Survey on online BCH forums (11/2008 - 2/2009)

In March 2009 an appreciation survey was conducted among the participants to the two forums and what follows is a synthesis of the main results of the survey. The Secretariat wishes to thank all the participants to the survey for their helpful cooperation.

*Note: The Ranking is calculated on the basis of an arbitrary scale as follows: Poor (0-25%), Fair (25-50%), Good (50-75%) and Very Good (75-100%).

Total number of respondents: 50 (17% of the forums' participants)

Access to the online event(s):

1. Which online event did you participate in?	Respondents	%
- On line Forum on Capacity Building / Conference on Risk Assessment	17	34%
- On line Forum on Capacity Building / Conference on Biosafety Mainstreaming	10	20%
- Open-ended Online Expert Forum on Risk Assessment and Risk Management / Discussion groups	20	40%
- Open-ended Online Expert Forum on Risk Assessment and Risk Management / Real-time Conference	34	68%
2. How would you rate the information you received prior to the on line event(s) you participated in?	Respondents	Ranking*
- Very good	22
- Good	24	Good
- Fair	2	(73%)
- Poor	0
3. Did you experience any problem(s) in the registration process?	Respondents	%
- Yes	15	30%
- No	35	70%
4. If yes, which problem(s)?
Main problems indicated included: Poor internet connectivity - Password problems - Lack of clear indications on the website - Multiple BCH accounts - Difficulties in filling the Expert form requested by MOP.

Discussion groups:

5. How would you rate the following:	Respondents	Ranking*
a. The usefulness of the ‘Introduction’ to each topic?
- Very good	14
- Good	25	Good
- Fair	3	(69%)
- Poor	0
b. The usefulness of the ‘Questions’ or the ‘Suggested points for discussion’?
- Very good	15
- Good	22	Good
- Fair	5	(68%)
- Poor	0
c. The usefulness of the ‘Selected readings’?
- Very good	8
- Good	25	Good
- Fair	6	(64%)
- Poor	0
d. The ease of accessing the different topics in the discussion groups?
- Very good	14
- Good	24	Good
- Fair	1	(71%)
- Poor	0
e. The ease of accessing the different topics in the discussion groups?
- Very good	10
- Good	28	Good
- Fair	2	(66%)
- Poor	1
f. The ease of creating new threads in the discussion groups?
- Very good	9
- Good	23	Good
- Fair	5	(64%)
- Poor	1
g. The ease of replying to the postings of other participants in the discussion groups?
- Very good	14
- Good	21	Good
- Fair	5	(67%)
- Poor	1
h. The overall user-friendliness of the online discussion groups?
- Very good	12
- Good	24	Good
- Fair	2	(68%)
- Poor	1
6. Did you prefer reading and/or submitting postings through the Web or via email?	Respondents	%
- Web	28	64%
- E-mail	16	36%

Real-time Conferences

7. Did you experience any problems accessing the real-time online conference?	Respondents	%
- Yes	9	23%
- No	30	77%
8. If yes, could you please provide the following information?	Respondents	%
a. Which operating system were you using?
- Vista	4	15%
- Windows XP	17	65%
- Windows NT	1	4%
- Other Windows OS	0	-
- Mac OS X	4	15%
- Unix / Linux	0	-
- Other	0	-
b. Which Internet browser were you using?
- Internet Explorer	14	45%
- Mozilla / Firefox	12	39%
- Apple Safari	2	6%
- Google Chrome	2	6%
- Other	1	3%
c. Was Silverlight already installed on your computer?
- Yes	13	39%
- No	16	48%
- I don’t know	4	12%
d. Please provide the details of the problem you experienced.
Main problems indicated included: Poor network, internet connectivity or technical problems on the client side - Password problems - Silverlight installation - Different time zones.
9. How would you rate the following:	Respondents	Ranking*
a. The ease of reading the interventions of other participants in the real-time conference?
- Very good	20
- Good	16	Good
- Fair	3	(73%)
- Poor	0
b. The ease of posting your interventions in the real-time conference?
- Very good	18
- Good	13	Good
- Fair	4	(69%)
- Poor	2
c. The overall user-friendliness of the real-time conference platform?
- Very good	20
- Good	15	Good
- Fair	3	(74%)
- Poor	0
10. Did you use the ‘Help Desk’?	Respondents	%
- Yes	8	20%
- No	32	80%
11. If yes, how would you rate the ‘Help Desk’ function?	Respondents	Ranking*
- Very good	4
- Good	5	Good
- Fair	0	(74%)
- Poor	0

Additional comments

Main additional comments included: Praises for the ease of using the system - Praises for the useful opportunity offered by the events - Complaints about difficulties in the registration process - Requests for extending the period of online discussions - Requests for similar events in the future - Considerations about the time needed for preparing to the online events - Suggestions for more focused topics in future conferences - Requests for more guidance (questions) in future similar events - Requests for technical guidance in the use of the real-time platform - Requests for making the real-time platform available to national and regional biosafety needs.