Hi my name is Sarah and I am a graduate student in the Adult Education/Human Resource Development program at James Madison University. I am currently in a Program Evaluation course and have a few questions on the current trends of evaluation related to Kirkpatrick's four-level evaluation process.

From my understanding, many organizations and individuals use Kirkpatrick's four-level evaluation process as the main evaluation tool. Phillips and Phillips (2005) suggest that Kirkpatrick's four-level model is outdated because it does not take into consideration return-on-investment; therefore, many new models have added ROI as a fifth level to Kirkpatrick's original four levels.

From your experience in the field and your organization, do organizations generally use Kirkpatrick's four levels as the basis for evaluation?

Are there any other factors that your organization evaluates in addition to reaction, learning, behavior, results, and return-on-investment?

Do you think the measurement and evaluation field is in need of a new standard evaluation model?

What are a few reasons why organizations do or do not use Kirkpatrick's four levels?

I appreciate your feedback and input and look forward to gaining further understanding and knowledge of evaluation procedures in current organizations.

Thank you,
Sarah

This was already posted on Feb. 5

Maybe those of you with the exact same assignment could get together and get to the library to start finding resources for your research. Most professors prefer books and scholarly journals. Good luck.

(As a fellow graduate student and teacher, I'm really appalled that you feel it's okay to post your assignment here.)

I apologize for posting two similar threads. I was interested in receiving additional feedback and input with regard to slightly different aspects of evaluation and Kirkpatrick.

Thank you.

While I agree you should be hitting the library and checking out published scholars, there are lots of successful trainers who choose not to write books, but still have great experience. Not that I am not claiming to be one of them However, I will share my thoughts on the topic...

According to SHRM (my books are from the Fall 2007 semester), organizations tend to evaluate training on the first two levels. However, these are the least effective. They simply measure if the participants liked the trainer, the subject matter, lunch, etc. Measuring learning immediately after the class or a week after is simply did the participants "get it." It doesnt mean they actually use it. Organizations use the other two levels (behavior and results) the least because they are harder to measure. Yet, they are more accurate measures. In the end training should be tied to strategic objectives... you should see positive results.

From my experience, its hard to separate training from the other factors that contribute to an organization's success. Organizational structures, policies, procedures and culture all play a role. You can have the best training program and best trainers, but without the proper support in place, it wont be 100%. How do you account for these factors? How do you put a dollar amount on it?

Hope this helps.