The progress is measured by the people’s feedback (attendees and participants). The methodology is helping to involve people much more in order to enhance democratic values and also to develop the quality of the project. Selected debaters (16 trainee and eight debaters) are selected to give Spaces their feedback to understand what to develop for training and topics. Along with this evaluation, some of audience (20 out 120) gave their  

Importance of Topic: with people’s vote basement notes that many are with selected theses but some are considering it not of importance:

Key findings:

• Importance of topic can be identified by several factors, how much is the topic controversial, and how much people are interested in it; and
• Involving people on topic will help to aim democracy, the main aspect of the donors.

 Debate preparations: 

Key finding:

• Positive audience feedback helps to standardize the preparations.

Debaters Performances:

Key findings:

• Feedbacks indicates of how effective training and rehearsals on performance by a third party “Audience.”

Facilitator Performance:

Key finding:

• According to the audience feedback the facilitator is rated as “very good”, some of audiences consider her as average based on her “rough style” and some for not holding one place when she speeches. Otherwise, rating is convenient compared to the first experience in facilitating; and this gives good lessons in order to achieve perfect training of facilitators.

Evaluation of Materials

Debating Skills (general)

Pre-training:& Post-training (samples):

Key finding:

• Feedbacks of participants are noting enormous improvement in debating skills even among those who has mentioned they previously had a similar training. 62.5% of participants had no previous experiences while 37.5% others had the experience. The final questionnaires are recording 87.5% progress. This optimistic record is giving high expectations of the final evaluation.

Key findings:

• 62.5% of the participants are evaluating trainer as perfect while 31% evaluate trainer as good and 6.5% are rating her as average.
• Major change in speech skills has been tracked; improvement is tracked by trainees 14 of 16 confirm the improvement while 2 persons see no differences.

• Researching Methods:

  Pre-training & post-training results:

• 
• 

Key findings:

• Improvement and previous experiences have same value; it indicates the significance that materials gave to the training; improving trainees’ knowledge in research methods.

• Entrusted websites (Pre & Post-training):

• 

• 

• Key findings:

  • Eminent change could be tracked in entrusted website (applied in the last debate). This emphasizes the importance of subject.

  How applicable these skills are in daily life:

• 

• Key findings:

  • According to participants’ feedback after the debate, many indicate that research methods were used to collect data for the debate.

• Over all Evaluations (research methods):

Key finding:

– Materials are helping participants in the daily life, as they confirm 13 from 16 of last session’s trainee are confirming these findings, other three see this as nihilo in daily life aspects.

– Evaluation of the Material and trainer are considered high compared being first used by the foundation. Still the percentage is lower than the debate skills trainings.

The Participants’ Evaluation

The event preparations, rehearsals and debate mechanism (8 out of 8):

Key findings:

• Some debate mechanisms need minor changes based on some of the inconveniences by some participants;
• More focus should be on some details of the preparation; and
• Rehearsals are helping both team to comprehend how to face the audience and how to commit to rules.

Material used by other Basement projects:

Many Materials of Spaces were used to enrich discussion of participants in the “Alternative Visions” project, supported by the Prince Claus Fond, Generation Gap, University Degree and Arts: Priority or Luxury were all selected by the Alternative Vision project participants hence materials were used to reach a new point instead of repeating same discussions.

Participants Feedback:

“A new experience, I have discovered my talents in debating and I have met people made of gold, and I have no problem with participating for another new experiences.“ – One of the participants answers on the questionnaire question of Debate’s impact.

Unpredicted Outcomes:

• 10% of the participants have been engaged in other debate events all of these six participants were without any previous expertise on debates.
• 5% are from the teenager age category while the other 5% are considered as college graduates.
• Many of the participants in other activity, e.g. Prince Claus Fond project with Basement “Alternative Visions.”

Challenges:

• Crowded hall when debate is held;
• Enthusiasm of participants makes them less committed with debates rules; and
• Some debate mechanisms need minor revising.

Recommendations:

• To add more applicable exercises in next any training;
• More involvement of audience in order to choose future topics;
• Enhancing funds of debates project to create sustainable basis for it; Debates will help in reforming laws and legislation in post-war period; and
• Ideas of how to make debate interacts with arts are much recommended; for these ideas make debates much comprehended.