How do you know that the education programs you design are appropriate for your learners and the environment of your organization? How do you tell if the latest craze is a beneficial technique or just hot air when you attend a conference gathering or read a blog about it? These questions can be answered with the help of a learning evaluation. So, how do you assess learning?

Models of Learning Evaluation That You Will Find Useful

There are dozens of learning evaluation models in use today. This piece provides a brief overview of the four most useful evaluation models: Kirkpatrick, Kaufman, Anderson, and Brinkerhoff are the authors.

1. Kirkpatrick’s Learning Evaluation Model

Kirkpatrick’s learning evaluation methodology has been in use for over 50 years. The concept invites us to assess learning on four different levels:

• Reaction – How did they feel about the training?
• Learning – Did they pass the exam?
• Are they more productive?
• Outcomes – Have business metrics improved?

The main thing is to measure at all four levels so that you can understand how effective each stage of your learning design was. Begin by creating your learning program with a business challenge. Then, determine the activities required to fix the problem, as well as the learning required to support those actions. After that, create the program that will allow that learning to take place. Your evaluation measures should follow the same pattern, so if you don’t accomplish the business goal, you’ll know what went wrong.

2. Kaufman’s Learning Evaluation Model

Several models are based on or respond to Kirkpatrick’s. One of these is Kaufman’s model of learning evaluation. He departs from Kirkpatrick in two key ways:

1. Kaufman divides Kirkpatrick’s level 1 into two parts: “input” and “process.” Input refers to the learning materials and resources that are available to students. The delivery of the learning experience is referred to as the process.
2. Kaufman adds the fifth step above organizational advantages to consider societal or business client benefits.

I like how Kaufman pushes us to evaluate learning resources independently of delivery because these are two very different things. I’m not sure about his fifth level. Most firms find it difficult to collect statistics on the impact of a learning program on business indicators, let alone ask us to figure out the impact on society as a whole. The influence on customers is undeniably essential, but it is usually already factored into company measures.

3. Anderson’s Learning Value Model.

You may consider a learning program effective if it results in a 50% increase in industrial output. However, if the firm where the session was held already had excess inventory and insufficient sales, the underlying story is that the learning program was poorly connected with the organization’s goals.

Anderson’s Value Of Learning model encourages us to focus evaluation on the connection between the learning program’s aims and the organization’s strategic goals. Only when the goals have been linked can we assess the learning program’s success in fulfilling those goals.

4. The Success Case Method of Brinkerhoff.

Sometimes learning programs are a huge success, and other times they are a complete failure. They are usually somewhere in the middle. Whatever the program’s overall effectiveness, there will always be a few successful learners and a few others for whom the program did not work.

Brinkerhoff’s Success Case Method (SCM) entails selecting and studying the most and least successful situations in your learning program. By comparing successes and failures, you can learn what to modify to assure future success. Based on what you learn, you can also produce and disseminate success stories to demonstrate the value of your program.

Which model should I employ?

Which of these models do I suggest? We can learn something from each of them. Kirkpatrick is a good starting place, and Kaufman’s division of level 1 into input and process improves it. Anderson’s model is used at a higher level than Kirkpatrick’s to evaluate the learning program’s aims in the first place, while Brinkerhoff’s method is effective for delving further into individual programs once they are completed.