Kirkpatrick's Model Of Training Evaluation

Kirkpatrick’s framework is the most widespread way of the assessment of training. The model has been the essential organizing design for training evaluations in organizations for more than 30 years. Kirkpatrick recognizes four categories of measures:
1. reaction;
2. learning;
3. behavior; and
4. results (Kirkpatrick, 1979).
Level one includes evaluation of training participants’ reaction to the training program, particularly appraisal of affective reactions to the quality or the relevance of training. Most organizations incorporate such assessment into the frequently used training evaluation questionnaire or ‘‘happy sheet’’. Level two, learning measures, is defined as quantifiable indicators of the learning that has occurred throughout the training. Level three, behavior results, addresses either the degree to which knowledge and skills gained in training are applied on the job or result in extraordinary job-related performance. Finally level four, results are proposed to give some measure of the effect that training has had on extensive organizational goals and objectives (Alliger and Janak, 1989; Bates, 2004).
Stokking proposes the model needs clarity in some aspects, for example, the distinction between the desired order of activities and the aspects of level and significance, or regarding execution. Implementation and accomplishment of the learning objectives incorporate Acquisition (Level 2), which should indicate the achievement of training execution. An alternative and broadly cited model is the CIRO (contents/contexts, inputs, reactions and outcomes) model suggested by Warr et al. (1970). The model measures the effectiveness of learning and training by CIRO components, both before and after training. The quality of the CIRO model is the measurement of managerial training program and furthermore the effectiveness consideration of objectives (contexts) and training equipment