Training Evaluation: Pedophilia and CSEM: Etiological and Typological Considerations in Clinical Practice

(OT320-A) Training Evaluation – Pedophilia and CSEM: Etiological and Typological Considerations in Clinical Practice

Training Name: Pedophilia and CSEM: Etiological and Typological Considerations in Clinical Practice

Learning Objectives

As a result of this training, participants will be able to:
1) Identify characteristics that differentiate individuals who commit contact offenses, CSEM-only offenses, and mixed offenses against children
2) Describe the role of neurodevelopmental and environmental factors in pedophilia
3) Explain the practical importance of distinguishing individuals with pedophilic disorders from others convicted of sexual offenses against children
4) Identify distinguishing characteristics of CSEM offending and their implications for risk assessment and treatment planning

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. Rate the instructor’s knowledge and expertise of the subject (Sonja Krstic, PhD) 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low
6. Rate the instructor’s teaching ability (Sonja Krstic, PhD) 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low
7.1. Would you agree that learning objective #1 was met?
Learning Objective #1: “Identify characteristics that differentiate individuals who commit contact offenses, CSEM-only offenses, and mixed offenses against children” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.2. Would you agree that learning objective #2 was met?
Learning Objective #2: “Describe the role of neurodevelopmental and environmental factors in pedophilia” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.3. Would you agree that learning objective #3 was met?
Learning Objective #3: “Explain the practical importance of distinguishing individuals with pedophilic disorders from others convicted of sexual offenses against children” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.4. Would you agree that learning objective #4 was met?
Learning Objective #4: “Identify distinguishing characteristics of CSEM offending and their implications for risk assessment and treatment planning” 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 instructor’s (Sonja Krstic, PhD) responsiveness to questions 5 = Very Responsive, 1 = Not responsive*
14. Rate the program staff’s responsiveness to questions 5 = Very responsive, 1 = Not responsive at all