I certify that I am the above-named person completing this form and that the information I submit here is accurate. *

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

2. Rate the quality of the program content 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low *

3. Rate how current/relevant the program content is 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low *

4. How useful was the content of this CE program for your practice or other professional development? 5 = Extremely Useful, 1 = Not Useful at all *

5.1 Rate the first instructor’s knowledge and expertise of the subject (Amy Griffith, PhD, LP) 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low *

5.2 Rate the second instructor’s knowledge and expertise of the subject (Seth Wescott, LMLP) 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low *

6.1 Rate the first instructor’s teaching ability (Amy Griffith, PhD, LP) 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low *

6.2 Rate the second instructor’s teaching ability (Seth Wescott, LMLP) 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low *

7.1. Would you agree that learning objective #1 was met?
Learning Objective #1: “Describe the ATSA best practices for conducting adult psychosexual evaluations.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree *

7.2. Would you agree that learning objective #2 was met?
Learning Objective #2: “Identify different types of referral questions associated with psychosexual evaluations.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree *

7.3. Would you agree that learning objective #3 was met?
Learning Objective #3: “Explain the unique challenges associated with different types of adult psychosexual evaluations.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree *

7.4. Would you agree that learning objective #4 was met?
Learning Objective #4: “Describe the basic components of the written report.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree *

7.5. Would you agree that learning objective #5 was met?
Learning Objective #5: “Utilize strategies for maintaining objectivity and navigating common ethical situations that arise in the evaluation process.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree *

8. Rate how well the program met your expectations (according to the promotional materials) 5 = Very well, 1 = Not well at all *

9. Rate the quality of the provided course materials 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low *

10. Rate the quality of the facilities (in-person) or technology (online). 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low *

11. Rate how well disability accommodations were met, if requested. 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low *

12. Rate the ease of the registration process 5 = Very Easy, 1 = Very Difficult *

13. Rate the first instructor’s (Amy Griffith, PhD, LP) responsiveness to questions 5 = Very Responsive, 1 = Not responsive *

14. Rate the second instructor’s (Seth Wescott, LMLP) responsiveness to questions 5 = Very Responsive, 1 = Not responsive *

15. Rate the program staff’s responsiveness to questions 5 = Very responsive, 1 = Not responsive at all *