The correlation of participant satisfaction, learning success and learning transfer: an empirical investigation of correlation assumptions in Kirkpatrick’s four-level model

International Journal of Management in Education

Volumn 3, Issue 3-4, 2009, Pages 346-358

  Gessler, Michael ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BREMEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

four level model; Kirkpatrick; participant satisfaction; quality assurance; reaction; training effectiveness

Indexed keywords

EID: 77955149775     PISSN: 1750385X     EISSN: 17503868     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1504/IJMIE.2009.027355     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Alliger, G.M. and Janak, E.A. (1989) ‘Kirkpatrick’s levels of training criteria: thirty years later’, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 42, pp.331–342.
2. Alliger, G.M., Tannenbaum, S.I., Bennett, W., Traver, H. and Shotland, A. (1997) ‘A meta-analysis of the relations among training criteria’, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 50, pp.341–358.
3. AZWV (2004) ‘Verordnung über das Verfahren zur Anerkennung von fachkundigen Stellen sowie zur Zulassung von Trägern und Maßnahmen der beruflichen Weiterbildung nach dem Dritten Buch Sozialgesetzbuch (Anerkennungs- und Zulassungsverordnung - Weiterbildung - AZWV)’, vom 16. Juni 2004, Bundesgesetzblatt Jahrgang 2004 Teil I Nr. 28, ausgegeben zu Bonn am 22. Juni 2004.
4. Bates, R. (2004) ‘A critical analysis of evaluation practice: the Kirkpatrick model and the principle of beneficence’, Evaluation and Program Planning, Vol. 27, pp.341–347.
5. Beywl, W. (2006) ‘Evaluationsmodelle und der Stellenwert qualitativer Methoden’, in Flick, U. (Ed.): Qualitative Evaluations forschung Konzepte Methoden - Umsetzung, Rowohlt, Reinbek, pp.92–116.
6. Carnevale, A.P. and Schulz, E.R. (1990) ‘Return on investment: accounting for training’, Training and Development Journal, Vol. 7, pp.S1-S32.
7. Cohen, J. (1988) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed., Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
8. EduQua (2004) Schweizerische Qualitätszertifikat für Weiterbildungseinrichtungen: Handbuch über das Verfahren, Anleitung zur Zertifizierung. Available online at: http://www.eduqua.ch/pdf/eduqua_handbuch.pdf
9. Engeström, Y. (1994) Training for Change: New Approach to Instruction and Learning in Working Life, International Labour Office, Geneva.
10. Gonon, P. (2008) ‘Wirkung oft ungewiss’, Weiterbildung, Jg. 18, H. 1, S., pp.12–15.
11. Gülpen, B. (1996) Evaluation betrieblicher Verhaltenstrainings unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Nutzens, Hampp, Mering.
12. Holton III, E.F. (1996) ‘The flawed four level evaluation model’, Human Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp.5–21.
13. ISO 9001:2008 Quality Management Systems - Requirements, 4th ed., ISO, Geneva.
14. Kirkpatrick, J.D. and Kirkpatrick, D.L. (2005) Transferring Learning to Behavior: Using the Four Levels to Improve Performance, Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco.
15. Kirkpatrick, J.D. and Kirkpatrick, D.L. (2006) Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels, 3rd ed., Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco.
16. Muncer, S., Taylor, S. and Craigie, M. (2002) ‘Power dressing and meta-analysis: incorporating power analysis into meta-analysis’, Journal of Advanced Nursing, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp.274–280.
17. Noe, R.A. and Schmitt, N. (1986) ‘The influence of trainee attitudes on training effectiveness: test of a model’, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 39, pp.497–523.
18. Phillips, J. (1994) In Action: Measuring Return on Investment, Vol. 1, American Society for Training & Development, Alexandria, VA.
19. Phillips, J. and Schirmer F. (2005) Return on Investment in der Personalentwicklung: Der 5-Stufen-Evaluationsprozess, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
20. Stufflebeam, D.L. (2000) ‘The CIPP model for evaluation’, in Stufflebeam, D.L., Madaus, G.F. and Kellaghan, T. (Eds): Evaluation Models: Viewpoints on Educational and Human Services Evaluation, 2nd ed., Boston, Dordrecht, London, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp.290–317.
21. Customer satisfaction is one of the most important criteria for assessing the quality of rendered services. [...] Please show how you evaluate general customer satisfaction on an institutional level.
22. Even a decade after the first wave of quality assurance in Germany, there is little qualified evidence on its favourable effects and hardly any empirical evaluation regarding the quality of quality assurance in advanced training.
23. ‘In 1954, at the University of Wisconsin in Madison, I (Don) completed my PhD dissertation entitled “Evaluation a Human Relations Training Program for Supervisors”. Based on the dissertation, I wrote a series of four articles for the T&D on the American Society for Training & Development (ASTD): “Evaluating Reactions”, “Evaluation Learning”, “Evaluating Behavior” and “Evaluating Results”’ (Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick, 2005, p.4).
24. That is WR: work rate, CL: customer loyalty, WC: work conflicts, PE: performance evaluations, E: confidence in the future, I: implementation of new ideas.