The Kirkpatrick model: A useful tool for evaluating training outcomes

Smidt, Andy; Balandin, Susan; Sigafoos, Jeff; Reed, Vicki A.

doi:10.1080/13668250903093125

Cited by 273 publications

(204 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

192

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…To this end, Kirkpatrick (1996) developed a four-level model that is widely used to evaluate training programs (Smidt, 2009). The levels-reaction, learning, behavior, and results-are shown in in Table 2.…”

Section: Overview Of Factors Impacting Training Efficiency and Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a Framework for Evaluating Continuous Improvement Training Within the Context of Enterprise Transformation

Wiseman

Eseonu

Doolen

2014

Journal of Enterprise Transformation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

2 Many organizations fail in their efforts to create a culture of continuous improvement. For many manufacturing organizations, lean is one vehicle used to create a culture of continuous improvement. However, according to a 2007 survey of organizations attempting to introduce lean conducted by Industry Weekly, the rate of failure is above 70%, due to piecemeal adoption, lack of employee buy-in, and deficient continuous improvement strategies. Effective training is one mechanism available to organizations to create a comprehensive approach for creating a culture of continuous improvement. Effective training can be used to increase employee buy-in and to create a unified understanding of continuous improvement tools and strategies among employees. This article details a study to identify determinants of training effectiveness at a steel manufacturing company in the early stages of lean implementation. Time, resources, and communication were identified as the primary determinants of training effectiveness and efficiency in this organization. To extend the applicability of these findings, the results from this study were placed within a larger context of enterprise transformation and used to specify a framework for enterprise transformation that can assist organizational leaders in designing training programs and to increase the likelihood of success in their efforts to create a culture of continuous improvement.

show abstract

Section: Overview Of Factors Impacting Training Efficiency and Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a Framework for Evaluating Continuous Improvement Training Within the Context of Enterprise Transformation

Wiseman

Eseonu

Doolen

2014

Journal of Enterprise Transformation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This integrates four levels of evaluation: reaction (to the programme), learning, changes in behaviour and real world results. The model has been in use for over 50 years and its longevity may be related to its practicality and simplicity (Griffin, 2014), shifted and emphasis from single measure evaluation (Bates, 2004) and use as a framework for evaluating interventions (Smidt et al, 2009;Yardley and Dornan 2012). It has unsurprisingly received criticism mainly on the grounds of assumed relationships between the four levels (Bates 2004).…”

Section: Project Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This assumption is compounded by a perception that the four levels constitute a hierarchy of evidence of proof of benefit (Anderson & Thorpe, 2014;Yardley and Dornan, 2012). Despite limitations the model was chosen for this evaluation for its inherent usability, comprehensiveness (Carpenter et al, 2006) and focus on outcomes (Smidt et al, 2009). …”

Section: Project Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing a culture of publication: a joint enterprise writing retreat

Garside

Bailey

Tyas

et al. 2015

Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Many students irrespective of level of study produce excellent course work which, if given support and encouragement could clearly be of a publishable standard. Academic staff are expected to produce quality publications meeting peer review standards although they may be relatively novice authors. All are engaged in some aspects of academic writing practices but not as frequently involved in co-production of publications emanating from student work. This activity is still at the margins of much of the student experience. Design/methodology: Mindful of these issues, we designed and offered a writing programme including a writing retreat. This brought together undergraduate and postgraduate students from a range of applied disciplines (health and art, design and architecture) and their supervisors with the aim of co-producing publications and participating in a community of scholarly practice. The project was delivered over nine months. It involved four days 'compulsory' attendance and included a preparatory workshop, a two day off campus writing retreat and a dissemination event. Student and supervisors applied to participate as a team. Kirkpatrick's (2006) four-stage classic model: reaction, learning, changes in behaviour and real world results was used as a framework for the educational evaluation. Key findings organised thematically were: Supervisor-supervisee relationships; space and time; building confidence enabling successful writing and publication. Originality/Value: This paper will provide an overview of the design, content and approaches used for successful delivery of this innovative project. It will draw on examples that illustrate the different types of joint enterprise that emerged, illuminate experiences of co-production and co-authorship along with recommendations for future ventures.

show abstract

“…1-2015, 11 årgang _________________________________________________________________________________________ Intervjuguiden ble utarbeidet etter de tre første nivåene i Kirkpatricks evalueringsmodell (1996). Flere forskere hevder at Kirkpatricks evalueringsmodell (1996) er egnet for evaluering av veilednings-og vurderingsverktøy eller studieprogram (Smidt, Balandin, Sigafoos & Reed, 2009;Gjerde, Hla, Kokotailo & Anderson, 2008). Kirkpatricks evalueringsmodell inneholder fire nivå som kan brukes for å evaluere ulike og komplementaere aspekt av veilednings-og vurderingsverktøy:…”

Section: Metode Og Datainnsamlingunclassified