Training Evaluation Methods 23645e

Training evaluation refers to activities aimed at finding out the effectiveness of training programmes after they are conducted, against the objectives for which such programmes were organized. The CIPP Model of Evaluation: Published in 1983, the James Galvin model for evaluation is better known by its acronym, CIPP, which stands for the four steps in the process: context, input, process and product evaluation. This model was developed for evaluating the effectiveness of educational methods, but has since found training applications outside the classroom. 1.Context Evaluation: Obtaining and using information about the current operational context in order to determine training needs and objectives. 2. Input Evaluation: Obtaining and using information about possible training resources in order to choose between alternative ‘inputs’ to training. 3. Process Evaluation: Obtaining and using information about how a program is being implemented, monitoring how the program is performing, auditing the program to make sure it is following required legal and ethical guidelines, and identifying defects in the procedural design or in the implementation of the program. 4. Product Evaluation: determining and examining the general and specific outcomes of the program (i.e., which requires using impact or outcome assessment techniques), measuring anticipated outcomes, attempting to identify unanticipated outcomes, assessing the merit of the program, conducting a retrospective benefit/cost assessment (to establish the actual worth or value of the program), and/or conducting a cost effectiveness assessment (to determine if the program is cost effective compared to other similar programs).

The CIRO Model of Evaluation: Warr, Bird and Rackham’s four-stage CIRO (context, input, reaction, and output) model, developed in 1970 remains one of the most widely used training evaluation models. The CIRO Framework for the Evaluation of Training 1. Context Evaluation: Obtaining and using information about the current operational context in order to determine training needs and objectives. 2. Input Evaluation: Obtaining and using information about possible training resources in order to choose between alternative ‘inputs’ to training. 3. Reaction Evaluation: Obtaining and using information about trainees’ expressed current or subsequent reactions in order to improve training. 4. Outcome Evaluation: Obtaining and using information about the outcomes of training in order to improve subsequent training. Three levels of outcome evaluation are in of immediate, intermediate and ultimate outcomes.

Kirkpatrick’s learning and training evaluation theory: Kirkpatrick's four levels are designed as a sequence of ways to evaluate training programs. Donald L Kirkpatrick (1959).

The four levels of Kirkpatrick's evaluation model are as follows: 1.Reaction - what participants thought and felt about the training (satisfaction; "smile sheets") 2. Learning - the resulting increase in According to Kirkpatrick behaviour change knowledge and/or skills, and change in brought about by the training function can be attitudes. This evaluation occurs during the divided into: training in the form of either a knowledge 1. Change of skill: Change of skill may be demonstration or test. measured by a change in production/output 3. Behaviour - transfer of knowledge, skills, 2. Change of Knowledge: Testing the and/or attitudes from classroom to the job conceptual clarity on the subject matter can (change in job behavior due to training assess change of knowledge. Here trainer deals program). This evaluation occurs 3–6 months with ‘concepts’ or ‘principle’ post training while the trainee is performing 3. Change of Attitude: Attitude change is the the job. Evaluation usually occurs through most difficult of behavioural change. There are observation. three ways to evaluate attitudinal changes in an 4. Results - the final results that occurred individual because of attendance and participation in a I) By the subjective evaluation of others about the training program (can be monetary, person; performance-based, etc.) II) By the individual verbalization of his or her family; III) By the individuals total productivity

(c) Job Instruction: This method is also known "Management Development is an educational as training through step by step. Under this process utilizing a systematic and organized method, trainer explains the trainee the way of procedure by which managerial personnel learn doing the jobs, job knowledge and skills and conceptual and technical knowledge for general allows him to do the job. The trainer appraises the performance of the trainee, provides purpose." information and corrects the trainee. On-The-Job Training Methods (a) Job Rotation: This type of training involves (d) Committee Assignments: Under the the movement of the trainee from one job to committee assignment, group of trainees are another. The trainee receives job knowledge and given and asked to solve an actual gains experience from his supervisor or trainer organisational problem. The trainees solve the in each of the different job assignments. Though problem tly. It develops team work. this method of training is common in training (e) Apprenticeship: Apprenticeship is a managers for general management positions, formalized method of training curriculum trainees can also be rotated from job to job in program that combines classroom education workshop jobs. This method gives an with on-the-job work under close supervision. opportunity to the trainee to understand the This method is appropriate for training in crafts, problems of employees on other jobs and trades and technical areas. respect them. (b) Coaching: The trainee is placed under a particular supervisor who functions as a coach in training the individual. The supervisor provides to the trainee on his performance and

offers him some suggestions for improvement. Often the trainee shares some of the duties and responsibilities of the coach and relieves him of his burden. A limitation of this method of training is that the trainee may not have the freedom or opportunity to express his own ideas.