2023 Annual Meeting Celebrated in Survey Responses, Despite Frustrations Over Hotel and (No) Program Book

Our 2023 Annual Meeting Participant Survey has collected valuable insights into attendees’ responses to last year’s meeting and a window into the priorities and needs of our participants in the present moment. As AFS continues to navigate the changing landscape of constraints and opportunities in our field and the larger world, the participant survey helps us gauge what worked well in 2023 and what may need revision for future meetings. AFS leadership and staff are committed to maintaining broad accessibility for all participants, while also responding to your important feedback calling for a more interactive and cohesive meeting experience that truly brings us all together. 

The 2023 survey garnered a total of 115 responses, and around 80% of respondents rated the meeting 8 out of 10 or above on a scale where 10 is rated highest.

• “ This felt like the best meeting I’ve ever attended (first AFS AM was in 2004). There were so many of us present and it was really wonderful to reconnect with friends and colleagues. I enjoyed every session and event that I attended.”
• “I appreciate what the virtual option offers but nothing can replace the in-person interaction for me. … I really, really, really wish we could have paper programs again.”
• “Although the arrangement of the meeting was excellent, some sessions were missing an audience, and fruitful discussions were not possible.”
• “I have never been to a conference that premediated my accessibility needs as well as this conference. I loved the location and that there were lots of things to do. I loved all the sessions and breakouts.”

The survey tried to gauge the engagement of the membership within the three modes offered at the 135th meeting: in-person, virtual, and hybrid. 68% of respondents reported joining the meeting in person whereas 22% attended both virtually and in person. Only around 8% of respondents reported joining the meeting only through the virtual mode.

Delving into engagement on each day of programming, not even a quarter of the respondents within the survey attended the virtual annual meeting days, while at least 80% of the respondents reported attending the in-person meeting on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday.

Virtual Meeting

• Wednesday, Oct. 11 (VIRTUAL) – Attended: 24.35%
• Thursday, Oct. 12 (VIRTUAL) – Attended: 23.48%

In-person Meeting

• Wednesday, Nov. 1 (PORTLAND) – Attended: 66.96%
• Thursday, Nov. 2 (PORTLAND) – Attended: 80%
• Friday, Nov. 3 (PORTLAND) – Attended: 81.74%
• Saturday, Nov. 4 (PORTLAND) – Attended: 80.87%

The majority of respondents spent an average of 70-80% of their time at the conference attending programming. They also spent 15-20% of their time socializing/networking on average, and 5-10% of their time seeing the area.

In considering the value of different kinds of programs, respondents showed a clear inclination towards in-person programs and events over hybrid or virtual ones. The following aspects of the conference were rated as “very valuable” by respondents:

• In-person networking/social events: 72.65%
• In-person workshops: 64.96%
• In-person paper panels/forums: 80.34%
• In-person plenaries: 70.94%
  
• Hybrid live-streamed events: 40.17%
• Hybrid paper panels and sessions: 36.75%
• Recordings of virtual, hybrid, live-streamed sessions and events: 44.44%
  
• Virtual plenary events: 42.74%
• Virtual presentations and forums: 44%
• Virtual workshops: 19.65%
• Virtual networking: 19.65%

On average, 31.50% of respondents found virtual programs to be very valuable, while an average of 40.45% found hybrid programs to be very valuable. 72.25% of the respondents found in-person programs to be very valuable.

A majority of the respondents (84%) accessed the Annual Meeting Hub to navigate through the meeting and get information. About one third of respondents used printouts of the program schedule and addendum, and about one third reported that they used the printable PDF. Over one third of the respondents had difficulty browsing these resources.

• “Outside of some initial difficulty accessing/logging in to the hub, my experience was pretty solid all around.”

• “Program .pdf was helpful before the meeting started, as was the 2023 annual meeting hub.  I would have preferred a printed program to use during the meeting.”

• “The AFS hub was great on my computer but difficult to navigate on mobile. The pages all look similar so it was not at all clear that the function of the dropdown menu at the top of the page had changed from general site information to the conference days. Coupled with the lack of a hard copy of the schedule this could get frustrating. I love the idea of an all virtual schedule but I think it needs to be formatted differently?”

• “I understand the need to move away from the print program, and yet I really miss that at the meeting. It’s difficult to navigate the website in the mobile view and the print-out’s are  difficult to use since they’re stapled rather than bound. All this makes navigating the huge program in person very difficult.”

The 2023 Annual Meeting program was available on the Hub, online as a PDF download, and as a printout at the registration desk. However, survey respondents noted frustration around not having a 2023 print program, which were exacerbated by the difficulty those respondents reported navigating the Hub and the PDF, especially in a mobile view during the conference. 

• “I really prefer to have a printed, bound copy of the conference program and would gladly pay a supplemental fee to acquire one if that option were made available during online registration. I understand the desire to cut down on paper usage and costs, but I know a lot of other attendees this year were a little bugged by having to do everything on their phones during the annual meeting … including “young whippersnappers” like myself! :-)”
• “The Hub was okay but in the end, I think I want a paper copy on which I can make notes next to each session I attend.”

Around 20% of the respondents reported complaints about the hotel, mostly focused on the layout of the hotel, difficulty moving between floors due to elevator issues and no viable alternative, and problems with the layout, setup, and size of the rooms.

• “My biggest criticism for this meeting was the hotel accommodations (although this is not something that I feel AFS staff is responsible for). The rooms were really small and uncomfortable, and even the conference rooms were, in many cases, small and with weird distribution of space, which made the space also uncomfortable.”

Some respondents found the number of events and concurrent sessions too packed and difficult to navigate. 

• “While, I appreciate AFS’s efforts to get as many papers/presentations on the schedule as possible, it does feel like things are spread too thin. Perhaps more intentionally focusing the Annual Meeting themes to more specific areas/ideas/interests as opposed to broad themes that can kind of encompass anything would give the organization room to streamline and not have so much happening all at once.”
• “I wish that there had been fewer concurrent sessions.”
• “Too much to choose from at a single time.  When I choose sessions at a conference, I like to experience them from start to finish. I do not prefer to bop around to simultaneously scheduled sessions to hear bits and pieces.”

30.7% of respondents explicitly celebrated the variety of stimulating meeting programs and experiences featured at the conference, which they perceived to serve a wide spectrum of interests and needs:

• “Excellent diversity of panels and other events. I particularly enjoy the attention to disability and queerness that has been lacking in years past.”
• “Very well organised, the staff was ready to help. Liked the varied organised section meetings and varied other programs. Lots of academic learning. The city chosen was also very nice.”
• “The Keynote speakers were fantastic.”
• “The panels were of course the most intellectually stimulating, as I could almost always find something related to my interests or something to broaden my horizons.”

Respondents particularly emphasized the importance of interactive opportunities for engagement and connection at the meeting, with over 60% expressing joy or appreciation for gathering with old friends, networking with new colleagues, and building a sense of community at the conference.

• “I participated in many of the sessions, as well as the society meetings, lunch meetings, and late evening programs. The interactive space is very much a part of these AFS annual meetings, and please keep that going on in future.”
• “I enjoyed the opportunity to meet new people outside structured sessions. I was brand new to the community as well as the conference but that didn’t stop me from making new friends and connections. All the sessions I went to were intellectually stimulating and I enjoyed the smaller breakout groups as well.”
• “I appreciate getting together with people who don’t think like me but who are committed to open discussion. … The social events, such as the dance party and receptions, are also very welcome, as they provide a more relaxed atmosphere for getting to know people or catching up with old friends.”

In the weeks to come you will see plans unfolding for the 2024 conference platform and (print!) program in response to this important feedback. Thanks to all the participants who took time to share their feedback on the 2023 Annual Meeting, which helps us shape decisions for 2024 and coming years. We can’t wait to begin planning for our meeting in Albuquerque!