Evaluating the quality of training courses: a comparison of different designs for evaluating training
This paper aims to show that some designs for evaluating training are more suitable than others in a quality approach. Effectively, several practices of evaluation are incompatible. These are presented in the first section: Kirkpatrick’s fourlevel training evaluation model (Reaction, Learning, Behav...
Main Authors: | , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Etudes Scientifiques Spécialisées Appliquées aux Communications Humaines, Economiques, Sociales et Symboliques
2009-01-01
|
Series: | Essachess |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://www.essachess.com/index.php/jcs/article/view/62/32 |
id |
doaj-d63c3159ac9e48b392f1a5a2bca42131 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-d63c3159ac9e48b392f1a5a2bca421312021-08-02T05:50:24ZengEtudes Scientifiques Spécialisées Appliquées aux Communications Humaines, Economiques, Sociales et SymboliquesEssachess2066-50831775-352X2009-01-01234152Evaluating the quality of training courses: a comparison of different designs for evaluating trainingIsabelle GILLETDaniel GILIBERTThis paper aims to show that some designs for evaluating training are more suitable than others in a quality approach. Effectively, several practices of evaluation are incompatible. These are presented in the first section: Kirkpatrick’s fourlevel training evaluation model (Reaction, Learning, Behavior and Results), Kraiger’s comprehensive model based on learning outcomes, as well as the more recent designs taking into account multiple stakeholder perceptions (Michalski & Cousins). On the basis of these works and of some original practices, we attempt to show the aspects which are the most adapted to a total quality approach.http://www.essachess.com/index.php/jcs/article/view/62/32quality approachtraining evaluation researchstakeholder perceptionsparticipants involvement |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Isabelle GILLET Daniel GILIBERT |
spellingShingle |
Isabelle GILLET Daniel GILIBERT Evaluating the quality of training courses: a comparison of different designs for evaluating training Essachess quality approach training evaluation research stakeholder perceptions participants involvement |
author_facet |
Isabelle GILLET Daniel GILIBERT |
author_sort |
Isabelle GILLET |
title |
Evaluating the quality of training courses: a comparison of different designs for evaluating training |
title_short |
Evaluating the quality of training courses: a comparison of different designs for evaluating training |
title_full |
Evaluating the quality of training courses: a comparison of different designs for evaluating training |
title_fullStr |
Evaluating the quality of training courses: a comparison of different designs for evaluating training |
title_full_unstemmed |
Evaluating the quality of training courses: a comparison of different designs for evaluating training |
title_sort |
evaluating the quality of training courses: a comparison of different designs for evaluating training |
publisher |
Etudes Scientifiques Spécialisées Appliquées aux Communications Humaines, Economiques, Sociales et Symboliques |
series |
Essachess |
issn |
2066-5083 1775-352X |
publishDate |
2009-01-01 |
description |
This paper aims to show that some designs for evaluating training are more suitable than others in a quality approach. Effectively, several practices of evaluation are incompatible. These are presented in the first section: Kirkpatrick’s fourlevel training evaluation model (Reaction, Learning, Behavior and Results), Kraiger’s comprehensive model based on learning outcomes, as well as the more recent designs taking into account multiple stakeholder perceptions (Michalski & Cousins). On the basis of these works and of some original practices, we attempt to show the aspects which are the most adapted to a total quality approach. |
topic |
quality approach training evaluation research stakeholder perceptions participants involvement |
url |
http://www.essachess.com/index.php/jcs/article/view/62/32 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT isabellegillet evaluatingthequalityoftrainingcoursesacomparisonofdifferentdesignsforevaluatingtraining AT danielgilibert evaluatingthequalityoftrainingcoursesacomparisonofdifferentdesignsforevaluatingtraining |
_version_ |
1721240884600635392 |