Introduction and Methods Overview
Level 1 of the Kirkpatrick training evaluation model is designed to measure participants’ reactions to the learning product, and may include reactions to its relevance, training methods, trainers, qualifications, and assessment methods (Kirkpatrick, 1996). Arguably, evaluating participants’ reactions may not determine the effectiveness of a training; however, capturing participants’ viewpoints on the training may identify gaps in learning needs, highlight a training’s strengths and weaknesses, and determine barriers to learning.
The
Preparedness and Emergency Response Learning Centers (PERLC) Evaluation Working Group was charged to select, share, and implement measures that can be consistently and uniformly applied to measure participant satisfaction (e.g., quality, usefulness, value, and relevancy) across the
PERLC network. The purpose of developing these core evaluation items was to provide the funder, the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, with better, more robust data that show immediate outcomes of Learning Projects at the aggregate, or network, level.
Back | Next