THURS-053 - Mixed-methods Evaluation of a Conference Training to Strengthen Public Health Students’ Professional Development Competencies

Brief Abstract Summary: Learn how intentional mentoring prepares public health graduate students to effectively engage in professional conferences. This session presents the evaluation of Conferencing 101, a skill-building workshop designed to address gaps in graduate training. Presenters will share outcomes from student activities across five focus areas: networking, session etiquette, conference navigation, personal branding, and workbook use. Attendees will gain a replicable framework and insights into assessing student growth, program impact, and contributions to the health education pipeline.

Detailed abstract description:

Background: Formal public health training often overlooks essential professional skills such as networking, presentation, personal branding, and conference engagement, leaving students and emerging professionals underprepared for real-world expectations. As the conference landscape evolves, students must now navigate a broader range of environments and technologies. In addition, increased competition for professional development opportunities have made it more important than ever for students to be intentional and strategic in how they engage with conferences. To address these gaps, structured mentoring is needed to prepare students to capitalize on the full range of opportunities that conferences offer. Rigorous evaluation of such programs is essential to ensure they meet student needs, foster meaningful skill development, and provide scalable models for replication.

Aim: To evaluate a professional development program for public health students.

Methods: Students were invited to Conferencing 101, a two-hour workshop. Participants (n=14) completed a pre-post test consisting of five-point Likert scale items to rate their attitudes, knowledge, confidence, and behaviors in the following skils: networking, elevator pitch, and conference etiquette and navigation. Students crafted an elevator pitch and designed a business card. They also set goals for conference networking and session participation. Participants then attended a local public health conference where they applied these skills. Post-conference, students completed a post-test with additional open-ended questions to capture qualitative information about their experience. Composite scores were created to measure participants’ knowledge, attitudes, confidence, and behaviors related to conferencing skills. Univariate analyses were used to describe variable distribution and data quality. Bivariate statistical analyses were used to examine associations among the composite scores, behavioral outcomes, and sociodemographic characteristics. Quantitative analyses were conducted in Stata 19. To complement the quantitative findings, qualitative data from open-ended survey responses were analyzed using thematic analysis. Insights were used to highlight program strengths, identify areas for improvement, and provide recommendations to support professional development initiatives.
Anticipated results: Students reported improved knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and confidence in networking, elevator pitch delivery, and conference etiquette and navigation, compared to baseline. Qualitative responses indicated that students found the workshop valuable and acceptable.

Conclusion: Mentors can develop mentee leadership skills with minimal investment of time and resources. The two-hour Conferencing 101 workshop can serve as a blueprint for mentors to meaningfully plan and evaluate interventions for student and new professional development.