Results of the Evaluation

All the participants received a link to an electronic evaluation after the 25th Florence Network Annual Meeting in Switzerland. 59 persons filled out the evaluation questionnaire, which corresponds to approximately one third of the participants.

Regarding the function, 37.3 % of the respondents are students, 18.6 % lecturers, 3.4% exchange coordinators, 1.7% deans, 33.9% FL-ECOS and 5.1% have other functions. 83.1% of the 59 respondents are from nursing and 16.9% from midwifery.

The survey participants had to answer 9 questions on a 4-point Likert Scale and 7 questions on a 5-point Likert Scale (e.g. “Your overall impression of the 2017 Florence Network Annual Meeting in Switzerland”: “Very bad / bad / okay / good / very good”).

Concerning the quality of the scientific programme like keynote speeches, workshops, study visits, poster session or marketplace, the results of the evaluation illustrate that the respondents were very satisfied. Especially the participants were interested in the study visits in the different health institutions, where they could have an insight in the Swiss health care system.

An important goal of the Florence Network is the cooperation between nursing and midwifery in higher education and the facilitation of exchange programmes for students and lecturers. The results of the evaluation show that the participants have got new information about the other FNAM member institutions and that they had enough time for networking and FL-ECO meetings.

Regarding the meals, refreshments, music, accommodation and social trip, the participants were very satisfied and answered most often with “good” or “very good/excellent”. They liked mostly the social trip to Thun and Beatus Caves (61.1% answered with “excellent”). 

Furthermore, the results indicate that the information prior to the meeting was very good and most of the respondents had a very good overall impression of the FNAM 2017.

Individual feedbacks

Individual feedbacks from the respondents show that the programme was very dense and that the schedule could be stretched a little bit. Some feedbacks show also that there was little time for informal networking. 

See the PDF