• Home
• What we do
  • Why Bespoke Training
  • What is training
    • Needs Analysis
    • Training Design
    • Group Safety
    • Training Delivery
    • Evaluation
  • Ethics
  • Terminology
  • Inclusive Practice
• Course Info
• the blog
• Bookshop
• Search
• Themes
• Treatment
• DANOS
• Teams
• Jobs
• Links
• Contact Me
• Free Resources

Evaluation

Evaluating a training programme is the art of finding out to what extent it has succeeded in reaching its objectives. The primary concern is with the transfer of learning – how do participants use the course material when they get back to work.
Training can be evaluated whilst the event is taking place (formative evaluation) or at the end (summative evaluation).

Formative Evaluation

In formative evaluation one is checking out the process of the training. It is essential for checking out the following:

• Does the group have the right learning objectives
• Is the group meeting the learning milestones
• How it the process of the training helping the delivery of the content.
• To what extent must the material be changed to enable the group to meet the learning objective within the given constraints

Summative evaluation

Summative evaluation takes place when the course is over. The most normal for is though evaluation forms distributed at the end of the course to find out how satisfied participants were. Ideally, it should normally consists of the following: -

Basic demographic information

• Questions about the training administration and course set up.
• To what extent the objectives were met.
• Some other questions about improvements to the course, other training needs and how the training will be applied.

These forms have obvious drawbacks.

• They only state how participants felt at the end of the course – they say nothing about what will happen when they get back to work.
• They tend to be filled in very quickly at the end of the course – often reluctantly and so do not always represent a considered view.
• They are literacy based and are often filled out incorrectly.

These drawbacks are serious and often these forms deteriorate into what are known as ‘happy sheets’ – that ask how wonderful the training was and how delightful the trainer.

Some of these problems can be addressed by;

• Listing each objective separately so that the different elements of the course are assessed.
• Using an even number for a scoring scale – the mid point for an odd number scale is normally 3. It looks non-committal on the page but as a percentage gives a satisfaction rating of 66%- an odd number forces participants into a decision.
• Getting them signed. If they are anonymous they give no opportunity for setting things right afterwards and accountability is minimal.
• Including some information by which the data can be analysed – e.g. job grouping or sector. This means that the impact of the training on different types of participant can be measured. This is particularly important on large programmes run many times.

After the training.

The evaluation must establish a link between the change in performance and what happened on the course. The longer the gap between the event and the evaluation the harder this is to ascertain. The maximum has got to be a figure of about 12 weeks.
The participant can be asked to respond to a questionnaire some time after the event to comment on how it has changed their performance – and if not what are the factors that made the change impracticable or impossible.
Ideally the line manager should discuss the content of the training in supervision and appraisal. S/he is then in a position to evaluate how the individual’s performance has improved.
Focus groups are often mentioned as something that may be useful. The time taken to get them together and the difficulty of recruiting sufficient people makes them difficult. If they are conducted by the original trainer then questions of bias may arise.