*In the spring 2019 evaluation, this question was worded “What is
your overall evaluation of the instructor: excellent (5) |
above average (4) | average (3) | below average (2)
| poor (1)” while in the Spring 2020 evaluation, this question
was worded “Please indicate the overall teaching effectiveness of the
instructor: excellent (5) | very good (4) |
satisfactory (3) | fair (2) | poor (1)”
**In the spring 2019 evaluation, this question was worded “What
is your overall evaluation of the course: excellent (5) | above
average (4) | average (3) | below average (2)
| poor (1)” while in the Spring 2020 evaluation, this question
was worded “Please indicate the overall educational value of the
course: excellent (5) | very good (4) | satisfactory
(3) | fair (2) | poor (1)”
⇞ Percent of respondents that responded ‘satisfied’ or ‘very
satisfied’ to the prompt “Overall, how satisfied were you with the
California Naturalist course you attended? Very satisfied |
Satisfied | Somewhat Satisfied | Somewhat Unsatisfied
| Not Satisfied”
⇤Percent of respondents that responded ‘very
good’ or ‘excellent’ to the prompt “How would you rate the performance
of your lead instructor? Excellent | Very Good | Good
| Needs Improvement | Poor”
⤲ Percent of respondents that responded ‘Yes’ to the prompt “As a
California Naturalist, do you plan to volunteer in the coming year? Yes
| No”
☨Retrospective pre/post course; percent of respondents that
‘strongly agree’ they are “capable of making a positive impact on the
environment”