I need someone to complete this for me by tonight at 8pm EST. Please do not respond if you cannot finish by the deadline.  2 replies of 250–300 words each. Must: - Include an analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of the topic. - Include the textbook for the course. - Include at least 1 additional scholarly resource. - Include Bible references. - Include an assessment/analysis of your Christian worldview as it relates to the topic. - Include both in-text citations and references in APA format. - Utilize correct English, grammar, spelling, and punctuation. - Include clear topic sentences for each paragraph, supporting sentences, and a conclusion sentence/paragraph. Textbook: Werner, J., & DeSimone, R. (2012). Human resource development (6th ed.). Mason, OH: Thomson-Southwestern. ISBN: 9780538480994. Alison M. Digges Kirkpatrick’s Evaluation Framework According to Werner and DeSimone (2012), “If the HRD department cannot demonstrate effectiveness, it may not be taken seriously within an organization” (p. 203). HRD evaluations are therefore necessary to ensure organizational effectiveness is maintained. Asadullah, Peretti, Ghulam Ali, and Bourgain (2015) found that, “the firms which are larger and provide training of longer duration to their employees, use more sophisticated training evaluation practices” (p. 445) and thus are able to increase the effectiveness of their training more actively. One of the most influential evaluation models is Kirkpatrick’s evaluation framework. This evaluation framework incorporates four distinct levels of criteria used to evaluate HRD programs, including: 1) reaction, 2) learning, 3) behavior, and 4) results (p. 206). Reaction The first level of Kirkpatrick’s evaluation framework is reaction. This level analyzes the general reaction of the trainees towards the training program. Negative reactions allow organizations to reevaluate how training is conducted. Positive reactions on the other hand allow organizations to promote their training programs to other possible trainees within the organization. Reactions help organizations ensure overall effectiveness in terms of trainee satisfaction and perceived learning. These positive reactions are an area of data specifically that I have experienced on my own that has increased effectiveness in a training program that I designed. After being promoted into a new role within my organization I reformatted the orientation class. It was so successful that employees who were hired previous to the reformatting began asking if they could re-take the class! Learning             The second level of Kirkpatrick’s evaluation framework is learning. This level analyzes the transfer of learning experienced by the trainees involved in the training program. More specifically, it evaluates how learning objectives were met or unmet during the training based on the learning experience by the trainees. This level incorporates the use of tests or quizzes to evaluate trainee knowledge prior.

1. I need someone to complete this for me by tonight at 8pm EST.
Please do not respond if you cannot finish by the deadline.
2 replies of 250–300 words each. Must:
- Include an analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of the topic.
- Include the textbook for the course.
- Include at least 1 additional scholarly resource.
- Include Bible references.
- Include an assessment/analysis of your Christian worldview as
it relates to the topic.
- Include both in-text citations and references in APA format.
- Utilize correct English, grammar, spelling, and punctuation.
- Include clear topic sentences for each paragraph, supporting
sentences, and a conclusion sentence/paragraph.
Textbook:
Werner, J., & DeSimone, R. (2012). Human resource
development (6th ed.). Mason, OH: Thomson-Southwestern.
ISBN: 9780538480994.
Alison M. Digges
Kirkpatrick’s Evaluation Framework
According to Werner and DeSimone (2012), “If the HRD
department cannot demonstrate effectiveness, it may not be
taken seriously within an organization” (p. 203). HRD
evaluations are therefore necessary to ensure organizational
effectiveness is maintained. Asadullah, Peretti, Ghulam Ali, and
Bourgain (2015) found that, “the firms which are larger and
provide training of longer duration to their employees, use more
sophisticated training evaluation practices” (p. 445) and thus
are able to increase the effectiveness of their training more
actively. One of the most influential evaluation models is
Kirkpatrick’s evaluation framework. This evaluation framework
incorporates four distinct levels of criteria used to evaluate

2. HRD programs, including: 1) reaction, 2) learning, 3) behavior,
and 4) results (p. 206).
Reaction
The first level of Kirkpatrick’s evaluation framework is
reaction. This level analyzes the general reaction of the trainees
towards the training program. Negative reactions allow
organizations to reevaluate how training is conducted. Positive
reactions on the other hand allow organizations to promote their
training programs to other possible trainees within the
organization. Reactions help organizations ensure overall
effectiveness in terms of trainee satisfaction and perceived
learning. These positive reactions are an area of data
specifically that I have experienced on my own that has
increased effectiveness in a training program that I designed.
After being promoted into a new role within my organization I
reformatted the orientation class. It was so successful that
employees who were hired previous to the reformatting began
asking if they could re-take the class!
Learning
The second level of Kirkpatrick’s evaluation framework
is learning. This level analyzes the transfer of learning
experienced by the trainees involved in the training program.
More specifically, it evaluates how learning objectives were met
or unmet during the training based on the learning experience
by the trainees. This level incorporates the use of tests or
quizzes to evaluate trainee knowledge prior to learning and
following learning so that knowledge obtained during training
can be accurately measured. This level might also be conducted
over various periods of time. Often a short-term analysis will be
conducted where knowledge is measured directly after training
or a day after training. Then long-term analyses will be
conducted after one week, one month, or even one year to
understand how long this knowledge is typically retained. One
way that I have personally utilized this evaluation of learning is
through the use of pre-tests and post-tests in the safety and
security section of my orientation program. This allows my

3. team to evaluate actual learned knowledge, opposed to just
evaluating common sense.
Behavior
The third level of Kirkpatrick’s evaluation framework is
behavior. This level analyzes the second step in the transfer of
training. Not only does transfer of training evaluate knowledge
acquired and retained, but also knowledge applied on the job.
Knowledge can be obtained and retained without being applied
but the application of the knowledge is the purpose of both
acquiring and retaining said knowledge. Without the
application, or behavior, the training is for naught. Khalid,
Rehman, and Ashraf (2012) state that, “There is the need to
know what trainees learn during training so as to reproduce it
on job, in form of better performance” (p. 275). Long-term
evaluation is something that I personally have used in the past
by incorporating direct knowledge from orientation into thirty-
day and ninety-day evaluations of employee performance. This
long-term evaluation has allowed me to analyze the long-term
effectiveness of my training program and assess whether it is
the best option for our high turnover industry.
Results
The fourth and final level of Kirkpatrick’s evaluation
framework is results. This level analyzes the result of training
on the overall organizational effectiveness of the company. If
the training does not increase the effectiveness of the
organization it is going to be hard to convince the organization
that this training is beneficial. My organization receives
quarterly audits from an outsourced organization that evaluates
the operations of the entire organization. This evaluation allows
me to analyze exactly how training has impacted the
organizational effectiveness of the organization. This evaluation
helps me prove to my organization that our training programs
are effective and useful.
A discussion on training evaluation can easily be addressed in a
Christian context. Galatians 6:3-4 states, “For if anyone thinks
he is something, when he is nothing, he deceives himself. But

4. let each one test his own work, and then his reason to boast will
be in himself alone and not in his neighbor” (English Standard
Version). Testing our work before God is the ultimate test of
effectiveness.
References
Asadullah, M. A., Peretti, J. M., Ghulam Ali, A., & Bourgain,
M. (2015). Firm size, ownership, training duration and training
evaluation practices. European Journal of Training and
Development, 39(5), 429-455. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu/abicomplete/doc
view/1699473257/fulltextPDF/3285B366AE1C4AF7PQ/6?accou
ntid=12085
Khalid, M. M., Rehman, C. A., & Ashraf, M. (2012). Exploring
the link between kirkpatrick (KP) and context, input, process
and product (CIPP) training evaluation models, and its effect on
training evaluation in public organizations of pakistan. African
Journal of Business Management, 6(1), 274-279. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu/abicomplete/doc
view/920253646/3285B366AE1C4AF7PQ/1?accountid=12085
The English Standard Version Bible. New York: Oxford
University Press, 2009. Print.
Werner, J. M., DeSimone, R. L. (2012). Human Resource
Development (6th ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western, Cengage
Learning.
Christina Curry
Organizational socialization is an essential process for
newly hired employees joining an organization. This process is
used by many organizations to help integrate new employees
into the company by helping them understand their new job
role, explaining what is expected of them, and allowing them to
begin to establish relationships with their co workers (Werner &
DeSimone, 2012). Many companies have come to the
realization that they must use strategic strategies and techniques
in their organizational socialization programs, in order to
successfully facilitate new employees into the organization and

5. retain them. “Successful socialization of new members is
critical to both individuals and organizations, especially since
the new employee’s satisfaction, performance, and commitment
to the organization are at stake” (Werner & DeSimone, 2012, p.
256). Therefore, there are many reasons why an organization
should carefully consider and plan an effective organizational
socialization program for new employees.
Daniel Feldman developed a 3-stage model of
organizational socialization, which includes the anticipatory
socialization stage, the encounter stage, and the change and
acquisition stage (Werner & DeSimone, 2012). The anticipatory
socialization stage is the beginning stage, where the individual
is gathering information about what it would be like to work at
a specific organization (Werner & DeSimone, 2012). The
encounter stage starts when the individual becomes an
employee, and begins to discover what the culture of the
organization and work environment are really like (Werner &
DeSimone, 2012). While the change and acquisition stage,
occurs when the employee has learned how to perform the job
successfully and work satisfactorily within the work group
(Werner & DeSimone, 2012). This model builds a framework
that is useful for organizations to design an effective
organizational socialization process.
My experience with the onboarding or organizational
socialization process would not necessarily be to the same
degree as the experience outlined in Feldman’s 3-stage model.
Over the last 20 years, I have worked for a number of different
companies. While looking back over the years at the various
jobs that I have held, it is my opinion that many of these
companies didn’t have an effective organizational socialization
program. Most companies only provided a brief orientation
and then mainly minimal on-the-job training. Cable, Gino, &
Staats (2013) state that “by encouraging new employees to
apply their personal strengths to the job, companies can help
their new hires become more connected with their colleagues,
more engaged in their work and more likely to stay” (p.23). As

6. research has shown, it can be very beneficial for new employees
to receive a more customized socialization into the organization
to ultimately be successful (Cable, Gino, & Staats, 2013).
References
Cable, D. M., Gino, F., & Staats, B. R. (2013). Reinventing
employee onboarding. MIT Sloan Management Review, 54(3),
23-28. Retrieved from
http://ezproxy.liberty.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.
ezproxy.liberty.edu/docview/1323893232?accountid=12085
Werner, J., & DeSimone, R. (2012).Human resource
development (6th ed.). Mason, OH: Thomson-Southwestern.