Career Counselling Workshop for High School students - 2001

A Successful Event Hosted by the ASGC.

In keeping with its commitment to promoting higher education among Tamil youths, yet another Career Counselling Workshop for students in Grade 9 to Grade 13 was hosted by the ASGC on October 13, 2001, at the Woburn Collegiate Institute, Scarborough. The workshop was designed to serve as a forum for dissemination of information, exchange of ideas, and sharing of academic and professional experience of guest speakers and moderators, selected on the basis of success in their chosen profession or academic careers. As representatives of the educated and professional elite in the Canadian Tamil community, all of them had the necessary credentials to serve as role models. Therefore, they were encouraged, in particular, to draw from their personal experience and share such attributes and personal commitments required to prepare for a chosen career, and succeed both in the work place and in the Canadian society at large. Included among the guest speakers, were Engineers, IT Experts, Research Scholars, University Professors, Educationists, a Barrister & Solicitor, Chartered Accountant, Senior Actuarial Analyst, Pharmacist, Senior Corporate Manager, Physiotherapist, Journalist, Medical Student etc.

The one-day program included a plenary session in the morning, followed in the afternoon, by two sessions of concurrent meetings of four groups viz. Life Science, Physical Science, Information Technology, and Business and Social Science. Each student was given the option and opportunity to participate in two different group sessions. Each group had four to five speakers and one moderator. The program concluded with reports from the moderators at a brief final session with all participants in attendance.

Initially, arrangements were made only for the participation of a total of 120 students and parents. Thanks to the support of the Tamil media, both radio and newspapers, and the efforts on the part of the ASGC members, in general, and the members of the executive committee in particular, the ASGC was overwhelmed by over 300 requests from students and parents for registration. However, due to the limitation of seating space both in the main hall and in the classrooms, the ASGC was forced to restrict the total participants to 200 students only. Eventually, a total of 205 students or all those who showed up were registered as participants..

Besides professional guest speakers, the special guests who addressed the plenary included Ms. Gerry Connelly, Executive Officer, Toronto District School Board (TDSB), Mr. Scott Harrison, School Trustee and Ms. Virji Rummana, Manager, Student & Community Services, TDSB.

Feedback

Feedback forms were distributed among the participants to ascertain their views on the usefulness of the program and to identify areas for improvements in the future. They were invited to rate, on a scale of 5 to 1 (excellent to very poor) different aspects of the Plenary Session, the four Workshop Sessions, and an Overall Assessment of the Workshop, and also provide comments and suggestions. They were requested to rate the Plenary Session in terms of it being “Informative and Resourceful” and “Speakers: Diversified Professionals from Different Industries”; to rate each of the four Workshop Sessions in terms of “ Focus of Discussions on Topics of Session”, “Speakers Knowledgeable and Able to Communicate Well”, and “Time Assigned Adequate”; and an Overall Assessment of Workshop as a “Satisfying and Learning Experience” and “Suggest to Another Friend”. A total of 120 forms or responses, representing 59 % of the participants were received.

Results of Feedback

Plenary Session - Respondents: 118

50 or 42% rated the session with a score of 5 as being informative and resourceful, followed by a score of 4 by 42 or 36 % for a weighted average of 4.09%. In response to the suggestion that speakers (represented) diversified professions and industries, 57 or 49% responded with a score of 5 while 45 or 39% scored it at 4, for a weighted average of 4.33.

Workshops: Life Science – Respondents: 61

31 or 51% scored 5 in support of the suggestion that the discussion focused on the topic of session followed by a rating of 4 by 21 or 34% for an weighted average of 4.33. A total of 31 or 51% scored 5 in agreement to the second suggestion that speakers (were) knowledgeable and able to communicate well, followed by a rating of 4 by 33%, for an weighted average of 4.31. A total of 39% and 36% of respondents scored 5 and 4 respectively in concurring with the suggestion that the time assigned was adequate for an weighted average of 4.05.

Physical Science – Respondents: 54

While 28 or 52% scored 5 in support of the first suggestion, 37% did so scoring 4 for an weighted average of 4.37. A total of 38 or 70% scored 5 in concurring that that speakers (were) knowledgeable and able to communicate well, followed by a rating of 4 by 22% for a weighted average of 4.63. A total of 41% and 39% of respondents scored 5 and 4 respectively in concurring with the suggestion that the time assigned was adequate for an weighted average of 4.48.

Information Technology – Respondents: 58

50% of respondents agreed that the focus of discussion was on the topics of session with a rating of 5 followed by a rating of 4 by 36% for an weighted average of 4.41. While 64% scored 5 in support of the suggestion regarding the speakers, 26 % did so with a rating of 4 for an weighted average of 4.5. Weighted average of approval for time assigned amounted to 4.29.

Business and Social Studies – Respondents 57

While 60% of the respondents scored 5 in support of the first suggestion, 31% did so with a rating of 4 for an weighted average of 4.47. The approval to the suggestion that the speakers were knowledgeable and able to communicate well was scored at 5 by 61% and 4 by 30%, for an weighted average of 4.52. The approval for suggestion regarding time assigned was scored by 39% at 5 and by 49% at 4, for an weighted average of 4.42.

Overall Assessment – Respondents: 115

50% of the respondents scored 5 to the suggestion that the workshop was a satisfying and a learning experience followed by 40% scoring the same at 4, for an weighted average of 4.37. Again 50% of the respondent scored 5 in confirmation of the chances of their suggesting the event to another friend and 39% scoring at 4 for an weighted total average of 4.28.

Comments and Suggestions – Respondents 72

Only 72 of the 120 responded with comments and suggestions. Among them 30 or 42% of the indicated, both directly and indirectly, that the plenary session was too long. Further, most of the respondents would prefer: more time for workshops; inclusion of more university students from different universities and different faculties as workshop speakers; increasing the number of sessions to include more career oriented subjects; and make available flyers and information sheets on entrance requirements of various universities and faculties. Also, some respondents suggested the program be restricted to students from Grade 10 to Grade 13.

General Comments and Conclusions

On the assumption that the rating on a scale of 5 to 1 is taken to represents excellent, good, average, poor and very poor, the following conclusions could be drawn from the above results:

· The weighted average of all the scores/ratings for the Plenary, all the Workshop Sessions, and Overall Assessment of the Event itself at more than 4 or 4+ represents a rating of between good and excellent, which could in turn be interpreted as “very good”. This high level of overall rating leads to the obvious conclusion that the Workshop was a success.

· A total of 78% of the respondents found the plenary session good to excellent in terms of it being both informative and resourceful, and the speakers included diversified professions and industries.

· On the Workshop Sessions, the approval ratings at 4 and 5 for both the first and second suggestions, ranged between 84% to 92% for different sessions, including the highest rating of 5 or excellent ranging from 51% to 70%. It could therefore be concluded that the selected speakers and discussion participants for the workshop sessions were both suitable and appropriate.

It was unfortunate that we could not include the parents as we originally planned, and we are aware of their deep disappointment. We wish to assure that every effort would be made to accommodate both the students and parents next time.

The ASGC wishes to thank all the special guests and the guest speakers for accepting our invitation and making a substantial contribution to the success of the event. By their exemplary behaviour, all the student participants did proud by their parents, teachers, and schools and, above all, by our community, for which we thank them.