ABLA 2016’s
7th Lesson Learned:
“Measuring the Impact of Training”
By
Prof. Jonathan Acuña-Solano, M. Ed.
School
of English
Faculty of Social Sciences
Universidad Latina de Costa Rica
Sunday,
September 11, 2016
Post
291
“One of the most important aspects of
teacher training has to do with its impact in teaching skills and student learning”
(Gómez, 2016) . But how long does
it take for a training team in a language school such as a Binational Center
(BNC) to see the results of teacher coaching materialized in the staff’s
teaching skills displayed in the classroom and to find evidence of how changes
in instruction trigger an effect in student learning? The fact is that in terms
of teacher training, instructor-coaching faculty members cannot expect to see
or find any immediate result or evidence that the training has been moved into
the class boundaries; outcomes can only be perceived later on, and they should
be, as Gómez (2016) proposes, analyzed and measured in different time intervals
to really see the effects of that teacher training.
Though I do not watch over instructor
training at the BNC I work for, being in charge of the Curriculum Development
Team makes my partners and me participate in teacher coaching and also wonder
how this can have a long-lasting effect in our teaching staff. During the ABLA
2016 convention in Houston, TX, German Gómez, from World
Learning, talked about a training program they are currently carrying
out in the Sultanate of Oman based on the Kirkpatrick Model for evaluating
training impact, which was a complete novelty for me and a sounding measuring program
after reading about it. Now, based on Gómez’s talk at ABLA, “training aims at developing 4
key aspects ” (Gómez, Measuring the Impact of Training (PPTx),
2016) .
These crucial aspects are “knowledge” or “content required for the job,” “awareness”
or “self-introspection of skill,” “skill” or “practical application of
knowledge,” and “attitude,” or “the attitude towards a specific belief or
practice.” These are the aspects that a training team needs to concentrate to
consider how coaching sessions can have a long-lasting effect on teaching professionals
working for our BNCs. These are the pillars supervisors and training decision
makers should give some thorough follow-up to measure the understanding, application,
and/or impact of “knowledge, awareness, skill, and attitude” presented to
educators to positively affect “teaching skills and student learning.”
During German Gómez’s ABLA presentation
(2016), and bearing in mind the positive effect training can have in “teaching
skills and student learning,” he asked the audience two questions regarding
teacher coaching. “Why is measuring the impact of training important in your
context / position?” (Gómez, Measuring the Impact of Training (PPTx),
2016) .
First of all, as I commented this point with Gómez himself, in my curriculum
development position, it is crucial that language trainees get the proper
coaching to be fully functional in a new language program or with improvements
made to an existing program, whether that is for adults, teenagers, or children.
The idea behind training, in the way we perceive it at the BNC I work for, is
to enhance the teaching skills and style any of our teachers have. The enhancement
in skills and style can have a positive effect in the way language trainees are
being exposed to the contents they must learn from the various thematic units
in the courses they take with us. Second of all, the constant visiting or
re-visiting to topics related with our curricula allows the institution and the
training team to somehow measure what the impact of training is in the short
run. Measuring helps Academic Department training staff to actually see what is
happening in our classrooms and how our classes are being delivered by our
instructors to help us guarantee the quality of teaching our students are
getting. Measuring is part of the quality control our BNC wants to exercise in
its language programs to satisfy the demands of our current and future
learners.
“What are some ways in which you as a
trainer / coordinator / administrator measure the impact of training in your teaching
staff?” (Gómez, Measuring the Impact of Training (PPTx),
2016) .
When German Gómez asked us to share with our
peers in the room, lots of things started to come to my memory: the times in
which I was a supervisor and the way how supervision is now handled at our BNC
in Costa Rica. At the beginning we coaches had to create our evaluation rubrics
for class visits and observations. Based on those rubrics supervisors had to
write a report of their trainees that had to be submitted to our site
coordinator for them to see who was doing what was expected of them and what
kind of corrective actions needed to be taken to help the teacher overcome any
teaching issue s/he might be experiencing. But in hindsight, what was exactly
expected? There were different types of trainings, but I cannot recall any real
follow-up for those specific coaching sessions we had. Best practices were
proposed, but in the end everyone decided to either use them or forget all
about them. In the end, were we really measuring “the impact of training” in “teaching
skills and student learning?” Most of our rubrics were connected to expected
and ideal performances in the classroom, but our training team never asked ELT
educators how they thought was the best way to measure the implementation of
any of those so-called best practices in their courses.
German Gómez gave many of us ABLA 2016
participants a good slap of reality in terms of what is actually and theoretically
done to work with teaching professionals and their training nowadays. Participants
were introduced to the theoretical model World
Learning is currently using in the Sultanate of Oman to coach
EL teaching professionals over there: The Kirkpatrick Model. To have a sample
what this model is about, Gómez had us watch the a video to see -in 60 seconds-
what the model can do for us and for our instructors in terms of the measurement
of training and the time span needed to see the results of any training event.
After watching the video about the model and comprehending that the model has
four levels: reaction, learning, behavior, and results, the scope of action
towards measurement changes drastically (The Daily Project Manager, 2015) (Gómez, Measuring the Impact of Training (PPTx), 2016) .
After listening to what German Gómez
was explaining to us, my conception of language trainer coaching changed and
widened my understanding of the four levels presented by the Kirkpatrick Model.
Seeing each of the four levels, the following can be noted. Reaction refers to “the degree to which
participants find the training favorable, engaging and relevant to their jobs” (The Kirkpatrick Partners, n.d.) . Based on Gómez
(2016), teachers should be measured to find out their immediate reaction right
after the event by means of surveys, direct questionnaires, and so on. Learning encases “the degree to which
participants acquire the intended knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence and
commitment based on their participation in the training” (The Kirkpatrick Partners, n.d.) . Gómez (2016)
proposes that language instructors can also be “measured” in their learning after
the training event by the same means. Behavior
entails “the degree to which participants apply what they learned during
training when they are back on the job” (The Kirkpatrick Partners, n.d.) . Language educators,
as stated by Gómez (2016) in his presentation, need to be measured three to
five months after being trained by means of surveys, classroom observations,
and interviews. Finally, results
comprise “the degree to which targeted outcomes occur as a result of the training
and the support and accountability package” (The Kirkpatrick Partners, n.d.) . Gómez (2016) posits
that these results can only be measured from six to twelve months after the
training event by means of customer satisfaction results and manager results.
All these facts are intended to make us BNC’s Academic Department coordinators
understand that a training session held today will have different immediate effects
or short or long-term sequels. The real impact of training can only be started
to be measured after six months after the training event; before that moment,
it is quite premature.
Some of the most salient points
connected to my 7th lesson learned at ABLA is that the Kirkpatrick
Model is not a training program per se;
training programs must be designed and developed by BNCs to guarantee quality
in their programs. This model can be used as a solid ground to base any
coaching program for teaching professionals in our institutions. The program,
as it was also shared by Gómez (2016) with his experience in the Sultanate of
Oman, needs to be open and participative for the teachers; that is, language
trainers also need to have access to the training agenda in our schools to
provide the institution with feedback related to what pedagogical areas they
need to be trained on and how they should be measured by the team of teacher-coaching
experts. Perhaps, as explained by Gómez (2016), teachers can participate in the
creation of the rubrics the BNC can use to evaluate their own performance and
accountability for the quality the training is looking for in their “teaching
skills and student learning.”
References
Gómez,
G. (2016, August 18). Measuring the Impact of Training (PPTx). PPTx for
the ABLA 2016's Talk . Houston, Texas, United States: World Learning.
Gómez, G. (2016, August 16-19). Measuring the Impact of
Training. 21st Century
Challenges ABLA 2016 Convention Program . Monterrey, Nuevo León, Mexico: Centro Mexicano
Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales.
The Daily Project Manager. (2015, August 3). Kirkpatrick's
4 Levels of Evaluation. Retrieved from YouTube.Com: https://youtu.be/aw9sqEvfuf8
The Kirkpatrick Partners. (n.d.). The Kirkpatrick Model.
Retrieved from The Kirkpatrick Partners:
http://www.kirkpatrickpartners.com/OurPhilosophy/TheKirkpatrickModel
Saturday, September 10, 2016
Post a Comment