The activity was made for nurses and nursing attendants of Western Visayas

Medical Center. There are 100 participants in the said program. This was conducted
in Western Visayas Medical Center Rooftop Conference room. This is a second level
learning evaluation which is geared towards skill building. To further augment
lectures and the knowledge discussed during the said training program, return
demonstration activities were also conducted. Second level evaluation would like to
measure the specific skills learned on the said training program. The following are
the results gained from the evaluation tool used and was complied by the
participants. A rating scale of 1 to 5 was used where 1 means the lowest score
possible and 5 as the highest score possible.
QUESTIONS:
1. Did this activity meet its objectives?
Out of 100 participants, 52% of the participants gave a rating of 5,
meaning the objectives were fully met, 46% gave a rating of 4,
meaning the objectives were mostly met and the remaining 2% gave
the rating of 3, meaning the objectives were halfway met.
2. All topics and its content were relevant and useful to your work?
Out of 100 participants, 62% of the participants gave a rating of 5,
meaning the topics were mostly relevant, 34% gave a rating of 4,
meaning the topics were very relevant and the remaining 4% gave the
rating of 3, meaning the topics were relevant.
3. Does the methodology used by the resource speakers appropriate that it
facilitated learning to the audience?
Out of 100 participants, 49% of the participants gave a rating of 5,
meaning the methodology was mostly appropriate, 41% gave a rating
of 4, meaning the methodology was very appropriate and the
remaining 10% gave the rating of 3, meaning the methodology was
appropriate.
4. Were the visual aids utilized by the Resource Speakers useful in his /her
delivery of topics?
Out of 100 participants, 56% of the participants gave a rating of 5,
meaning the visual aids are mostly useful, 33% gave a rating of 4,
meaning the visual aids were very useful and the remaining 11% gave
the rating of 3, meaning the visual aids were useful.
5. Did the facilitators perform their functions in support for the activity,
participants and Resource Speaker?
Out of 100 participants, 54% of the participants gave a rating of 5,
meaning the facilitators had an excellent performance, 40% gave a
rating of 4, meaning the facilitators had a very good performance and
the remaining 6% gave the rating of 3, meaning the facilitators had a
good performance.
6. Was the venue conducive for the activity conducted?
Out of 100 participants, 54% of the participants gave a rating of 5,
meaning the venue was excellent, 41% gave a rating of 4, meaning the
venue was very good and the remaining 5% gave the rating of 3,
meaning the venue was good.
7. Was the food served conformed with your dietary needs?

Out of 100 participants, 40% of the participants gave a rating of 5,

meaning the food served was excellent, 48% gave a rating of 4,
meaning the food served was very good and the remaining 12% gave
the rating of 3, meaning the food was good.