Evaluating learning in library training workshops: using the retrospective pretest design

Abstract

Abstract:The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of an evaluation instrument using the retrospective pretest design to measure changes in participants' behaviour after library training. This article focuses on the measurement component of training evaluation -the process of answering the question of how much change has occurred. Participants, who were from a large, public academic geriatric care centre in Toronto, included administrators, researchers, clinical and other staff, and university students doing field placements at the hospital. Participants attended one of four 1-hour sessions on the topic of Effectively Searching Google and Google Scholar that were held over a 3-month period. Sixty days post training, a self-administered retrospective pretest questionnaire, consisting of 10 searching behaviour statements developed using the learning objectives for the training session, was used to measure the impact of library training on participants' behaviour. Participants were asked to indicate their level of frequency of performing a searching behaviour described in the statement before and after training using a five-point, Likert-type scale ranging from 1, almost never; 2, seldom; 3, about half the time; 4, often; to 5, almost always. Summary baseline statistics are reported for respondents who never or rarely exhibited the behaviour prior to training. For the change measure, we report the simple percentage of respondents who improved. The findings of this study showed the potential of using the retrospective pretest to help librarians document the outcomes of library training. The benefits of gathering data using the retrospective pretest are discussed. McDiarmid and Binns 109

The potential of a lecture series in changing intent and experience among health professionals to conduct research in a large hospital: a retrospective pre-post design

“…The innovative retrospective pre/post-test methodology was used for this study due to its effectiveness, efficiency and ease of administration. Participants rate themselves with a single frame of reference on both pre-test and retrospective post-test which helps to reduce response shift bias [16]. It was also utilised in a busy hospital setting due to its advantage of a single administration and implementation of the study design post-intervention [16].…”

“…Participants rate themselves with a single frame of reference on both pre-test and retrospective post-test which helps to reduce response shift bias [16]. It was also utilised in a busy hospital setting due to its advantage of a single administration and implementation of the study design post-intervention [16]. In the analysis of the data a paired analysis was chosen for its effective simplicity and could be considered a limitation compared to other more complex analysis, such as multivariate modelling.…”

“…The third and fourth sections measured self-assessed experience in and intent to conduct research [10, 15] using a retrospective pre/post-test design where participants complete both pre and post questions at one time point i.e. 6 months following the intervention activity [16]. The questionnaire was piloted amongst 8 WSLHD clinicians and several minor changes were made to help validate the survey.…”

Why video health education messages should be considered for all dental waiting rooms

“…The section of the questionnaire that evaluated oral health knowledge and behaviour was delivered in a retrospective pre-test style to measure both pre and post-viewing behaviour change. The retrospective pre-test method asks participants to give both pre and post-test responses after the intervention activity [19]. Participants rate themselves with a single frame of reference on both pre-test and retrospective post-test which helps to reduce response shift bias.…”

Predictors of Knowledge-Sharing Behaviors Among Community-Based Natural Resources Organizations in the Okavango Delta, Botswana

“…The retrospective pretest enabled subjects to give pretest answers that are based on a more accurate frame of reference as it is administered at the same time as the posttest (McDiarmid & Binns, 2005; Pratt, McGuigan, & Katzev, 2000). The greatest strength of the retrospective-pretest design is that it addresses the threat to validity found in the traditional pretest-posttest design—the response shift bias (Howard & Dailey, 1979; Howard Schmeck, & Bray, 1979; Rohs, 1999).…”