16th Symposium on Child Custody: Workshop 2 Evaluation

One Court’s Thoughtful Approach to Problematic Parenting

This workshop will explore programs to help parents work through disputes and to build stronger families. Through a multi-disciplinary approach, the Summit County Domestic Relations Court designed programs for parents to better understand the issues they are facing. Discussion includes details about the Working Together Program, the resources through family court Services with focus on evaluations regarding allocation of parental rights and responsibilities and Family Recovery Court.

Question Title

* 1. Based on the content of this session, I am able to (1=Strongly disagree, 5=Strongly agree):

	1	2	3	4	5
1. Review court programs to address the best interest of the child and to help strength parenting relationships for a positive impact on the child’s well-being.	1. Review court programs to address the best interest of the child and to help strength parenting relationships for a positive impact on the child’s well-being. 1	1. Review court programs to address the best interest of the child and to help strength parenting relationships for a positive impact on the child’s well-being. 2	1. Review court programs to address the best interest of the child and to help strength parenting relationships for a positive impact on the child’s well-being. 3	1. Review court programs to address the best interest of the child and to help strength parenting relationships for a positive impact on the child’s well-being. 4	1. Review court programs to address the best interest of the child and to help strength parenting relationships for a positive impact on the child’s well-being. 5
2. Identify how other courts and family law professionals can implement these court programs in their jurisdictions.	2. Identify how other courts and family law professionals can implement these court programs in their jurisdictions. 1	2. Identify how other courts and family law professionals can implement these court programs in their jurisdictions. 2	2. Identify how other courts and family law professionals can implement these court programs in their jurisdictions. 3	2. Identify how other courts and family law professionals can implement these court programs in their jurisdictions. 4	2. Identify how other courts and family law professionals can implement these court programs in their jurisdictions. 5

Question Title

* 2. Please rate presenter: Hon. Katarina V. Cook (1=Poor, 5=Excellent)

	1	2	3	4	5
Level of knowledge and expertise	Level of knowledge and expertise 1	Level of knowledge and expertise 2	Level of knowledge and expertise 3	Level of knowledge and expertise 4	Level of knowledge and expertise 5
Teaching ability	Teaching ability 1	Teaching ability 2	Teaching ability 3	Teaching ability 4	Teaching ability 5
Maintained my interest	Maintained my interest 1	Maintained my interest 2	Maintained my interest 3	Maintained my interest 4	Maintained my interest 5
Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions	Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions 1	Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions 2	Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions 3	Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions 4	Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions 5

Question Title

* 3. Please rate presenter: Magistrate Julie Mitrovich King (1=Poor, 5=Excellent)

	1	2	3	4	5
Level of knowledge and expertise	Level of knowledge and expertise 1	Level of knowledge and expertise 2	Level of knowledge and expertise 3	Level of knowledge and expertise 4	Level of knowledge and expertise 5
Teaching ability	Teaching ability 1	Teaching ability 2	Teaching ability 3	Teaching ability 4	Teaching ability 5
Maintained my interest	Maintained my interest 1	Maintained my interest 2	Maintained my interest 3	Maintained my interest 4	Maintained my interest 5
Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions	Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions 1	Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions 2	Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions 3	Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions 4	Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions 5

Question Title

* 4. The content of the presentation was consistent with the abstract in the symposium brochure

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

16th Symposium on Child Custody: Workshop 2 Evaluation

Question Title

* 1. Based on the content of this session, I am able to (1=Strongly disagree, 5=Strongly agree):

Question Title

* 2. Please rate presenter: Hon. Katarina V. Cook (1=Poor, 5=Excellent)

Question Title

* 3. Please rate presenter: Magistrate Julie Mitrovich King (1=Poor, 5=Excellent)

Question Title

* 4. The content of the presentation was consistent with the abstract in the symposium brochure

Question Title

* 5. Please rate this session presentation overall (1=Poor, 5=Excellent)

Question Title

* 6. How much did you learn as a result of this CE program? (1=Very little, 5=Great deal)

Question Title

* 7. Information presented in this session reflected the most current evidence on this topic (1=Disagree, 5=Agree)

Question Title

* 8. How useful was the content of this CE program for your practice or other professional development (1=Not useful, 5=Extremely useful)

Question Title

* 9. Additional Comments