A Framework for an ET Program’s Evaluation: An Expanded Kirkpatrick’s Four-Level Model
Cheng-Chang Pan, Rene Corbeil, Michael Sullivan, University of Texas at Brownsville, United States
E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Washington, DC, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-54-9 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), San Diego, CA
The present paper is intended to foster a theoretical framework for a Web-based Educational Technology graduate program's evaluation in an U.S. southern state university. Corresponding to two key program goals and state-mandated regulations, an expanded Kirkpatrick's four-level model is proposed and illustrated in a matrix, including four distinct, but compatible, categories of data: learners' reaction, learning outcomes, behavior change, and business results, and one additional dimension of data sets: learner profiling, i.e., age, gender, work status, and learning styles. It features a flattened evaluation model structure, participants' reaction on a spectrum, a learning assessment tool, a performance appraisal model, and partnership within an eco-system, and use of learner profiling in describing and predicting a successful learning experience and a satisfactory performance across the curriculum. The rationale and justifications of the project are also addressed.
Pan, C.C., Corbeil, R. & Sullivan, M. (2004). A Framework for an ET Program’s Evaluation: An Expanded Kirkpatrick’s Four-Level Model. In J. Nall & R. Robson (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn 2004--World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 410-415). Washington, DC, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved March 22, 2023 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/11353/.
© 2004 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)
ReferencesView References & Citations Map
- Askov, E. N. (2000). Workplace literacy: Evaluation of three model programs. Adult Basic Education, 10(2), 100-107.
- Bernthal, P. R. (1995). Evaluation that goes the distance. Training & Development, 49(9), 41-45.
- Blanchard, P. N., Thacker, J. W., & Way, S. A. (2000). Training evaluation: Perspectives and evidence from Canada. Inter national Journal of Training & Development, 4(4), 295-304.
- Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Dziuban, C., & Moskal, P. (2001). Evaluating distributed learning in met ropolitan universities. Metropolitan Universities, 12(1), 41-49.
- Institute for Higher Education Policy. (2000). Quality on the line: Benchmarks for success in Internet-based distance education. Washington, DC: Institute for Higher Education Policy.
- Kifer, E. (1995). Evaluation: A general view. In G. Anglin (Ed.), Instructional Technology: Past, present, and future (pp. 384392). Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
- Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1959). Techniques for evaluating training programs. Journal of the American Society of Training Directors, 13, 3–9, 21–26.
- Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1996). Great ideas revisited. Training & Development, 50(1), 54-59.
- Lynch, L. L., & Purnawarman, P. (2004). Electronic portfolio assessments in U.S. Educational and instructional technology programs: Are they supporting teacher education? TechTrend, 48(1), 50-56.
- Moskal, P. D., & Dziuban, C. D. (2001). Present and future directions for assessing cybereducation: The changing research paradigm. In L. R. Vandervert, L. V. Shavinina, & R. A. Cornell (Eds.), Cybereducation: The future of long distance learning (pp. 157-184). Larchmont, NY: Many Ann Liebert.
- Noonan, L. E., & Sulsky, L. M. (2001). Impact of frame-of-reference and behavioral observation training on alternative training effectiveness criteria in a Canadian military sample. Human Performance, 14(1), 3-26.
- Ornstein, A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (1998). Curriculum: Foundations, principles, and issues (3rd ed.). Needham Height, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
- Ring, G. L., & Foti, S. L. (2003). Addressing standards at the program level with electronic portfolios. TechTrends, 47(2), 28-32.
- Sivo, S., Pan, C., & Brophy, J. (2004, in press). Temporal cross-lagged effects between subjective norms and students’ attitudes regarding the use of technology. Journal of Educational Media & Library Sciences, 42(1).
- Thompson, M. M., & Irele, M. E. (2003). Evaluating distance education programs. In M. G. Moore & W. G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 567-584). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.Suggest Corrections to References