Definitions
|
|
Evaluation of training
All definitions
|
Evaluation of training can be understood as "the systematic collection of descriptive and judgmental information necessary to make effective training decisions related to the selection, adoption, value, and modification of various training activities" (Goldstein & Ford, 2002, p. 138)
Evaluation and transfer, together, comprise the third and final phase of Arnold and Silvester's (2004) systematic training cycle. Summative versus formative evaluation (Scriven, 1967; in Thompson, Eriksen-Brown et al., 2009) can be a useful distinction. Summative evaluations, such as Kirkpatrick's model, focus only on measuring outcomes. Formative evaluations focus on "why" particular outcomes occurred – that is, they focus on "process criteria to provide further information to help understand the training system so that the originally intended objectives are achieved" (Goldstein & Ford, 2002, p. 166). Related References Arnold, J, Silvester, J, Patterson, F, Robertson, I.T., Cooper, C.L., Burnes, B. (2004). Work psychology: Understanding human behaviour in the workplace (4th ed. Harlow, UK: Pearson Education. Goldstein, I.L., Ford, J.K. (2002). Training in organizations (Fourth edition). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. Scriven, M. (1967). The methodology of evaluation. In American Educational Research Association, Perspectives of Curriculum Evaluation, Monograph No. 1. Chicago: Rand McNally. Thompson, I, Eriksen-Brown, A, Dewe, P, Bramely, P. (2009). Training and development subject guide. London: Birkbeck University of London. Read a practice exam essay in response to the question:
"Critically evaluate the Kirkpatrick model of training evaluation in terms of its value to the practitioner. Does any alternative model of training evaluation offer better guidance?" Exam essay practice answer |
|
|
|