Kirkpatrick‟s Evaluation Model

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

CHAPTER TWO MODELS, THEORIES AND FRAMEWORKS THAT SUPPORT THE EVALUATION OF STAFF TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT

Introduction

This chapter discusses the models, theories and frameworks that helped to conceptualise the current study in order to gain understanding of the prevailing situation. In a broader context, a model is viewed as a representation of reality; it delineates those aspects of the real world which the researchers consider to be relevant to the problem being investigated. It makes explicit the significant relationships among aspects and it enables the researcher to formulate empirically, testable propositions regarding the nature of these relationships (Frankfort-Nachmias & Nachmias 1996: 44).
High-level quality performance requires a high level of competent staff. Competent and efficient staff are very essential for growth and survival of modern organisations. The human resource development activities therefore help to increase the effectiveness and productivity of organisations. The main objective of human resource development is to prepare the staff (human resources) to face the challenges of socio-economic and technological changes. It also helps to prepare staff for better performance in the future (Thomaskutty 2010: 6).
Training and development programmes deal with the individual values, behaviours, actions and thoughts of staff of an organisation. These programmes are undertaken to promote the cultural, social and economic development of the individual to maximise their highest human capital potential as a resource for the organisation (Thomaskutty 2010: 7-8).
Training needs therefore exist at all levels of organisations and meeting these needs at all times is expected to make staff more effective and productive. In recent times, because of the potential of training and development to improve performance and promote high efficiency, organisations are investing a lot of time and resources into training and development programmes. It is therefore necessary to periodically evaluate the effectiveness of training and development programmes to ascertain whether it is making the necessary impact on staff work performance. An accepted method to determine the effectiveness of staff training and development programmes is to evaluate such training and development programmes.
Thomaskutty (2010: 11) describes training evaluation as the process of ascertaining whether the training offered has been effective to the employee in terms of achieving the goals of the organisation. Every evaluation process should consider the following:

• Assessment of the effectiveness of an on-going training programme to know if it is achieving its objectives.
• Relying on the standards of project design to distinguish a programme‟s effects from those of other forces.
• Aiming at improving future training programmes through modification of (Thomaskutty 2010: 11).

Ceffai (2009: 42) and Birnbrauer (1998: 81) suggest that the evaluation of training and development programmes should enable organisations to determine if the intended learning goals, objectives and outcomes were achieved. It should also allow trainers to discover if the needs and desires of participants were fulfilled. The measurement of the effects of the training on participants in terms of growth and change in behaviour can help in decision-making about future training programmes. According to Ceffai (2009: 42) staff training and development programmes that are not evaluated runs the risk of being ad-hoc, lacking direction and occurring in isolation without having any relevance to either the staff or the organisation. Birnbrauer (1998: 81) also argue that evaluation should be mandatory for every training programme because it is the only way of determining whether or not training benefits have paid off. Staff training and development is central to the successful achievement of strategic plans and objectives of organisations. Evaluation of staff training and development programmes is, therefore, very important for assessing the effectiveness of learning and development of individuals, the team and the library.
Given the importance of staff development to both staff and organisations, it is critical to design evaluation models to help understand the benefits of professional development efforts on staff work performance (HFRP 2004: 1). Some of the models, theories and frameworks that provide understanding to the evaluation of staff training and development programmes that are discussed in the next section are as follows:

• Kirkpatrick‟s evaluation model
• The Return On Investment (ROI) process model
• RPTIM model for staff development
• Theory of change and theory of action in practice
• Adult learning theory
• Staff development cost model.
• The logic models of professional development
• The framework for continuing professional development
• Framework for evaluating professional development for adult education.
• Model for evaluating the impact of professional development in eight steps
• Career development model

Kirkpatrick’s evaluation model

The Kirkpatrick evaluation model was developed by Donald L. Kirkpatrick in 1959 and is considered to be the most useful framework in the evaluation of training programmes (Basarab & Root 1992; Rothwell & Sredl 1992; Philips 1991). According to Falletta (1998: 259), Kirkpatrick‟s model allows for the measurement of potential effects of training at four levels:

• Participants‟ reaction to the training
• Participants‟ learning as a result of the training
• Participants‟ change in behaviour as a result of the training
• Impact on the organisation as a result of the participant‟s behaviour change.

The Kirkpatrick‟s model enables the trainers, trainees as well as organisations to determine the extent to which trainees are satisfied with the training programme, and thus, whether they learned from the programme and are able to apply the newly acquired knowledge and skills on the job, and the subsequent impact on the organisation.
Falletta (1998: 259) in a review of Kirkpatrick‟s model provides three basic reasons for evaluating training:

• To justify the existence of a training function by showing how it contributes to organisational goals and objectives,
• To decide whether to continue a training programme, and
• To improve training in future.

Level 1. Reaction evaluation

As illustrated in Figure 2.1 Level 1 measures how participants in a training programme react to the training. Reaction evaluation helps to ascertain the participants‟ personal reaction to the training or learning experience, for instance the evaluation must find answers to the following questions:

• Did the trainees like and enjoyed the training?
• Did they consider the training relevant and was it a good use of their time?
• Did they like the venue, the style, timing, logistics etc?
• Level of participation,
• Level of efforts required to make the most of the learning (Nickols 2013: 5). Reaction evaluation can be done immediately after the training ends.

Level 2. Learning evaluation.

Learning evaluation refers to the measurement of the increase in knowledge or intellectual capability of the trainees, before and after the training experience. Some of the questions that must be asked include the following:

• Did the trainees learn what was intended to be taught?
• Did the trainees experience what they were intended to experience?
• What is the extent of advancement or change in the trainees after the training? (Nickols 2013: 5).

Level 3. Behaviour evaluation

Behaviour evaluation refers to the measurement of the extent to which the trainees applied the learning and changed their behaviour. This evaluation is either done immediately after the training or several months after the training, depending on the situation. The questions to ask at this level of evaluation should include:

• Did the trainees put their learning into effect when back on the job?
• Were the relevant skills and knowledge obtained?
• Was there noticeable and measurable change in the activity and performance of the trainees -when they were back on their jobs? (Nickols 2013: 5).

Measurement of behaviour change is less easy to quantify and interpret than reaction and learning evaluation.

Level 4. Results evaluation

Results evaluation refers to the measurement of the effects of the training on the business or environment resulting from the improved performance of the trainee. The measurement of results is usually done in volumes, values, percentages, timescales, return on investment, and other quantifiable aspects of organisational performance; this could be in terms of the number of complaints, staff turnover, attrition, failure, wastage, quality rating, non-compliance, standards, accreditation and growth. Individual results evaluation is not particularly difficult but results evaluation across the entire organisation is much more challenging. Also, external factors greatly affect organisational and business performance (Nickols 2013: 6).

CHAPTER 1: Introduction of the Study 
1.1. Introduction
1.2. Background of the Study
1.3. Statement of the Problem
1.4. Purpose of the Study
1.5. Research Objectives
1.6. Research Questions
1.7. Research Hypotheses
1.8. Justification of the Study
1.9. Scope/Delimitations of the Study
1.10. Limitations of the Study
1.11. Originality of the Study
1.12. Brief Literature Review
1.13. Definition of Key Terms and Concepts
1.14. Research Methodology
1.15. Population
1.16. Sampling
1.17. Data Analysis
1.18. Validity and Reliability of Data Collection Instrument
1.19. Ethical Considerations
1.20. Organisation of the Study
1.21. Conclusion
CHAPTER 2: Models, Theories and Frameworks that Supports Staff Development Programmes 
2.1. Introduction
2.2. Kirkpatrick‟s Evaluation Model
2.3. The Return On Investment (ROI) Process Model
2.4. RPTIM Model for staff development
2.5. Theory of change and theory of action in practice
2.6. Adult learning theory
2.7. Staff development cost model
2.8. Professional development logic model
2.9. The Framework for continuing professional development
2.10. Framework for evaluating professional development for adult education
2.11. Model for evaluating the impact of professional development in eight steps
2.12. Career development model
2.13. Conclusion
CHAPTER 3: Literature Review 
3.1. Introduction
3.2. The concept of training and development
3.3. Staff training and development
3.4. Monitoring and evaluation of staff training and development programmes
3.5. The effects of staff training and development on job performance
3.6. Measuring return on investment
3.7. Measuring effective library and information services
3.8. Conclusion
CHAPTER 4: Background and profiles of institutions and university libraries in Ghana
4.1. Introduction
4.2. University of Ghana
4.3. University of Cape Coast
4.4. University of Education Winneba
4.5. Central University College
4.6. Methodist University College Ghana
4.7. Conclusion
CHAPTER 5: Research Methodology 
5.1. Introduction
5.2. Research approach
5.3. Data collection methods
5.4. Validity and reliability
5.5. Data analysis
5.6. Population
5.7. Sampling
5.8. Ethical consideration
5.9. Conclusion
CHAPTER 6: Presentation of Findings 
6.1. Introduction
6.2. Demographic information on participants
6.3. Staff training and development programmes
6.4. The use and satisfaction with library services
6.5. Testing of hypotheses
6.6. Assessment of performance of training on library staff work performance
6.7. Problems and recommendations
6.8. Analysis of interview/observation results
6.9. Conclusion
CHAPTER 7: Interpretation and discussion of findings 
7.1. Introduction
7.2. Demographic information on participants
7.3. Staff training and development programmes
7.4. Testing of hypotheses
7.5. Challenges with staff training and development programme
7.6. Conclusion
CHAPTER 8: Summary, conclusions and recommendations 
8.1. Introduction
8.2. Research purpose
8.3. Summary of findings
8.4. Conclusion
8.5. Recommendations
8.6. Possible impact of the findings on future staff training and development programmes
8.7. Suggestions for further research
8.8. Final conclusion 359 Lists of References
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT