1. EVALUATION RESULTS March 14 and 15, 2012 - New York, New York

2. Who Responded? Overall Summit Evaluation Evaluation of Sessions Evaluation of Logistics and Support Evaluation Comments 2 Contents

3. WHO RESPONDED? 3

4. 4 Who Responded? Definitions: Participants: Country and sponsor teams engaged in dialogue at the center table Attendees: Invited guests in audience observing dialogue and participating in Q&A

5. OVERALL SUMMIT EVALUATION 5

6. The summit as a whole was useful. I am glad I attended. 6 Average ScoreRespondent Totals Participants: 4.4Participants: 47 Attendees:4.4Attendees: 89 All:4.4All:136 (5 = Strongly Agree, 1= Strongly Disagree)

7. 7 Average ScoreRespondent Totals Participants: 4.1Participants: 47 Attendees:4.2Attendees: 89 All:4.1All: 136 I learned about policies and practices that will help me when I return home. (5 = Strongly Agree, 1= Strongly Disagree)

8. I made valuable professional connections. 8 Average ScoreRespondent Totals: Participants:4.2Participants: 47 Attendees:4.1Attendees: 89 All:4.1All:136 (5 = Strongly Agree, 1= Strongly Disagree)

9. The OECD background paper was informative and will serve as a useful tool as I continue this work. 9 Average ScoreRespondent Totals Participants:4.5Participant: 47 Attendees:4.3Attendees: 89 All:4.4All: 136 (5 = Strongly Agree, 1= Strongly Disagree)

10. The meeting logistics and pre-meeting communications were effective. 10 Average ScoreRespondent Totals Participants:4.3Participants: 47 Attendees:4.2Attendees: 89 All: 4.2All: 136 (5 = Strongly Agree, 1= Strongly Disagree)

11. EVALUATION OF SESSIONS 11

12. Quality, relevance and usefulness of the Framing the Issues session 12 Average ScoreRespondent Totals Participants:4.5Participants: 43 Attendees:4.7Attendees: 83 All:4.6All: 126 (5 = Excellent, 1= Poor)

13. Quality, relevance and usefulness of Session 1: Developing School Leaders 13 Average ScoreRespondent Totals Participants:4.2Participants: 45 Attendees:4.1Attendees: 86 All:4.1All: 131 (5 = Excellent, 1= Poor)

14. Quality, relevance and usefulness of Session 2: Preparing Teachers: Delivery of 21 st Century Skills 14 Average ScoreRespondent Totals Participants:4.2Participants: 45 Attendees:4.2Attendees: 86 All:4.2All: 131 (5 = Excellent, 1= Poor)

15. Quality, relevance and usefulness of Session 3: Preparing Teachers: Matching Supply and Demand 15 Average ScoreRespondent Totals Participants:4.2Participants: 43 Attendees:4.3Attendees: 78 All: 4.2All: 121 (5 = Excellent, 1= Poor)

16. Session Format Part I – International examples 16 Average Score Respondent Totals Participants:4.4Participants:44 Attendees:4.4Attendees: 88 All:4.4All: 132 Average Score Respondent Totals Participant: 4.1Participants: 44 Attendee: 4.2Attendees: 88 All: 4.2All: 132 Please indicate your level of satisfaction with the format of the sessions. (5 = Excellent, 1= Poor) Session Format Part II – International participant discussion

17. Please indicate your level of satisfaction with the format of the sessions 17 Session Format Part III – attendee/observer Q&A (5 = Excellent, 1= Poor) Average ScoreRespondent Totals Participants:3.8Participants: 45 Attendees:4.0Attendees: 87 All:3.9All: 132

18. Ministers’ Lunch 18 (5 = Excellent, 1= Poor) Average Score: 4.5Respondent Totals: 12

19. Union Leaders’ Lunch 19 (5 = Excellent, 1= Poor) Average Score: 3.2Respondent Totals: 33

20. Lunch Discussions (Attendees and other country participants) 20 (5 = Excellent, 1= Poor) Average Score: 3.9Respondent Totals: 81

21. Country Group Meetings 21 (5 = Excellent, 1= Poor) Average Score: 4.2Respondent Totals: 46

22. Quality, relevance and usefulness of the Closing Session: What Have We Learned? Where Do We Go From Here? 22 Average ScoreRespondent Totals Participants:4.4Participants: 39 Attendees: 4.5Attendees: 63 All: 4.4All: 102 (5 = Excellent, 1= Poor)

23. EVALUATION OF LOGISTICS & SUPPORT 23

24. Travel and hotel information was clear and timely 24 Average ScoreRespondent Totals Participants:4.5Participants: 43 Attendees:4.6Attendees: 82 All: 4.6All: 125 (5 = Strongly Agree, 1= Strongly Disagree)

25. Hilton NY was an effective setting for the summit 25 Average ScoreRespondent Totals Participants:4.5Participants: 44 Attendees:4.5Attendees: 88 All:4.5All: 132 (5 = Strongly Agree, 1= Strongly Disagree)

26. My questions and concerns were addressed in a timely and complete manner 26 Average ScoreRespondent Totals Participants: 4.6Participants: 38 Attendees:4.6Attendees: 63 All: 4.6All: 101 (5 = Strongly Agree, 1= Strongly Disagree)

27. EVALUATION COMMENTS 27

28. 28 Comments on 2012 Excellent facilitator, framer and rapporteurs. It was helpful to receive the OECD background report ahead of time. The agenda was clear--not too ambitious and very high quality. The audience lunch discussion was excellent. People were engaged and made valuable connections. The Ministers' lunch was a great addition to the agenda, and I liked the time for each country group to discuss what they learned and their top priority going forward. 90 second closing presentations were focused and clear, aimed at actionable statements. Not enough specific "tie-back" to last year and what each nation has done since the 2011 Summit.

29. 29 Suggestions for 2013 If possible, have more exchange prior to the event, for example, make country background material available in advance. Start the 2013 Summit with country reports on progress made since 2012. Spend more time discussing how to implement successful practices. Find a way to bring more depth to the discussions. Plan organized networking so more delegates meet each other. Arrange meeting so observers can see the speakers better. Use technology to gather questions from the audience. Have more follow-on discussion after the Summit, perhaps online. The Summit just whetted the appetite!

30. Prepared by the U.S. Department of Education