View From the Top
For over seven decades, the Kirkpatrick Model for training evaluation has stood the test of time and proven to be an effective tool for measuring training outcomes. In this fast-paced and constantly evolving world of instructional design, it’s essential to ensure that we are employing the most effective methods available. Let’s explore how we can harness the power of the Kirkpatrick Model to maximize our training efforts.
Kirkpatrick outlines four levels for evaluation:
Level 1: Reaction – measures the immediate response from learners using surveys or smile sheets.
Level 2: Learning – measures the knowledge, skills, or attitudes gained using quizzes and tests.
Level 3: Behavior – measures the transfer of learning to the jo using observation checklists, interviews, and 360-degree feedback tools.
Level 4: Results – measures the final results of the program using business measures such as KPIs or ROI.
This model is straightforward and effective, but can also give a false sense of security if we approach it the wrong way.
For example, level one measures the immediate response from learners, but does this reaction tell us much about the effectiveness of the training intervention? Surveys are easy to create, implement, and track. An entertaining facilitator and some good food can prompt positive survey results, but is the problem solved?
What about level two? Tests and quizzes are pretty easy to draft but tend to lean heavily toward knowledge at the expense of skills or attitudes. The types of questions that are easiest to measure (e.g., multiple choice) often just measure the lowest level of thinking: recall. In too many cases, half the answer options are obviously wrong and freely guide the learner to the correct answer, skewing the results.
Progressing from level two to level three of the Kirkpatrick model can pose a significant challenge. While the previous levels of evaluation may have been relatively simple to assess and monitor, measuring behavior can prove to be much more difficult. As a result, learning and development teams may not strategize past the surveys and tests and limit the effectiveness of their evaluation process.
There is a solution! When using Kirkpatrick’s Levels, we must avoid treating the levels as a ladder, progressing from one step to the next from the bottom up. It is widely acknowledged that backward design is the ideal approach for designing effective training and this ought to be applied to the evaluation strategy. By starting with a clear understanding of the desired goals, it is possible to develop a program that is more likely to make a meaningful impact.
The fourth level of Kirkpatrick’s Model, which measures results, should be the starting point of the evaluation process.
What does this look like? Start by identifying a clear business goal that the training intervention will help solve. Only once this has been established should the training program be designed and developed, with a focus on measuring and evaluating the root problem and its solution. This approach ensures that the evaluation process is based on meaningful, measurable outcomes that provide insight into the effectiveness of the training. With this foundation, you are primed to consider what behaviors should be adopted and how to measure them. Tests and surveys can be more easily targeted to collect valid and reliable data.
The beauty of starting with level four is organizations can effectively demonstrate the value of their instructional design teams and showcase their return on investment. This approach enables companies to truly reap the rewards of effective training and development. Begin at the top with the results, the view is pretty spectacular!
