Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Kirkpatrick's Levels 1 and 2 Training Evaluation, Focus on formative…
Kirkpatrick's Levels 1 and 2 Training Evaluation
Level 1 Reaction
: The degree to which participants find the training favorable, engaging, and relevant to their jobs.
Key Components
Engagement, Relevance, Customer Satisfaction
Evaluation Methods & Descriptions
Formative
Instructor Observation
Using physical senses during class to gauge how well the audience is tracking.
Pulse Check
Briefly stopping the class or utilizing breaks to ask participants how things are going.
Dedicated Observer
Placing an observer in high-stakes or expensive classes to track room dynamics.
Summative
Written Surveys
Post-program sheets tracking standardized items like instructor quality, satisfaction, and relevance.
Interviews & Focus Groups
In-depth discussions used for highly critical or newly launched programs.
Primary Purpose
To efficiently confirm that the quality of the program and the instructor are acceptable while conserving resources
Timing
Immediate
Usually produces high response rates.
Days/Weeks
Neutralizes instructor charisma for objective data.
Months
Allows new hires to accurately judge true job relevance.
Challenges & Limitations
Immediate feedback is often superficial.
"Holding people hostage" lowers answer quality.
Learning professionals may overthink and over-resource this evaluation level.
Level 2 Learning
: The degree to which participants acquire intended knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence, and commitment based on their participation in the training.
Key Components
Knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence, and commitment.
Evaluation Methods & Descriptions
Knowledge Checks / Quizzes
Formative or summative tools measuring direct comprehension.
Table Discussions
Group processing where tables report key concepts back to the class, proving understanding.
Role Play / Simulations
Realistic performance testing in safe spaces, vital for soft skills and technical tasks.
Teach Back
Participants showcase learning by actively teaching course elements to their peers.
Action Planning
Creating an execution strategy at the end of class with milestone follow-ups.
Retrospective Pre/Post Assessment
A single survey given at the end asking learners to rate their skills before vs. after the course.
Primary Purpose
To confirm an acceptable learning threshold before participants leave.
Timing
Immediate Post-Event
Quick surveys or interviews to lock in numeric benchmarks.
Delayed Follow-Up
Only used when data suggests that knowledge has eroded.
During Class
Dynamic tracking embedded inside training activities.
Challenges & Limitations
Learning professionals may over-structure learning objectives instead of practical utility.
Corporate stakeholders rarely care about learning metrics.
Traditional testing can be resource-heavy, or culturally rejected by certain companies.
Post-class plans are often dishonest if workplace barriers exist.
Relationship Between the Two Levels
Positive reactions don't automatically guarantee cognitive outcomes, and vice versa
Level 1 measures "Did they like it?", whereas Level 2 measures "Did they learn it?"
Level 1 (Reaction) influences Level 2 (Learning)
Focus on formative methods
Formative in nature