Four level model for evaluating trainers and training

Kirkpatrick proposed a four-level model for evaluating training courses (which is documented most thoroughly in his 1994 book). This framework assesses various aspects of the effectiveness of training courses. Trainers and their clients can then use the four different assessments to reach conclusions about the overall quality and value of a given training course, as well as its impact on the bottom line of the client who requested the course.

Following are Kirkpatrick’s four levels of evaluation.

Level	Name	Issues Assessed at this Level
I	Reaction	Assesses participants’ initial reactions to a course. This, in turn, offers insights into participants’ satisfaction with a course, a perception of value. Trainers usually assess this through a survey, often called a "smiley sheet." Occasionally, trainers use focus groups and similar methods to receive more specific comments (called qualitative feedback) on the courses. According to the TRAINING magazine annual industry survey, almost 100 percent of all trainers perform "Level I" evaluation.
II	Learning	Assesses the amount of information that participants learned. Trainers usually assess this with a criterion-referenced test. The criteria are objectives for the course: statements developed before a course is developed that explicitly state the skills that participants should be able to perform after taking a course. Because the objectives are the requirements for the course, a Level II evaluation assesses conformance to requirements, or quality.
III	Transfer	Assesses the amount of material that participants actually use in everyday work 6 weeks to 6 months (perhaps longer) after taking the course. This assessment is based on the objectives of the course and assessed through tests, observations, surveys, and interviews with co-workers and supervisors. Like the Level II evaluation, Level III assesses the requirements of the course and can be viewed as a follow-on assessment of quality.
IV	Business results	Assesses the financial impact of the training course on the bottom line of the organization 6 months to 2 years after the course (the actual time varies depending on the context of the course). For many reasons, Level IV is the most difficult level to measure. First, most training courses do not have explicitly written business objectives, such as "this course should reduce support expenses by 20 percent." Second, the methodology for assessing business impact is not yet refined. Some assess this measurement by tracking business measurements, others assess by observations, some by surveys, and still others assess by qualitative measures. Last, after six months or more, evaluators have difficulty solely attributing changed business results to training when changes in personnel, systems, and other factors might also have contributed to business performance. Despite these difficulties in obtaining a measure, over 50 percent of organizations perform this type of evaluation on 50 percent of their courses (TRAINING, 1995). Level IV evaluation is assessment of quality. It does so in financial terms, a perspective different than that of the evaluations at Level II and Level III.

Trainers widely follow this model (although, admittedly, not every organization performs each type of evaluation for every training course). Nearly all organizations perform Level I and II evaluations on most of their courses (TRAINING Industry survey). Many organizations perform Level III and IV evaluations on some of their courses. The framework is followed widely enough that, at conferences and in journals and magazines, trainers refer to these evaluations in a short-hand language: Level 1, Level 2, Level 3, and Level 4.