector", "Phone line for Internet demo"
"better boom-box".

QUESTION 4: "Were the talks long enough?"

Too Long: 4 OK: 48 Too Short: 1

AB7ST Comments: Almost unanimous that the overall talk length was correct.
However, several people suggested that some talks should be longer, and
some shorter – don't be arbitrary. In particular, several
would like Rev. Dobbs to talk longer.

QUESTION 5: "Enough time for Breaks, Lunch, How was Lunch?"

Single Yes response: 21 Breaks: 30 Lunch: 30 Lunch quality: Poor: 2
OK: 15 Good: 17

AB7ST Comments: Almost unanimous that break length was correct. A few people
felt we should bring in our own food. However, it should be noted that our
contract with the hotel precludes us from bringing food into a meeting room.

QUESTION 6: "How was the printed Proceedings? Want one next year?

Single Yes response: 21 Printed Proceedings: 27 Want one next year: 27

Comments: Several: "We need page numbers", "print quality was lacking on
several pages"

AB7ST comments: No one stated they didn't want the proceedings.

QUESTION 7: "Is a QRP book as part of your registration fee of value to you?
Would you prefer to see a lower registration fee w/o a book?"

Single Yes response: 15 Single No response: 11 Book of value?: 10 Lower
fee w/o book - Yes: 1 No: 14

Comments: "As long as there is a NEW book available"

AB7ST comments: While the book giveaway is in favor, there is a significant
minority that don't want it included. My suggestion: Do it in the future
only if there is a new publication available that would attract
wide interest – otherwise, forget it.

QUESTION 8: (Paraphrasing) "Talks were to be non-commercial in nature –
Continue this way? Or would you prefer presentations where brand names
and competitor names are referenced?"

Leave as/is: 14 Don't Care: 5 References OK, but not crass commercial
presentations: 22 Commercial presentations: 10

AB7ST Comments: There were several narrative replies, but rather than quote,
I will paraphrase: a significant minority would like it as-is. A small
majority would like either commercial references or full-
blown commercial presentations. I would estimate the bulk of the respondents
would be most satisfied by changing the speaker rules to allow commercial
comparisons or references, but forbid crass commercial pitches.

Scoring, interpretations and translations of responses solely the
responsibility of Bob Follett – AB7ST
FDIM Administration Chair
73, Bob

PS: Profit & Loss statement next week

Bob Follett AB7ST, QRP-L # 129, NorCal, ARCI, 10-10, ARS
2861 Estates Dr. VOICE: 801.649.6457
Park City, UT 84060 E-mail: bfollett@ditell.com

| |
| Bob Gobrick - N0EB & VO1DRB (ex WA6ERB, VE2DRB) Stillwater, MN |
| Internet: rgob@tco.infonet.com |
| AND Internet: rgobrick@worldnet.att.com |

Search QRP-L Archives

[ QRP-L Archive | ]
[ 1993 | 1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | 1999 | 2000 ]


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 on Fri Jun 02 2000 - 11:33:47 EDT