Kirkpatrick’s Four-Level Model
Has provided a foundation for the development of other models as evidenced by a host of evaluation models.
Kirkpatrick’s taxonomy
It allows the evaluator and stakeholders to define what might be considered to be “success,” and it allows the evaluator to gather whatever data seem most appropriate.
Success Case Method
discovering what students know while they're still in the process of learning it
Formative assessment
Is used to determine the training program’s payoff for the company.
Results level
By adding a fifth level (societal outcomes), they take into account the societal impact of training or of any HRD intervention.
Kaufman, Keller, and Watkins Five-Level Model
occurs when information intersects with a user
Knowledge
Each succeeding step or level is somehow “better” than the previous one, perhaps in terms of information gleaned or value to the organization.
An implicit assumption in Kirkpatrick’s four-level model
The outcome of individual performance is influenced by motivation to improve work through learning and by various conditions affecting training transfer. Organizational results are affected by the expected utility or return on investment and various external factors.
Holton's HRD Evaluation Research and Measurement Model
The American Evaluation Association’s defines evaluation as:
Assessing the strengths and weaknesses of programs, policies, personnel, products, and organizations to improve their effectiveness.
The year the model was first proposed
1959
This model includes factors affecting training outcomes: knowledge, attitudes, and behavior.
Systemic Model of Factors Predicting Employee Training Outcomes
The author of the following definition is: program evaluation is the use of social research procedures to systematically investigate the effectiveness of social intervention programs to improve social conditions.
Rossi, Freeman, and Lipsey (2004)