Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Evaluation for Instructional Designers
As instructional designers, the ultimate goal is to create learning experiences that drive measurable improvements in learner performance and organizational success. However, it’s not enough to simply design and deliver training programs—it’s crucial to assess the effectiveness of these programs to ensure that they meet the desired objectives. This is where Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Evaluation comes into play.
Developed by Donald Kirkpatrick in 1959, Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Evaluation provides a comprehensive framework for evaluating the effectiveness of training programs. It allows instructional designers to measure not only what learners are learning but also how this learning impacts their behavior and, ultimately, the organization. By applying these levels of evaluation, instructional designers can gather valuable feedback, make improvements to future programs, and demonstrate the value of training initiatives.
Let’s dive into each of Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Evaluation and explore how instructional designers can use this model to assess and improve their training programs.
1. Level 1: Reaction – Measuring Learner Satisfaction
The first level of Kirkpatrick’s evaluation model is Reaction. This level measures how learners feel about the training program. Did they find it engaging? Was it relevant to their needs? Did they enjoy the learning experience? Measuring reactions is important because it helps instructional designers understand the initial impact of a training program and whether learners perceive it as valuable.
Think of this as conducting a “movie review” immediately after watching a film. While a quick review can give you an idea of the viewer’s immediate feelings about the film, it doesn’t yet provide insights into how the film will be remembered or how it might change the viewer’s behavior. Similarly, Level 1 evaluation helps instructional designers gauge how learners feel about the content, the delivery method, and the overall experience.
Example: After a corporate leadership development training session, instructional designers may administer a survey or feedback form asking participants to rate various aspects of the training, such as the clarity of the content, the instructor’s delivery, the relevance of the material, and the overall enjoyment of the experience. Positive feedback here suggests that the program is engaging and well-received by the learners.
Why It’s Important for Instructional Designers: Level 1 feedback is essential for assessing the immediate impact of the training. If learners do not react positively, it’s an early indicator that changes may be needed in course design or delivery. However, it is only the first step in the evaluation process and should be used in conjunction with other levels for a more comprehensive analysis.
2. Level 2: Learning – Measuring Knowledge Acquisition
The second level of Kirkpatrick’s evaluation model is Learning, which focuses on measuring the knowledge or skills that learners have gained during the training program. Did they learn the key concepts? Were their learning objectives met? This level typically involves testing or assessments to measure the extent of knowledge retention and skill development.
To put this into perspective, consider a person learning how to play a musical instrument. After a few lessons, you could assess whether they have learned the basic notes, chords, or scales. The learner’s ability to recall and perform these skills would be an indication of their progress. Similarly, in training programs, the Learning level helps assess whether participants have acquired the necessary knowledge and skills as a result of the program.
Example: In a project management course, learners might take a quiz or complete an assignment at the end of the training to demonstrate their understanding of project management principles such as budgeting, scheduling, or resource allocation. Success on these assessments indicates that the learners have gained the intended knowledge.
Why It’s Important for Instructional Designers: Evaluating learning ensures that the content is effectively teaching what it was designed to teach. If learners are not acquiring the intended knowledge or skills, instructional designers can identify areas where the training content or delivery might need improvement. This level also provides evidence of the effectiveness of the instructional materials and teaching methods.
3. Level 3: Behavior – Measuring Changes in Behavior on the Job
The third level of Kirkpatrick’s evaluation model is Behavior, which measures the extent to which learners apply what they have learned in the training to their actual job tasks and behaviors. It’s one thing to demonstrate knowledge on a test; it’s another to translate that knowledge into real-world behavior.
Think of this level like learning how to drive a car. After completing a driving course, the real measure of success is whether the individual can drive safely and confidently on the road, not just whether they passed the written exam. Similarly, in workplace training, the Behavior level evaluates how well learners transfer their new knowledge and skills to their day-to-day work.
Example: After a customer service training program, an instructional designer might follow up with employees and managers to see whether employees are applying the techniques they learned in training. For example, are they handling customer complaints more effectively? Are they using active listening techniques as taught in the training? Observation, interviews, or surveys can help assess whether these behaviors are being implemented.
Why It’s Important for Instructional Designers: Behavior change is often the ultimate goal of training programs. While knowledge acquisition is important, the real value of training lies in how well learners can apply that knowledge in practical, on-the-job situations. If learners are not using what they’ve learned, it may indicate that the training was not sufficiently relevant, engaging, or actionable.
4. Level 4: Results – Measuring the Impact on Organizational Outcomes
The final level of Kirkpatrick’s model is Results, which measures the ultimate impact of the training program on the organization’s outcomes. This level assesses whether the training has led to tangible benefits, such as improved performance, increased productivity, cost savings, or enhanced customer satisfaction.
Think of this as assessing the outcome of a sports team’s training program. The true measure of success is not just how much the players learned in practice, but whether their skills lead to winning games and achieving team goals. In the same way, Results in training evaluate whether the program has delivered measurable improvements to the organization.
Example: In a sales training program, the Results level would evaluate whether the training has led to increased sales or higher customer retention. If employees are performing better after the training, such as closing more deals or achieving sales targets, the program can be considered a success from an organizational perspective.
Why It’s Important for Instructional Designers: The Results level is often the most significant, as it demonstrates the overall value and ROI (Return on Investment) of the training program. Organizational leaders are typically most concerned with how training impacts the bottom line, and demonstrating results helps show the direct contribution of the training to organizational goals.
Why Instructional Designers Need Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Evaluation
Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Evaluation provide instructional designers with a comprehensive framework for assessing the effectiveness of their training programs at every stage. By evaluating reactions, learning, behavior, and results, instructional designers can obtain a holistic view of a program’s impact and make data-driven decisions to improve the learning experience.
Here’s why instructional designers need to use all four levels:
| 1 | Comprehensive Feedback: The four levels provide both qualitative and quantitative data, offering a full picture of a program’s effectiveness. |
| 2 | Ongoing Improvement: Regular evaluation through Kirkpatrick’s model allows instructional designers to continuously refine their courses, ensuring they meet learning objectives and organizational goals. |
| 3 | Evidence of Impact: By linking learning outcomes to behavioral and organizational results, instructional designers can demonstrate the ROI of their programs to stakeholders and leadership. |
| 4 | Actionable Insights: Each level of evaluation offers insights that help identify areas for improvement, whether it’s content, delivery methods, or real-world application. |
Conclusion
Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Evaluation are a powerful tool for instructional designers to assess the effectiveness of their training programs. By using this model, designers can ensure that their programs not only engage and educate learners but also drive tangible improvements in behavior and organizational outcomes. Through systematic evaluation, instructional designers can continuously enhance their programs, ensuring they remain relevant, impactful, and aligned with organizational goals.
Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Evaluation is such a robust framework for assessing training programs—it’s impressive how it covers everything from immediate reactions to long-term organizational impact. I particularly like the analogy of a movie review; it really helps to visualize how Level 1 evaluation works. But I wonder, how often do instructional designers actually implement all four levels in practice? It seems like a lot of effort, but the payoff must be significant. Do you think smaller organizations can effectively apply this model, or is it more suited for larger ones? Also, how do you measure the long-term behavioral changes in a way that’s not subjective? I’d love to hear your thoughts on this—do you think this model could be adapted for non-corporate training, like in education or community programs?
It’s fascinating how Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Evaluation offer such a structured way to assess training programs. I particularly liked the analogy of a movie review, as it really helps to grasp the concept of Level 1 evaluation. Do you think this model can also be adapted for evaluating non-corporate educational programs, like online courses or workshops? I’m curious about how often instructional designers actually use all four levels in practice—it seems like it could be quite time-consuming. Also, how do you measure the long-term behavioral changes (Level 3) without it being too subjective? The focus on data-driven decisions is impressive, but do you think there’s ever a risk of over-relying on data and missing out on qualitative insights? Lastly, what’s your take on the balance between improving the learning experience and driving organizational outcomes—does one sometimes overshadow the other?
P.S. We’ve integrated libersave into our regional voucher system. It’s amazing how easy it is to bundle various providers on a single platform.