Kirkpatrick developed a four-level model for evaluating training programs: (1) reaction, (2) learning, (3) behavior, and (4) results. The model provides a framework for assessing outcomes at each level to determine a training's effectiveness and identify ways to improve future trainings. Two case studies show how Intel and St. Luke's Hospital have applied the Kirkpatrick model in their evaluation processes, with Intel working backwards from level four and St. Luke's conducting statistical analysis of behavioral changes. The model offers a flexible approach to evaluation that can be tailored to different organizational needs.
Kirkpatrick developed a four-level model for evaluating training programs that is widely used. Level I evaluates participants' reaction to the training; Level II evaluates learning; Level III evaluates behavior change; and Level IV evaluates results including business impact. Each level provides information for the next and higher levels, but alone does not guarantee outcomes at those levels. Evaluation methods include questionnaires, tests, observations and metrics tailored to the objectives of the particular training program.
The Kirkpatrick model provides a simple 4-level approach to evaluating training programs: (1) measure participant reaction, (2) assess learning, (3) determine behavior changes, and (4) evaluate results. It is among the most widely used training evaluation models. While simple and easy to understand, it has also been criticized as being too simplistic and lacking evidence that the levels are causally related.
Adlt 606 class 11 kirkpatrick's evaluation model short versiontjcarter
Kirkpatrick's 4 levels of evaluation assess training programs from different perspectives: Level 1 assesses participant reactions; Level 2 assesses learning; Level 3 evaluates behavior change; Level 4 measures organizational results. Each level requires different data collection methods, with higher levels being more difficult and expensive to measure. The model provides guidelines for evaluation questions, timing, methods and comparing pre- and post-training metrics to determine a program's full impact.
Most of the support functions in an organisation fail to justify Return on Investment.
Here is the solution you have been looking for.
Please Note: It is not only that the training function can apply this method, but also the other support functions can also apply.
Kirkpatrick's Four Levels Of Evaluation Modelsikojp
Kirkpatrick's Four Levels of Evaluation Model is a framework for evaluating training programs and other professional development activities. It originated from Kirkpatrick's 1952 dissertation and was published in 1959. The four levels are: 1) Reactions, 2) Learning, 3) Behavior, and 4) Results. Level 1 assesses satisfaction with the training. Level 2 evaluates the increase in knowledge from pre-to post-training. Level 3 looks at applying skills on the job. Level 4 examines the impact on business results such as productivity or profits. The model provides an easily understood approach for evaluation but has limitations such as oversimplifying the relationship between levels.
This document discusses Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation: reaction, learning, behavior, and results. It provides an overview of each level and guidelines for evaluating training at each level. It also presents a case study of Cisco Systems evaluating a new training program on their return-to-vendor process using all four levels. Level 1 evaluated reactions to the training. Level 2 evaluated learning through embedded tests. Level 3 evaluated changes in behavior by observing trainees. Level 4 evaluated results such as reductions in costs and inventory from the new process.
The Kirkpatrick model is a framework for evaluating training programs with four levels: 1) Participant reaction, 2) Learning, 3) Behavior, and 4) Results. Level 1 measures participant satisfaction. Level 2 assesses knowledge gained immediately after training. Level 3 evaluates extent of behavior and knowledge application months later. Level 4 determines if training impacted organizational goals. The model provides tools to design evaluation forms, tests, and follow-up methods at each level to capture a program's full impact.
The Kirkpatrick Model is a worldwide standard for evaluating training effectiveness across four levels - reaction, learning, behavior, and results. It measures how participants react to and feel about the training, what knowledge and skills were learned, if behavior changed back on the job, and if overall business results were affected.
Kirkpatrick developed a four-level model for evaluating training programs that is widely used. Level I evaluates participants' reaction to the training; Level II evaluates learning; Level III evaluates behavior change; and Level IV evaluates results including business impact. Each level provides information for the next and higher levels, but alone does not guarantee outcomes at those levels. Evaluation methods include questionnaires, tests, observations and metrics tailored to the objectives of the particular training program.
The Kirkpatrick model provides a simple 4-level approach to evaluating training programs: (1) measure participant reaction, (2) assess learning, (3) determine behavior changes, and (4) evaluate results. It is among the most widely used training evaluation models. While simple and easy to understand, it has also been criticized as being too simplistic and lacking evidence that the levels are causally related.
Adlt 606 class 11 kirkpatrick's evaluation model short versiontjcarter
Kirkpatrick's 4 levels of evaluation assess training programs from different perspectives: Level 1 assesses participant reactions; Level 2 assesses learning; Level 3 evaluates behavior change; Level 4 measures organizational results. Each level requires different data collection methods, with higher levels being more difficult and expensive to measure. The model provides guidelines for evaluation questions, timing, methods and comparing pre- and post-training metrics to determine a program's full impact.
Most of the support functions in an organisation fail to justify Return on Investment.
Here is the solution you have been looking for.
Please Note: It is not only that the training function can apply this method, but also the other support functions can also apply.
Kirkpatrick's Four Levels Of Evaluation Modelsikojp
Kirkpatrick's Four Levels of Evaluation Model is a framework for evaluating training programs and other professional development activities. It originated from Kirkpatrick's 1952 dissertation and was published in 1959. The four levels are: 1) Reactions, 2) Learning, 3) Behavior, and 4) Results. Level 1 assesses satisfaction with the training. Level 2 evaluates the increase in knowledge from pre-to post-training. Level 3 looks at applying skills on the job. Level 4 examines the impact on business results such as productivity or profits. The model provides an easily understood approach for evaluation but has limitations such as oversimplifying the relationship between levels.
This document discusses Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation: reaction, learning, behavior, and results. It provides an overview of each level and guidelines for evaluating training at each level. It also presents a case study of Cisco Systems evaluating a new training program on their return-to-vendor process using all four levels. Level 1 evaluated reactions to the training. Level 2 evaluated learning through embedded tests. Level 3 evaluated changes in behavior by observing trainees. Level 4 evaluated results such as reductions in costs and inventory from the new process.
The Kirkpatrick model is a framework for evaluating training programs with four levels: 1) Participant reaction, 2) Learning, 3) Behavior, and 4) Results. Level 1 measures participant satisfaction. Level 2 assesses knowledge gained immediately after training. Level 3 evaluates extent of behavior and knowledge application months later. Level 4 determines if training impacted organizational goals. The model provides tools to design evaluation forms, tests, and follow-up methods at each level to capture a program's full impact.
The Kirkpatrick Model is a worldwide standard for evaluating training effectiveness across four levels - reaction, learning, behavior, and results. It measures how participants react to and feel about the training, what knowledge and skills were learned, if behavior changed back on the job, and if overall business results were affected.
The document discusses Dr. Donald Kirkpatrick's model for evaluating training programs. The model contains 4 levels - (1) measuring participant reactions, (2) assessing learning, (3) determining behavioral changes on the job, and (4) evaluating results such as increased productivity or profits. The model provides a simple framework for conceptualizing training evaluation but has also been criticized as being too simplistic and not fully representing the evaluation process.
Kirkpatrick's four levels of evaluation model was developed by Donald Kirkpatrick for his PhD dissertation over 50 years ago and remains the leading model for evaluating training programs. The four levels include reaction, learning, behavior, and results. Level 1 evaluates participant reactions to the training experience. Level 2 assesses the learning that occurred, such as knowledge gained. Level 3 looks at whether behavior changed on the job. Level 4 measures results such as increased productivity or reduced costs. While widely used, the model has also received some criticism for being too simplistic and not proving causal relationships between the levels.
Kirkpatrick's Four-Level Training Evaluation ModelMaram Barqawi
Donald Kirkpatrick, Professor Emeritus at the University of Wisconsin and past president of the American Society for Training and Development (ASTD), first published his Four-Level Training Evaluation Model in 1959, in the US Training and Development Journal.
The model was then updated in 1975, and again in 1994, when he published his best-known work, "Evaluating Training Programs."
It is a four level training evaluation model.
It helps trainers to measure the effectiveness of their training in an objective way.
Kirkpatrick’s model is a worldwide standard for evaluating the effectiveness of training.
The document discusses the Four Levels of Evaluation model developed by Donald Kirkpatrick in 1959 to evaluate training programs. The four levels are: 1) learner reactions, 2) learning, 3) job behavior or transfer, and 4) observable results or impact. Level 1 evaluates learner opinions immediately after training. Level 2 assesses knowledge and skills learned. Level 3 evaluates on-the-job application of skills. Level 4 examines long-term business impact. Each level provides benefits for improving training and identifies weaknesses, though higher levels present more challenges to isolate the effects of training.
The purpose for Kirkpatrick’s evaluation is to determine the effectiveness of a training program. According to this model, evaluation should always begin with level one, and then, as time and budget allows, should move sequentially through levels two, three, and four. Information from each prior level serves as a base for the next level\'s evaluation.
The purpose of Brinkerhoff’s SCM to prove and to improve impact. It is a cost effective way in determining which components of initiative are working and which are not, and reporting result in a way that organizational leaders can easily understand and believe.
Kirkpatrick's Levels of Training Evaluation - Training and DevelopmentManu Melwin Joy
Training and Development
Evaluation
Human resource
Management
Motivation
Psychology
Success
Organizational effectiveness
Personal growth
Change management
This document discusses evaluating coursework from a student perspective. It outlines common purposes of evaluation like quality assurance and improving teaching. The focus of evaluation should be on both teaching/teacher and learning/outcomes. Strategies mentioned include surveys, observations, interviews, pre-/post-testing. Drawbacks include low response rates and students not always accurately assessing teaching. The document advocates using a variety of quantitative and qualitative methods like those in Kirkpatrick's four-level model to gain a holistic view of a course's effectiveness and opportunities for improvement from both a student learning and teaching practice perspective.
This document provides an overview of training evaluation and the Kirkpatrick model. It discusses the history of learning and development from the early 20th century pioneers in education and psychology. It then explains Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation: reaction, learning, behavior, and results. Each level is defined. The document also includes models like ADDIE and competency matrix that support training design. It emphasizes evaluating all training programs using Kirkpatrick's levels and monitoring outcomes over time to measure return on investment.
The Benefits Of Utilizing Kirkpatrick’S Four Levels Ofwendystein
The document outlines Kirkpatrick's four levels of evaluation that can be used to assess the effectiveness of safety training programs for supervisors. The four levels are: Level I) evaluate participant reaction; Level II) evaluate learning; Level III) evaluate behavior change; and Level IV) evaluate results including organizational goals and safety impacts. It provides details on the tools that can be used at each level and recommends starting with Level I and working through all four levels sequentially. The document applies this framework to evaluate the current monthly supervisor safety training program at SOCHD using reaction questionnaires, pre-and post-tests, on-the-job observations, and analyzing results.
This document discusses Kirkpatrick's four-level model for evaluating training programs. It defines each of the four levels - reaction, learning, behavior, and results - and provides examples of assessment types and questions that can be used at each level. The key points are:
Level 1 assesses participants' reaction to the training. Level 2 evaluates the learning that occurred. Level 3 measures behavior change back on the job. Level 4 assesses the final business results or ROI of the training program. Each subsequent level builds upon the prior levels, and evaluation at all levels is needed to yield truly actionable insights. The document provides guidance on effectively performing assessments at each level.
This presentation gives a fundamental understanding about Kirkpatrick's four levels of evaluation model. It also includes a brief of the fifth level of evaluation by Philip that forms the Kirkpatrick-Philip Model.
The document describes the Kirkpatrick Model for Training Program Evaluation, which was developed by Donald Kirkpatrick. The model evaluates training programs on four levels - reaction, learning, behavior, and results. Level 1 measures participant reaction and experience with the training. Level 2 assesses learning or increased knowledge from before to after training. Level 3 evaluates if on-the-job behavior changed based on the training. Level 4 analyzes the effect on business metrics resulting from improved performance after training. The model is used as an industry standard to determine the impact and effectiveness of training programs.
KIRKPATRICK MODEL OF EVALUATION (LEO CHANDRA)vina serevina
The document discusses the Kirkpatrick (1994) model of evaluation, which consists of 4 levels - reaction, learning, behavior, and results. Level 1 measures participants' reactions to a training program. Level 2 assesses what participants learned. Level 3 looks at whether participants apply the new knowledge and skills on the job. Level 4 examines the overall impact on the organization in terms of outcomes like pass rates, GPA, retention rates, and satisfaction. The model provides a framework for conducting comprehensive evaluations of educational programs and their effects.
Learner Experience (model for training evaluation)Shahla Khan
Learner Experience or LX is a model of training evaluation I've coined, that tests the cognitive faculties of a learner. The approach is based on the principles of service design thinking that have heavily influenced user experience (UX) and customer experience (CX) in the information architecture area.
This presentation discusses training evaluation and provides the following key points:
1. Training evaluation involves assessing the effectiveness of training programs by collecting data on participant satisfaction, skills enhancement, and workplace application of new skills.
2. Kirkpatrick's four-level model is commonly used to evaluate training programs at the reaction, learning, behavior, and results levels.
3. The evaluation process includes identifying purposes, selecting methods, designing tools, collecting and analyzing data, and reporting findings to stakeholders such as training directors and funding agencies.
This document discusses the 4 Quadrants training design approach, which divides training into four sections: Open, Explain, Practice, and Reflect. The Open section involves introductory activities like icebreakers. Explain focuses on teaching methods like demonstration and examples. Practice provides opportunities for hands-on activities and role playing. Reflect allows for evaluating learning application and personal reflection. The document recommends tailoring activities in each quadrant to audience needs and providing different durations based on the training objectives of skill or knowledge building.
Measuring the Impact of eLearning: Turning Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Evalu...Lambda Solutions
Access to webinar recording here: http://go.lambdasolutions.net/webinar-growing-trend-of-open-source-learning
Whether it’s to inform, to improve, to change—or a combination of these factors, training must have measurable outcomes that contribute to larger organizational goals. Good training evaluation techniques identify and measure the impact of learning on job performance and ultimately, organization-wide business results. When it comes to measuring eLearning, Donald Kirkpatrick’s Four Level of Evaluation model is one of the most widely used and respected worldwide.
Co-hosted by Paula Yunker, with 30+ years of instructional design experience and certification in Kirkpatricks Four Levels Evaluation—this webinar will explore why learning evaluation is an important component of any training program and how you can measure the application of learning beyond the learning event itself. We’ll discuss how to implement learning evaluation that’s practical and provides value but isn’t complicated, time consuming or expensive. Paula will also share her favorite learning evaluation resources after the webinar!
Check out the slides to learn more about:
- Why learning evaluation is critical for business results
- Kirkpatrick’s four levels of evaluation explained
- Aligning learning to organizational goals
- Typical challenges implementing evaluation in an organization
- Practical strategies for implementing learning evaluation
- Our favorite learning evaluation resources
Kaufman's five-level evaluation method is used to develop and assess training programs from the trainee's perspective. The first two levels evaluate the resources and trainee reactions to the instruction. Levels two and three evaluate individual competency and application of skills in the workplace. Level four assesses the impact on organizational output and return on investment. The final level evaluates the contributions and consequences of the training program on clients and society.
This document provides an overview of assessment and evaluation in course design. It defines assessment as gathering information to make judgments about learner performance compared to standards to determine grades or success. Evaluation gathers information to improve teaching and learning, and can be formative (ongoing) or summative (final). Common assessment methods include tests, assignments, projects and surveys. Kirkpatrick's model outlines four levels of evaluation: reaction, learning, behavior, and results. When developing assessments, considerations include the purpose, objectives, class size, feedback, and using rubrics.
The four level model of evaluation assesses training effectiveness by building evaluation into four levels - reaction, learning, behavior, and results. Each successive level represents a more precise measure of a training program's effectiveness. Evaluation planning uses the model to identify targeted outcomes at the results level before beginning level one for reactions. The levels assess participant satisfaction, knowledge acquisition, ability to demonstrate learning in the workplace, and achievement of targeted outcomes respectively. While useful, the model has drawbacks as training is replaced by learning and development and levels three and four are difficult to implement.
The document discusses several models for evaluating training programs: Kirkpatrick's model, Phillips' ROI model, the CIPP model, and the COMA model. Kirkpatrick's model defines four levels of evaluation - reaction, learning, behavior, and results. Phillips' model adds a fifth level to Kirkpatrick's - return on investment (ROI). The CIPP model evaluates context, inputs, process, and products. The COMA model measures cognitive learning, organizational environment, motivation, and attitudes.
The document discusses Dr. Donald Kirkpatrick's model for evaluating training programs. The model contains 4 levels - (1) measuring participant reactions, (2) assessing learning, (3) determining behavioral changes on the job, and (4) evaluating results such as increased productivity or profits. The model provides a simple framework for conceptualizing training evaluation but has also been criticized as being too simplistic and not fully representing the evaluation process.
Kirkpatrick's four levels of evaluation model was developed by Donald Kirkpatrick for his PhD dissertation over 50 years ago and remains the leading model for evaluating training programs. The four levels include reaction, learning, behavior, and results. Level 1 evaluates participant reactions to the training experience. Level 2 assesses the learning that occurred, such as knowledge gained. Level 3 looks at whether behavior changed on the job. Level 4 measures results such as increased productivity or reduced costs. While widely used, the model has also received some criticism for being too simplistic and not proving causal relationships between the levels.
Kirkpatrick's Four-Level Training Evaluation ModelMaram Barqawi
Donald Kirkpatrick, Professor Emeritus at the University of Wisconsin and past president of the American Society for Training and Development (ASTD), first published his Four-Level Training Evaluation Model in 1959, in the US Training and Development Journal.
The model was then updated in 1975, and again in 1994, when he published his best-known work, "Evaluating Training Programs."
It is a four level training evaluation model.
It helps trainers to measure the effectiveness of their training in an objective way.
Kirkpatrick’s model is a worldwide standard for evaluating the effectiveness of training.
The document discusses the Four Levels of Evaluation model developed by Donald Kirkpatrick in 1959 to evaluate training programs. The four levels are: 1) learner reactions, 2) learning, 3) job behavior or transfer, and 4) observable results or impact. Level 1 evaluates learner opinions immediately after training. Level 2 assesses knowledge and skills learned. Level 3 evaluates on-the-job application of skills. Level 4 examines long-term business impact. Each level provides benefits for improving training and identifies weaknesses, though higher levels present more challenges to isolate the effects of training.
The purpose for Kirkpatrick’s evaluation is to determine the effectiveness of a training program. According to this model, evaluation should always begin with level one, and then, as time and budget allows, should move sequentially through levels two, three, and four. Information from each prior level serves as a base for the next level\'s evaluation.
The purpose of Brinkerhoff’s SCM to prove and to improve impact. It is a cost effective way in determining which components of initiative are working and which are not, and reporting result in a way that organizational leaders can easily understand and believe.
Kirkpatrick's Levels of Training Evaluation - Training and DevelopmentManu Melwin Joy
Training and Development
Evaluation
Human resource
Management
Motivation
Psychology
Success
Organizational effectiveness
Personal growth
Change management
This document discusses evaluating coursework from a student perspective. It outlines common purposes of evaluation like quality assurance and improving teaching. The focus of evaluation should be on both teaching/teacher and learning/outcomes. Strategies mentioned include surveys, observations, interviews, pre-/post-testing. Drawbacks include low response rates and students not always accurately assessing teaching. The document advocates using a variety of quantitative and qualitative methods like those in Kirkpatrick's four-level model to gain a holistic view of a course's effectiveness and opportunities for improvement from both a student learning and teaching practice perspective.
This document provides an overview of training evaluation and the Kirkpatrick model. It discusses the history of learning and development from the early 20th century pioneers in education and psychology. It then explains Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation: reaction, learning, behavior, and results. Each level is defined. The document also includes models like ADDIE and competency matrix that support training design. It emphasizes evaluating all training programs using Kirkpatrick's levels and monitoring outcomes over time to measure return on investment.
The Benefits Of Utilizing Kirkpatrick’S Four Levels Ofwendystein
The document outlines Kirkpatrick's four levels of evaluation that can be used to assess the effectiveness of safety training programs for supervisors. The four levels are: Level I) evaluate participant reaction; Level II) evaluate learning; Level III) evaluate behavior change; and Level IV) evaluate results including organizational goals and safety impacts. It provides details on the tools that can be used at each level and recommends starting with Level I and working through all four levels sequentially. The document applies this framework to evaluate the current monthly supervisor safety training program at SOCHD using reaction questionnaires, pre-and post-tests, on-the-job observations, and analyzing results.
This document discusses Kirkpatrick's four-level model for evaluating training programs. It defines each of the four levels - reaction, learning, behavior, and results - and provides examples of assessment types and questions that can be used at each level. The key points are:
Level 1 assesses participants' reaction to the training. Level 2 evaluates the learning that occurred. Level 3 measures behavior change back on the job. Level 4 assesses the final business results or ROI of the training program. Each subsequent level builds upon the prior levels, and evaluation at all levels is needed to yield truly actionable insights. The document provides guidance on effectively performing assessments at each level.
This presentation gives a fundamental understanding about Kirkpatrick's four levels of evaluation model. It also includes a brief of the fifth level of evaluation by Philip that forms the Kirkpatrick-Philip Model.
The document describes the Kirkpatrick Model for Training Program Evaluation, which was developed by Donald Kirkpatrick. The model evaluates training programs on four levels - reaction, learning, behavior, and results. Level 1 measures participant reaction and experience with the training. Level 2 assesses learning or increased knowledge from before to after training. Level 3 evaluates if on-the-job behavior changed based on the training. Level 4 analyzes the effect on business metrics resulting from improved performance after training. The model is used as an industry standard to determine the impact and effectiveness of training programs.
KIRKPATRICK MODEL OF EVALUATION (LEO CHANDRA)vina serevina
The document discusses the Kirkpatrick (1994) model of evaluation, which consists of 4 levels - reaction, learning, behavior, and results. Level 1 measures participants' reactions to a training program. Level 2 assesses what participants learned. Level 3 looks at whether participants apply the new knowledge and skills on the job. Level 4 examines the overall impact on the organization in terms of outcomes like pass rates, GPA, retention rates, and satisfaction. The model provides a framework for conducting comprehensive evaluations of educational programs and their effects.
Learner Experience (model for training evaluation)Shahla Khan
Learner Experience or LX is a model of training evaluation I've coined, that tests the cognitive faculties of a learner. The approach is based on the principles of service design thinking that have heavily influenced user experience (UX) and customer experience (CX) in the information architecture area.
This presentation discusses training evaluation and provides the following key points:
1. Training evaluation involves assessing the effectiveness of training programs by collecting data on participant satisfaction, skills enhancement, and workplace application of new skills.
2. Kirkpatrick's four-level model is commonly used to evaluate training programs at the reaction, learning, behavior, and results levels.
3. The evaluation process includes identifying purposes, selecting methods, designing tools, collecting and analyzing data, and reporting findings to stakeholders such as training directors and funding agencies.
This document discusses the 4 Quadrants training design approach, which divides training into four sections: Open, Explain, Practice, and Reflect. The Open section involves introductory activities like icebreakers. Explain focuses on teaching methods like demonstration and examples. Practice provides opportunities for hands-on activities and role playing. Reflect allows for evaluating learning application and personal reflection. The document recommends tailoring activities in each quadrant to audience needs and providing different durations based on the training objectives of skill or knowledge building.
Measuring the Impact of eLearning: Turning Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Evalu...Lambda Solutions
Access to webinar recording here: http://go.lambdasolutions.net/webinar-growing-trend-of-open-source-learning
Whether it’s to inform, to improve, to change—or a combination of these factors, training must have measurable outcomes that contribute to larger organizational goals. Good training evaluation techniques identify and measure the impact of learning on job performance and ultimately, organization-wide business results. When it comes to measuring eLearning, Donald Kirkpatrick’s Four Level of Evaluation model is one of the most widely used and respected worldwide.
Co-hosted by Paula Yunker, with 30+ years of instructional design experience and certification in Kirkpatricks Four Levels Evaluation—this webinar will explore why learning evaluation is an important component of any training program and how you can measure the application of learning beyond the learning event itself. We’ll discuss how to implement learning evaluation that’s practical and provides value but isn’t complicated, time consuming or expensive. Paula will also share her favorite learning evaluation resources after the webinar!
Check out the slides to learn more about:
- Why learning evaluation is critical for business results
- Kirkpatrick’s four levels of evaluation explained
- Aligning learning to organizational goals
- Typical challenges implementing evaluation in an organization
- Practical strategies for implementing learning evaluation
- Our favorite learning evaluation resources
Kaufman's five-level evaluation method is used to develop and assess training programs from the trainee's perspective. The first two levels evaluate the resources and trainee reactions to the instruction. Levels two and three evaluate individual competency and application of skills in the workplace. Level four assesses the impact on organizational output and return on investment. The final level evaluates the contributions and consequences of the training program on clients and society.
This document provides an overview of assessment and evaluation in course design. It defines assessment as gathering information to make judgments about learner performance compared to standards to determine grades or success. Evaluation gathers information to improve teaching and learning, and can be formative (ongoing) or summative (final). Common assessment methods include tests, assignments, projects and surveys. Kirkpatrick's model outlines four levels of evaluation: reaction, learning, behavior, and results. When developing assessments, considerations include the purpose, objectives, class size, feedback, and using rubrics.
The four level model of evaluation assesses training effectiveness by building evaluation into four levels - reaction, learning, behavior, and results. Each successive level represents a more precise measure of a training program's effectiveness. Evaluation planning uses the model to identify targeted outcomes at the results level before beginning level one for reactions. The levels assess participant satisfaction, knowledge acquisition, ability to demonstrate learning in the workplace, and achievement of targeted outcomes respectively. While useful, the model has drawbacks as training is replaced by learning and development and levels three and four are difficult to implement.
The document discusses several models for evaluating training programs: Kirkpatrick's model, Phillips' ROI model, the CIPP model, and the COMA model. Kirkpatrick's model defines four levels of evaluation - reaction, learning, behavior, and results. Phillips' model adds a fifth level to Kirkpatrick's - return on investment (ROI). The CIPP model evaluates context, inputs, process, and products. The COMA model measures cognitive learning, organizational environment, motivation, and attitudes.
The document reviews literature on different models for evaluating training program effectiveness. It discusses Kirkpatrick's four-level model of evaluation, which measures reaction, learning, behavior, and results. It also reviews several studies that applied aspects of Kirkpatrick's model to evaluate specific training programs.
Prescriptive evaluation involves assessing program strengths and weaknesses and offering specific recommendations for improvement. It follows a structured process that includes analyzing findings, identifying needs, developing recommendations in consultation with stakeholders, prioritizing recommendations, and monitoring their impact. Prescriptive evaluation provides actionable insights to help programs enhance effectiveness, efficiency, and outcomes.
The document discusses three prescriptive evaluation models: Kirkpatrick's Four-Level Training Evaluation Model, the Schuman Experimental Evaluation Model, and Stufflebeam's CIPP Model. Kirkpatrick's model assesses training programs at four levels - reaction, learning, behavior, and results. The Schuman model involves designing an intervention, implementing it, collecting and analyzing data, interpreting findings, and reporting results. Stufflebeam's CIPP model evaluates the context, inputs, process, and products of a program.
AkdjcijdjcBusiness card 8 Dec 2023.pdfhjdhbcjkewhcjkejckljecjdjRagaviS16
The document discusses models for evaluating training programs. It describes Kirkpatrick's four-level model which measures reaction, learning, behavior, and results. It also outlines the Phillips model which expands on Kirkpatrick by adding a fifth level - return on investment. The Phillips model provides more detailed assessment of learning application and implementation, impact on the organization, and financial return on the training investment. Both models aim to help improve training quality and impact through systematic evaluation.
Training evaluation is the systematic process of collecting information and using that information to improve your training. Evaluation provides feedback to help you identify if your training achieved your intended outcomes, and helps you make decisions about future training.
This document summarizes a knowledge sharing session on measuring learning impact. The session:
1) Discussed the importance of learning and development programs in organizations and different models for evaluating training, including Kirkpatrick's four levels of evaluation.
2) Presented two sample training courses and asked how evaluation could be conducted for each, focusing on which level of evaluation is most appropriate.
3) Noted that for the sample courses, level 4 evaluation measuring business impact would not be possible due to challenges in collecting relevant data.
4) Emphasized that the purpose of learning interventions is to impact the business through revenue generation, cost reduction, process improvement and people engagement.
The document discusses various methods and models for evaluating training programs, including:
- The Kirkpatrick model which evaluates training at four levels: reaction, learning, behavior, and results.
- The CIRO model which evaluates training context, inputs, reactions, and outputs at the learner, workplace, and organizational levels.
- The Phillips ROI model which adds a fifth level to the Kirkpatrick model to specifically measure return on investment through a cost-benefit analysis.
The key aspects of evaluating training discussed include determining indicators of effectiveness, choosing an appropriate evaluation model, and selecting the right data collection methods to gather feedback and assess the training against objectives.
The document discusses several models for evaluating training programs, including the Kirkpatrick, CIRO, CIPP, and Phillips models. The Kirkpatrick model evaluates training at four levels: reaction, learning, behavior, and results. The CIRO model also evaluates reaction and adds context and outcomes. The CIPP model evaluates context, inputs, processes, and products. The Phillips model includes five levels: reaction, learning, application, business impact, and return on investment. Kaufman's model also includes five levels from enabling resources to societal outcomes. Overall, the document outlines different approaches to evaluating the effectiveness and impact of training programs.
The document discusses various models for evaluating training programs, including Kirkpatrick's four-level model of evaluation, the CIRO model, and Phillip's five-level ROI model. Kirkpatrick's model measures reaction, learning, behavior, and results. The CIRO model focuses on context, input, reaction, and output to evaluate if training achieves organizational objectives. Phillip's expanded ROI model adds placement and business results to Kirkpatrick's levels. Evaluation is important for accountability, assessing costs and benefits, and improving future training programs.
This document discusses several models for evaluating training programs and educational courses: Kirkpatrick's four-level model, the Stufflebeam CIPP model, and the Flashlight Triad model. Kirkpatrick's model measures evaluation at four levels: reaction, learning, behavior, and results. The CIPP model evaluates context, inputs, processes, and products. It focuses on formative and summative evaluation to improve programs. The Flashlight Triad model uses triads of technology, activity, and outcomes to develop evaluation questions and gather data to inform modifications. The models provide systematic approaches to measure the effectiveness and efficiency of educational offerings.
This PPT will help to understand concepts in Training evaluation-It will be helpful for U.G & P.G students in understanding training and development concepts-Training Evaluation – Introduction – Reasons for evaluating training – Outcomes used in the evaluation of the training programs – Factors determining the outcomes of Evaluation – Evaluation Techniques and Instruments – Resistance to training evaluation – Future of Training and Development
The document discusses several models for evaluating the effectiveness of training programs:
1. Kirkpatrick's model is one of the most widely used frameworks, consisting of 4 levels - reaction, learning, behavior, and results. It measures effectiveness from participants' satisfaction to organizational impact.
2. Several other models build on Kirkpatrick's approach, such as adding a level to calculate return on investment (Phillips ROI model) or separating input and process (Kaufman's model).
3. Other approaches include the CIRO model for evaluating management training, the Brinkerhoff model focusing on success cases, and Anderson's model aligning training with organizational strategy.
4. Effective evaluation requires defining goals, measuring
The document discusses two models for evaluating educational training programs and courses: Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation and the Stufflebeam CIPP Evaluation Model. Kirkpatrick's model assesses training programs at four levels - reaction, learning, behavior, and results. The Stufflebeam CIPP Model evaluates based on context, inputs, process, and products. It is intended to improve programs by assessing their merit, worth and significance as well as lessons learned. Both models provide systematic approaches to measure the effectiveness and efficiency of educational programs and ways to improve them.
The Kirkpatrick Model is probably the best known model for analyzing and evaluating the results of training and educational programs. It takes into account any style of training, both informal or formal, to determine aptitude based on four levels criteria.
The document discusses evaluation of educational programs and learners. It defines evaluation as assessing the worth of teaching and learning. Evaluation is used to make decisions about training programs based on needs assessment, though barriers like lack of training and resistance can exist. The Kirkpatrick model is then explained as a popular method involving 4 levels - reaction, learning, behavior, and results. Finally, the document outlines the steps to evaluation as defining purpose, selecting a method, designing tools, collecting data, analyzing results, and reporting.
The document summarizes Kirkpatrick's model of training evaluation, which includes 4 levels - reaction, learning, behavior, and results. It focuses on Level 1 (reaction) and Level 2 (learning) evaluation. For Level 1, it describes measuring participant reactions through questionnaires. For Level 2, it describes measuring learning outcomes through achievement tests for knowledge, performance tests for skills, and questionnaires for attitudes. It emphasizes the importance of measuring learning objectives and using experimental research designs when possible, including control groups and pretests.
The document discusses several models of educational evaluation:
1. The Tyler Model emphasizes consistency between objectives, learning experiences, and outcomes. It involves defining objectives, selecting learning experiences, organizing experiences, and evaluating.
2. Metfessel and Michael's model is based on Tyler's but emphasizes other influencing factors. It involves direct community involvement and periodic observation.
3. Provus' Discrepancy Evaluation Model defines evaluation as identifying discrepancies between program aspects and standards to improve programs. It has four stages: program definition, installation, process, and product.
4. The Logic Model outlines a process involving inputs, activities, outputs, outcomes and impacts.
5. Kirkpatrick's model assesses participant reactions
5th LF Energy Power Grid Model Meet-up SlidesDanBrown980551
5th Power Grid Model Meet-up
It is with great pleasure that we extend to you an invitation to the 5th Power Grid Model Meet-up, scheduled for 6th June 2024. This event will adopt a hybrid format, allowing participants to join us either through an online Mircosoft Teams session or in person at TU/e located at Den Dolech 2, Eindhoven, Netherlands. The meet-up will be hosted by Eindhoven University of Technology (TU/e), a research university specializing in engineering science & technology.
Power Grid Model
The global energy transition is placing new and unprecedented demands on Distribution System Operators (DSOs). Alongside upgrades to grid capacity, processes such as digitization, capacity optimization, and congestion management are becoming vital for delivering reliable services.
Power Grid Model is an open source project from Linux Foundation Energy and provides a calculation engine that is increasingly essential for DSOs. It offers a standards-based foundation enabling real-time power systems analysis, simulations of electrical power grids, and sophisticated what-if analysis. In addition, it enables in-depth studies and analysis of the electrical power grid’s behavior and performance. This comprehensive model incorporates essential factors such as power generation capacity, electrical losses, voltage levels, power flows, and system stability.
Power Grid Model is currently being applied in a wide variety of use cases, including grid planning, expansion, reliability, and congestion studies. It can also help in analyzing the impact of renewable energy integration, assessing the effects of disturbances or faults, and developing strategies for grid control and optimization.
What to expect
For the upcoming meetup we are organizing, we have an exciting lineup of activities planned:
-Insightful presentations covering two practical applications of the Power Grid Model.
-An update on the latest advancements in Power Grid -Model technology during the first and second quarters of 2024.
-An interactive brainstorming session to discuss and propose new feature requests.
-An opportunity to connect with fellow Power Grid Model enthusiasts and users.
HCL Notes und Domino Lizenzkostenreduzierung in der Welt von DLAUpanagenda
Webinar Recording: https://www.panagenda.com/webinars/hcl-notes-und-domino-lizenzkostenreduzierung-in-der-welt-von-dlau/
DLAU und die Lizenzen nach dem CCB- und CCX-Modell sind für viele in der HCL-Community seit letztem Jahr ein heißes Thema. Als Notes- oder Domino-Kunde haben Sie vielleicht mit unerwartet hohen Benutzerzahlen und Lizenzgebühren zu kämpfen. Sie fragen sich vielleicht, wie diese neue Art der Lizenzierung funktioniert und welchen Nutzen sie Ihnen bringt. Vor allem wollen Sie sicherlich Ihr Budget einhalten und Kosten sparen, wo immer möglich. Das verstehen wir und wir möchten Ihnen dabei helfen!
Wir erklären Ihnen, wie Sie häufige Konfigurationsprobleme lösen können, die dazu führen können, dass mehr Benutzer gezählt werden als nötig, und wie Sie überflüssige oder ungenutzte Konten identifizieren und entfernen können, um Geld zu sparen. Es gibt auch einige Ansätze, die zu unnötigen Ausgaben führen können, z. B. wenn ein Personendokument anstelle eines Mail-Ins für geteilte Mailboxen verwendet wird. Wir zeigen Ihnen solche Fälle und deren Lösungen. Und natürlich erklären wir Ihnen das neue Lizenzmodell.
Nehmen Sie an diesem Webinar teil, bei dem HCL-Ambassador Marc Thomas und Gastredner Franz Walder Ihnen diese neue Welt näherbringen. Es vermittelt Ihnen die Tools und das Know-how, um den Überblick zu bewahren. Sie werden in der Lage sein, Ihre Kosten durch eine optimierte Domino-Konfiguration zu reduzieren und auch in Zukunft gering zu halten.
Diese Themen werden behandelt
- Reduzierung der Lizenzkosten durch Auffinden und Beheben von Fehlkonfigurationen und überflüssigen Konten
- Wie funktionieren CCB- und CCX-Lizenzen wirklich?
- Verstehen des DLAU-Tools und wie man es am besten nutzt
- Tipps für häufige Problembereiche, wie z. B. Team-Postfächer, Funktions-/Testbenutzer usw.
- Praxisbeispiele und Best Practices zum sofortigen Umsetzen
This presentation provides valuable insights into effective cost-saving techniques on AWS. Learn how to optimize your AWS resources by rightsizing, increasing elasticity, picking the right storage class, and choosing the best pricing model. Additionally, discover essential governance mechanisms to ensure continuous cost efficiency. Whether you are new to AWS or an experienced user, this presentation provides clear and practical tips to help you reduce your cloud costs and get the most out of your budget.
Ocean lotus Threat actors project by John Sitima 2024 (1).pptxSitimaJohn
Ocean Lotus cyber threat actors represent a sophisticated, persistent, and politically motivated group that poses a significant risk to organizations and individuals in the Southeast Asian region. Their continuous evolution and adaptability underscore the need for robust cybersecurity measures and international cooperation to identify and mitigate the threats posed by such advanced persistent threat groups.
Nunit vs XUnit vs MSTest Differences Between These Unit Testing Frameworks.pdfflufftailshop
When it comes to unit testing in the .NET ecosystem, developers have a wide range of options available. Among the most popular choices are NUnit, XUnit, and MSTest. These unit testing frameworks provide essential tools and features to help ensure the quality and reliability of code. However, understanding the differences between these frameworks is crucial for selecting the most suitable one for your projects.
Dive into the realm of operating systems (OS) with Pravash Chandra Das, a seasoned Digital Forensic Analyst, as your guide. 🚀 This comprehensive presentation illuminates the core concepts, types, and evolution of OS, essential for understanding modern computing landscapes.
Beginning with the foundational definition, Das clarifies the pivotal role of OS as system software orchestrating hardware resources, software applications, and user interactions. Through succinct descriptions, he delineates the diverse types of OS, from single-user, single-task environments like early MS-DOS iterations, to multi-user, multi-tasking systems exemplified by modern Linux distributions.
Crucial components like the kernel and shell are dissected, highlighting their indispensable functions in resource management and user interface interaction. Das elucidates how the kernel acts as the central nervous system, orchestrating process scheduling, memory allocation, and device management. Meanwhile, the shell serves as the gateway for user commands, bridging the gap between human input and machine execution. 💻
The narrative then shifts to a captivating exploration of prominent desktop OSs, Windows, macOS, and Linux. Windows, with its globally ubiquitous presence and user-friendly interface, emerges as a cornerstone in personal computing history. macOS, lauded for its sleek design and seamless integration with Apple's ecosystem, stands as a beacon of stability and creativity. Linux, an open-source marvel, offers unparalleled flexibility and security, revolutionizing the computing landscape. 🖥️
Moving to the realm of mobile devices, Das unravels the dominance of Android and iOS. Android's open-source ethos fosters a vibrant ecosystem of customization and innovation, while iOS boasts a seamless user experience and robust security infrastructure. Meanwhile, discontinued platforms like Symbian and Palm OS evoke nostalgia for their pioneering roles in the smartphone revolution.
The journey concludes with a reflection on the ever-evolving landscape of OS, underscored by the emergence of real-time operating systems (RTOS) and the persistent quest for innovation and efficiency. As technology continues to shape our world, understanding the foundations and evolution of operating systems remains paramount. Join Pravash Chandra Das on this illuminating journey through the heart of computing. 🌟
Have you ever been confused by the myriad of choices offered by AWS for hosting a website or an API?
Lambda, Elastic Beanstalk, Lightsail, Amplify, S3 (and more!) can each host websites + APIs. But which one should we choose?
Which one is cheapest? Which one is fastest? Which one will scale to meet our needs?
Join me in this session as we dive into each AWS hosting service to determine which one is best for your scenario and explain why!
How to Interpret Trends in the Kalyan Rajdhani Mix Chart.pdfChart Kalyan
A Mix Chart displays historical data of numbers in a graphical or tabular form. The Kalyan Rajdhani Mix Chart specifically shows the results of a sequence of numbers over different periods.
Letter and Document Automation for Bonterra Impact Management (fka Social Sol...Jeffrey Haguewood
Sidekick Solutions uses Bonterra Impact Management (fka Social Solutions Apricot) and automation solutions to integrate data for business workflows.
We believe integration and automation are essential to user experience and the promise of efficient work through technology. Automation is the critical ingredient to realizing that full vision. We develop integration products and services for Bonterra Case Management software to support the deployment of automations for a variety of use cases.
This video focuses on automated letter generation for Bonterra Impact Management using Google Workspace or Microsoft 365.
Interested in deploying letter generation automations for Bonterra Impact Management? Contact us at sales@sidekicksolutionsllc.com to discuss next steps.
HCL Notes and Domino License Cost Reduction in the World of DLAUpanagenda
Webinar Recording: https://www.panagenda.com/webinars/hcl-notes-and-domino-license-cost-reduction-in-the-world-of-dlau/
The introduction of DLAU and the CCB & CCX licensing model caused quite a stir in the HCL community. As a Notes and Domino customer, you may have faced challenges with unexpected user counts and license costs. You probably have questions on how this new licensing approach works and how to benefit from it. Most importantly, you likely have budget constraints and want to save money where possible. Don’t worry, we can help with all of this!
We’ll show you how to fix common misconfigurations that cause higher-than-expected user counts, and how to identify accounts which you can deactivate to save money. There are also frequent patterns that can cause unnecessary cost, like using a person document instead of a mail-in for shared mailboxes. We’ll provide examples and solutions for those as well. And naturally we’ll explain the new licensing model.
Join HCL Ambassador Marc Thomas in this webinar with a special guest appearance from Franz Walder. It will give you the tools and know-how to stay on top of what is going on with Domino licensing. You will be able lower your cost through an optimized configuration and keep it low going forward.
These topics will be covered
- Reducing license cost by finding and fixing misconfigurations and superfluous accounts
- How do CCB and CCX licenses really work?
- Understanding the DLAU tool and how to best utilize it
- Tips for common problem areas, like team mailboxes, functional/test users, etc
- Practical examples and best practices to implement right away
Introduction of Cybersecurity with OSS at Code Europe 2024Hiroshi SHIBATA
I develop the Ruby programming language, RubyGems, and Bundler, which are package managers for Ruby. Today, I will introduce how to enhance the security of your application using open-source software (OSS) examples from Ruby and RubyGems.
The first topic is CVE (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures). I have published CVEs many times. But what exactly is a CVE? I'll provide a basic understanding of CVEs and explain how to detect and handle vulnerabilities in OSS.
Next, let's discuss package managers. Package managers play a critical role in the OSS ecosystem. I'll explain how to manage library dependencies in your application.
I'll share insights into how the Ruby and RubyGems core team works to keep our ecosystem safe. By the end of this talk, you'll have a better understanding of how to safeguard your code.
In the rapidly evolving landscape of technologies, XML continues to play a vital role in structuring, storing, and transporting data across diverse systems. The recent advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) present new methodologies for enhancing XML development workflows, introducing efficiency, automation, and intelligent capabilities. This presentation will outline the scope and perspective of utilizing AI in XML development. The potential benefits and the possible pitfalls will be highlighted, providing a balanced view of the subject.
We will explore the capabilities of AI in understanding XML markup languages and autonomously creating structured XML content. Additionally, we will examine the capacity of AI to enrich plain text with appropriate XML markup. Practical examples and methodological guidelines will be provided to elucidate how AI can be effectively prompted to interpret and generate accurate XML markup.
Further emphasis will be placed on the role of AI in developing XSLT, or schemas such as XSD and Schematron. We will address the techniques and strategies adopted to create prompts for generating code, explaining code, or refactoring the code, and the results achieved.
The discussion will extend to how AI can be used to transform XML content. In particular, the focus will be on the use of AI XPath extension functions in XSLT, Schematron, Schematron Quick Fixes, or for XML content refactoring.
The presentation aims to deliver a comprehensive overview of AI usage in XML development, providing attendees with the necessary knowledge to make informed decisions. Whether you’re at the early stages of adopting AI or considering integrating it in advanced XML development, this presentation will cover all levels of expertise.
By highlighting the potential advantages and challenges of integrating AI with XML development tools and languages, the presentation seeks to inspire thoughtful conversation around the future of XML development. We’ll not only delve into the technical aspects of AI-powered XML development but also discuss practical implications and possible future directions.
GraphRAG for Life Science to increase LLM accuracyTomaz Bratanic
GraphRAG for life science domain, where you retriever information from biomedical knowledge graphs using LLMs to increase the accuracy and performance of generated answers
Unlock the Future of Search with MongoDB Atlas_ Vector Search Unleashed.pdfMalak Abu Hammad
Discover how MongoDB Atlas and vector search technology can revolutionize your application's search capabilities. This comprehensive presentation covers:
* What is Vector Search?
* Importance and benefits of vector search
* Practical use cases across various industries
* Step-by-step implementation guide
* Live demos with code snippets
* Enhancing LLM capabilities with vector search
* Best practices and optimization strategies
Perfect for developers, AI enthusiasts, and tech leaders. Learn how to leverage MongoDB Atlas to deliver highly relevant, context-aware search results, transforming your data retrieval process. Stay ahead in tech innovation and maximize the potential of your applications.
#MongoDB #VectorSearch #AI #SemanticSearch #TechInnovation #DataScience #LLM #MachineLearning #SearchTechnology
3. All about Kirkpatrick
In 1959, Kirkpatrick wrote four articles describing
the four levels for evaluating training programs.
He was working on his dissertation for a Ph.D.
when he came up with the idea of defining
evaluation.
Evaluation, as according to Kirkpatrick, seems to
have multiple meanings to training and
developmental professionals. Some think
evaluation is a change in behavior, or the
determination of the final results.
4. All about Kirkpatrick
(continued)
Kirkpatrick says they are all right, and
yet all wrong. All four levels are
important in understanding the basic
concepts in training. There are
exceptions, however.
6. Evaluating
“The reason for evaluating is to
determine the effectiveness of a
training program.” (Kirkpatrick,
1994, pg. 3)
7. The Ten Factors of Developing
a Training Program
1. Determine needs
2. Set objectives
3. Determine subject content
4. Select qualified applicants
5. Determine the best schedule
8. The Ten Factors of Developing
a Training Program
6. Select appropriate facilities
7. Select qualified instructors
8. Select and prepare audiovisual
aids
9. Co-ordinate the program
10. Evaluate the program
9. Reasons for Evaluating
Kirkpatrick gives three reasons ‘why’
there is a need to evaluate training:
1.“To justify the existence of the
training department by showing how
it contributes to the organizations’
objectives and goals.”
10. Reasons for Evaluating
2. “To decide whether to continue or
discontinue training programs.”
3. “To gain information on how to
improve future training programs.”
(Kirkpatrick, 1994, pg. 18)
12. “The Four Levels represent a
sequence of ways to evaluate
(training) programs….As you move
from one level to the next, the
process becomes more difficult and
time-consuming, but it also provides
more valuable information.”
(Kirkpatrick, 1994, pg. 21)
13. Reaction:
is the measuring of the reaction of
the participants in the training
program.
is “a measure of customer
satisfaction.” (Kirkpatrick, 1994,
pg. 21)
14. Learning:
is the change in the participants’
attitudes, or an increase in
knowledge, or greater skills
received, as a result of the
participation of the program.
15. Learning
The measuring of learning in any training
program is the determination of at least one
of these measuring parameters:
Did the attitudes change positively?
Is the knowledge acquired related and
helpful to the task?
Is the skill acquired related and helpful to
the task?
16. Behavior
Level 3 attempts to evaluate how
much transfer of knowledge, skills,
and attitude occurs after the
training.
17. The four conditions Kirkpatrick
identifies for changes to occur:
Desire to change
Knowledge of what to do and
how to do it
Work in the right climate
Reward for (positive) change
18. When all conditions are met,
the employee must:
Realize an opportunity to use the
behavioral changes.
Make the decision to use the
behavioral changes.
Decide whether or not to continue
using the behavioral changes.
19. When evaluating change in
behavior, decide:
When to evaluate
How often to evaluate
How to evaluate
20. Guidelines for evaluating
behavior:
Use a control group
Allow time for change to occur
Evaluate before and after
Survey/interview observers
Get 100% response or sampling
Repeat evaluation, as appropriate
Consider cost versus benefits
21. Results
Level 4 is the most important and
difficult of all - determining final
results after training.
23. Guidelines for evaluating
results:
Use a control group.
Allow time for results to be achieved.
Measure before and after the program.
Repeat the measurements, as needed.
Consider cost versus benefits.
Be satisfied with evidence if proof is not
possible.
25. Intel’s Compromise
of the Kirkpatrick Model
Intel uses the four-level model as
an analysis instrument to
determine the initial training needs
and design of its training program;
as well as using the model for
evaluations.
26. Intel’s Compromise
of the Kirkpatrick Model
Their uniqueness of using the model
is in the fact that the designers of
the training program worked
backwards in the analysis of the
training, starting with Level Four.
27. The Model
This implementation of the
Kirkpatrick Model stands as vivid
testimony to the versatility of the
model as a training tool, and in
developing fledgling training
programs.
28. The Model
It also reflects the open-mindedness
of the senior executives at Intel for
their infinite use of the model and
the use of the genius and visions of
Kirkpatrick.
29. How Intel applies the analysis
to their training program
Level Four …”Determine the
organizations’ structure and future
needs.”
Level Three. Change the
environmental conditions and
employee conditions to improve
business indicators.
30. How Intel applies the analysis
to their training program
Level Two. “Design a training
program that would ensure a transfer
of deficient skills and knowledge.”
Level One. Use a questionnaire,
according to their skill level, that
would instruct and inspire training
participants.
31. How Intel applies evaluation
to their training program
Level One - Questionnaire.
Level Two - Demonstrate competency,
create action plans through group
simulations.
Level Three - Follow-up to determine if
action plans were met (specific steps to
implement concepts of what was learned).
Level Four - Ongoing process of tracking
business indicators.
33. St. Luke’s is unique -
Evaluation of outdoor-based
training program, not classroom.
Results analyzed statistically to
determine the significance of any
change.
Evaluation led to recommendations
for future programs.
34. The New Questionnaire
Used before attendance in the program.
Used 3 months after completion of the
program.
Used again 6 months after completion of
the program.
(Communication showed statistically significant
improvement, and Group Effectiveness showed
statistically significant change.)
35. Kirkpatrick’s 4 Levels of
Evaluation are:
Level 1 - Reaction: how participants reacted
to the program.
Level 2 - Learning: what participants
learned from the program.
Level 3 - Behavior: whether what was
learned is being applied on the job.
Level 4 - Results: whether that application
is achieving results.
36. Post-test Questions
(1) Name three ways evaluation results can
be measured.
(2) Do all 4 Levels have to be used?
(3) Do they have to be used in 1,2,3,4
order?
(4) Is Kirkpatrick’s method of evaluation
summative or formative?
(5) Which developmental “view” does
Kirkpatrick use? (discrepancy,
37. “IF YOU THINK TRAINING IS
EXPENSIVE, TRY IGNORANCE.”
and, remember, the definition of
ignorance is
repeating the same behavior, over and
over, and expecting different results!
Editor's Notes
The reason why Kirkpatrick wanted to develop his Four-Level Model was to clarify the meaning and process for determining ‘evaluation’ in a training program. If there is no change in behavior, but there is a change in skills, knowledge, or attitudes, then using only part of the model (not all levels) is acceptable. If the purpose of the training program is to change behavior, then all four levels apply. Other authors on evaluation of training programs have proposed various strategies, but Kirkpatrick is given credit for developing and masterminding the Four-Level Model. Kirkpatrick focuses the Model for the executives and middle management. However, his model works well in most other training areas.
These are questions asked by HRD coordinators on training performance and the beginning criteria and the expectations of the resulting training program. Business training operations need quantitative measures as well as qualitative measures. A happy medium between these two criteria is an ideal position to fully understand the training needs and to fulfill its development. Quantitative - the research methodology where the investigator's “values, interpretations, feelings, and musings have no place in the positivist’s view of the scientific inquiry.” (Borg and Gall, 1989) cont.
The end results after an evaluation are hopefully positive results for both upper management and the program coordinators.
1. Ask participants, bosses, testing, or ask others who are familiar with the needs or objectives. Some examples are surveys or interviews. 2. a. What are the results that you are trying to do? b. What behaviors do you want the participants to have at the end of the training program. c. What knowledge, skills, and/or attitudes do you want your pupils to demonstrate at the end of the training program. 3. Determine subject content to meet needs and objectives. 4. Four decisions: a. Who is the best suited to receive the training. b. Are the training programs required by law (affirmative action). c. Voluntary or required d. Should hourly and salary be included in the same class or be segregated. 5. Solid week or intermittent days. How often should breaks be taken. Should lunch be brought in or allow participants to leave for a hour.
6. Should be comfortable and convenient and appropriate. 7. a. In-house or outside contractors b. Do instructors need to be ‘tailored’ to the special needs in the training program. 8. Two purposes: a. Maintain interest b. Help communicate ideas and skill transfer. Both of these purposes can be accomplished by using single, special interest video cassettes or some type of packaged program. 9. Two scenarios: a. Frustration, and b. Needs of the instructor. 10. The determining effectiveness of a training program are planning and implementation.
1. If and when downsizing occurs, this statement shall have more meaning than ever for some unlucky people. HRD departments are regarded by upper management as an overhead and not contributing directly to production.
2. Pilot courses may be implemented to see if the participants have the necessary knowledge, or skills, or behavioral changes to make the program work. 3. Kirkpatrick uses eight factors on how to improve the effectiveness of a training program. These eight factors closely follow the Ten Factors of Developing a Training Program. This is a feedback statement spinning off of the Ten Factors.
All of these levels are important. However, in later examples of this model, you shall see where large corporations have taken the Kirkpatrick Model and used all of it, only part of it, and still some reversed the order of the levels.
The reactions of the participants must be positive for the program to survive, grow, and improve. Reactions reach back to bosses and subordinates alike. This word-of-mouth gossip reaction can either make the program or break it. Here ‘customer’ refers to the participants in the training program.
A training program must accomplish at least one of these three learning traits in order to be effective for a participant to learn. The best case scenario is to see an improvement in all three traits. However, as according to Kirkpatrick, only one learning trait is all it takes to have an effective training program.
Guidelines for measuring Learning: 1. Use a control group along with an experimental group to provide a comparison analysis, 2. Have a pre-test and a post-test, then measure the difference, 3. Try to get an honest and true 100% response to any interviews, surveys, or tests. 4. The use of a test to measure participant learning is an effective evaluation for both participant and instructor alike. However, this is not a conclusive fact. There may be other factors involved. Results must be measured across the spectrum of the Ten Factors of Development.
Level 3 asks the question “What changes in behavior occurred because people attended the training? This Level is a more difficult evaluation than Levels 1 and 2.
The employee must want to make the change. The training must provide the what and the how . The employee must return to a work environment that allows and/or encourages the change. There should be rewards - Intrinsic - inner feelings of price and achievement. Extrinsic - such as pay increases or praise.
The employee may - Like the new behavior and continue using it. Not like the new behavior and return to doing things the “old way”. Like the change, but be restrained by outside forces that prevent his continuing to use it.
With Reaction and Learning, evaluation should be immediate. But evaluating change in Behavior involves some decision-making.
Use a control group only if applicable. Be aware that this task can be very difficult and maybe even impossible. Allow time for behavioral changes. This could be immediate, as in the case of diversity training, or it can take longer, such as using training for administration of performance appraisals. For some programs 2-3 months is appropriate. For others, 6 months is more realistic. Evaluate before and after, if time and budgets allow. Conduct interviews and surveys. Decide who is qualified for questioning, and, of those qualified, whose answers would be most reliable, who is available, and, of the choices, should any not be used. Attempt to get 100% response. Repeat the evaluation. Not all employees will make the changes at the same time. Consider cost vs. benefit. This cost can be internal staff time or an outside expert hired to do the evaluation. The greater the possible benefits, the greater the number of dollars that can be justified. If the program will be repeated, the evaluation can be used for future program improvements.
Many of these questions do not get answered. Why? Trainers don’t know how to measure results in comparison to the cost of the training. Secondly, the results may not be clear proof that the training caused the positive results. Unless there is a direct relationship between the training and the results. (i.e. sales training and resulting sales dollars)
Use a control group, again, if applicable, to prove the training caused the change. Allow time for results, different for different programs, different for each individual. Measure before and after. This is easier than measuring behavior because figures are usually available - hard data, such as production numbers or absenteeism. Repeat the measurement. You must decide when and how often to evaluate. Consider cost vs. benefit. Here, the amount of money spent on evaluation should be determined by - cost of training, potential results to be achieved, and how often the training will be repeated. And last, be happy with evidence of training success, because you may not get proof!
This case study used Level 1, Reaction, and Level 3, Behavior: St. Luke’s needed to improve efficiency and cost control and was looking for ways to improve management training. Outdoor-based programs have been effective in improving interdepartmental communications, increasing employee trust, and reducing boundaries between departments, thereby empowering employees. How many of you have taken part in such a program? There is an entire course of “rope and ladder” activities in the woods, some at ground level and some at higher elevations. The goal of these activities is to build trust and encourage openness and sharing.
St. Luke’s program consisted of three 1-day sessions on such a course. Phase I was directed at getting acquainted: in the morning “low rope” activities and in the afternoon, “high rope” elements. Phase II was focused on building trust within the group with harder, more challenging activities. Phase III focused on individual development and increased group support. The group traveled together and had team slogans and T-shirts. Previous participants were given a questionnaire to describe what they had personally gotten from the program and how it had changed their behavior. The results were used to design a new questionnaire for future participants.
Evaluation of this program showed that some of the goals were achieved and were long-lasting. Also, it showed that participants had a positive reaction to the program, which can be linked to results on the job.
(1) For ways results can be measured, refer to Slide 21. (2) All four Levels do not have to be used. Case study on St. Luke’s Hospital only used Levels 1 and 3. (3) The Levels do not have to be used in 1,2,3,4 order. Intel started 4,3,2,1 in designing their program. (4) What is your opinion on Kirkpatrick’s method being summative or formative? Is it a combination? (5) Which developmental view do you think Kirkpatrick uses? Defend your opinion.