QuestionPunkQuestionPunk
무료로 시작하기
모든 템플릿

Seminar & Conference Session Evaluation Survey

Captures how attendees experienced a seminar or conference session — content quality, speaker delivery, logistics, and likelihood to return — with an AI follow-up interview that digs into the specific moment satisfaction rose or fell instead of settling for a generic rating. Built for event organizers, training teams, and association program committees.

이 템플릿 사용하기템플릿 더 둘러보기

샘플 질문

템플릿에 포함된 내용을 미리 확인해 보세요. 모든 질문은 설문 공개 전에 자유롭게 수정할 수 있습니다.

질문 12개 · 약 7분
Q01
메시지

Thanks for attending (Replace with seminar/event name)! We'd love your honest feedback to make the next one better. Your responses are completely confidential and anonymized. This will take about 5 minutes.

Q02
객관식필수

Which session or track did you attend? (Template note: replace with your actual session list before launching.)

  • Session A (Replace with title)
  • Session B (Replace with title)
  • Session C (Replace with title)
  • Attended multiple sessions
  • Full-day/general track
Q03
의견 척도필수

Overall, how satisfied were you with this seminar?

척도: 1 – 7
최소:Very dissatisfied최대:Very satisfied
Q04
매트릭스필수

Please rate the following aspects of the seminar.

5개 행 × 5개 열
  • Relevance of content to your work
  • Speaker knowledge and delivery
  • Pacing and time management
  • Venue, tech setup, and comfort
  • Quality of handouts or materials
열: Poor · Below average · Average · Good · Excellent
Q05
의견 척도필수

How likely are you to recommend this seminar to a colleague?

척도: 0 – 10
최소:Not at all likely최대:Extremely likely
Q06
최선·최악 선택형(MaxDiff)필수

Among the topics covered, which were most and least valuable to you? (Template note: swap in the actual topics covered.)

  • Topic 1 (Replace)
  • Topic 2 (Replace)
  • Topic 3 (Replace)
  • Topic 4 (Replace)
  • Topic 5 (Replace)
  • Topic 6 (Replace)
세트별 최선·최악 선택최선:Most valuable최악:Least valuable
Q07
객관식

For future sessions like this, which format would you prefer?

  • In-person only
  • Virtual only
  • Hybrid (in-person with live-stream option)
  • No preference
Q08
AI 인터뷰

Reconstruct the specific moment or aspect that drove the respondent's overall satisfaction and recommendation scores — ask what stood out most (positively or negatively) and why. If they rated the seminar highly, probe which single element they'd want repeated at the next event; if they rated it low or middling, probe exactly what fell short and what a fix would look like. Anchor on concrete details (a specific speaker moment, a logistics issue, a topic gap) rather than general impressions.

Q09
단문형

What's one change that would make the next seminar noticeably better?

Q10
객관식

How likely are you to attend a future seminar in this series?

  • Definitely will attend
  • Probably will attend
  • Not sure
  • Probably won't attend
  • Definitely won't attend
Q11
객관식

Which best describes your role or industry?

  • Individual contributor
  • People manager
  • Senior leader/executive
  • Student or academic
  • Other
  • Prefer not to say
Q12
메시지

That wraps up the survey — thank you! Your feedback goes directly into the planning report we use to shape content and logistics for the next seminar.

포함된 기능

  • AI 후속 질문

    정형화된 설문이 놓치는 세부 내용을, 주관식 답변에 맞춰 AI가 심층 질문으로 끌어냅니다.

  • 주의력 확인 장치

    성의 없는 답변과 저품질 응답자를 걸러내는 내장 안전장치입니다.

  • AI가 작성한 문안

    문구, 질문 순서, 분기 로직까지 AI가 연구 목표에 맞춰 작성합니다.

  • 자동 리포트

    응답이 모이면 주요 주제, 인용문, 이해하기 쉬운 요약이 자동으로 작성됩니다.

다른 서비스와 비교

다른 설문 도구의 가장 유사한 템플릿을 검토했습니다. 그 도구들이 잘하는 점과, 이 템플릿이 한발 더 나아가는 지점을 정리했습니다.

이 템플릿을 선택하는 이유

  • Goes beyond star ratings with an AI follow-up interview that reconstructs the specific moment attendee satisfaction rose or fell, rather than stopping at a generic score
  • Combines standard seminar metrics (overall satisfaction, likelihood to recommend, a ratings matrix on content/speaker/logistics) with a max-diff question to rank which topics were most and least valuable
  • Captures actionable, forward-looking data — preferred future formats, likelihood to attend future sessions in the series, and a short open-text ask for the one change that would improve the next event
  • Segments feedback by session/track and by attendee role or industry, so organizers and program committees can see how experience differs by audience

Jotform

Seminar Evaluation Survey Form Template

A fielding-ready static form covering standard seminar feedback fields with Jotform's drag-and-drop builder and form-app ecosystem. It relies on fixed rating and text fields with no mechanism to probe why a respondent gave a particular score. Good for quick setup and integrations, but the analysis burden falls entirely on the organizer.

잘하는 점

  • Easy drag-and-drop customization
  • Broad integration ecosystem (payments, storage, notifications)
  • Fast to deploy for basic feedback collection

아쉬운 점

  • Static questions only — no adaptive follow-up to dig into a specific moment of satisfaction or dissatisfaction
  • No per-response quality scoring or transparent prompt methodology
  • No built-in voice interview or screen-share task option

QuestionPro

Seminar Evaluation Survey Template

A conventional seminar evaluation template built on QuestionPro's enterprise survey platform, offering standard rating scales and reporting dashboards. It's designed for broad survey research use cases rather than event-specific adaptive interviewing, so it captures what attendees felt but not the specific moment behind the rating. Reporting is dashboard-based rather than automatically narrative.

잘하는 점

  • Enterprise-grade survey logic and reporting dashboards
  • Wide range of question types for general survey design
  • Established platform with broad market use

아쉬운 점

  • No AI-driven follow-up interview to reconstruct the moment behind a satisfaction score
  • No automated per-response quality scoring
  • No transparent, publishable prompt methodology for how follow-ups are generated

Typeform

Free Seminar Evaluation Form Template

A conversational-style, fielding-ready form well suited to a pleasant respondent experience, using Typeform's signature one-question-at-a-time flow. It still relies on fixed question paths and can branch with basic logic, but it cannot adaptively interview a respondent about a specific remembered moment. Reporting is standard summary analytics rather than auto-generated narrative reports.

잘하는 점

  • Polished, conversational one-question-at-a-time UI
  • Simple conditional logic for basic branching
  • Strong mobile-friendly respondent experience

아쉬운 점

  • No adaptive AI follow-up probing into why satisfaction rose or fell at a specific point
  • No voice AI interview or guided screen-share task option
  • No automated quality scoring of individual responses

설문을 공개할 준비가 되셨나요?

이 템플릿을 편집기에서 열어 보세요. 첫 응답자가 보기 전에 모든 부분을 원하는 대로 바꿀 수 있습니다.

Use this template무료로 시작하기