The CIPP Approach to Evaluation and Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Training Evaluation
1113 Words5 Pages
In this comparative essay I will be comparing The CIPP approach to evaluation and Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation. This comparative essay will document the key components, how the evaluations are alike and different, and how they can be employed in my practice.
Stufflebeam’s CIPP Model (Context, Input, Process, and Product) was created in 1983. This evaluation approach deals with an effective way of examining several distinctive facets of the development process. The context evaluation phase of the CIPP Model establishes the main idea of the program and the evaluation procedure. This phase supports in the decision making associated with development, and authorizes the evaluator to recognize the requirements, strengths, and resources in order to deliver the program design that will be constructive and valuable. In the input evaluation phase, data is gathered about the mission, expectations, and program development. The rationale of this process is to measure the program’s approach, capability and design strategy aligned with research, the awareness of the program stakeholders’ needs, and unconventional plans posed in related programs. The Process evaluation examines the effectiveness of the program’s execution. In this stage, program activities are examined, acknowledged and measured by the evaluator. The product evaluation, measures the successful and unsuccessful influences the program had on its stakeholders. The short-term and long-term outcomes are estimated in this phase as well. In the course of this phase, perceptiveness of stakeholders and significant staff are questioned, examining outcomes that influence the program stakeholders. Utilizing mixed methodologies guarantee all outco...
... middle of paper ...
...nsider the intentions of evaluation varying from essentially procedural and scientific to determine the effectiveness of the program. The four levels of training evaluates the reactions to the training, skill gain at the end of training, the behavior on the job as to how it was changed due to the training, and the improvements of the overall program and outcomes. Stufflebeam’s model analyzes what the program is intended to do and it facilitates in the decision making process of program development. This model of evaluation is a better fit for the environment in which I work because, it is intended for the use of administrators, management, and other professionals. The model is designed for use in internal evaluations performed by organizations, carried out by individual administrators or management, and contracted external evaluations. (Stufflebeam, 2000, p. 279)