1. Did they enjoy the experience?
2. Did they learn something?
3. Are they applying what they learned?
4. Did it result in the intended data outcome?
As an example of the Kirkpatrick model, consider this scenario:
Problem: Students are struggling passing the math portion of the GED.
Goal: Help students improve their math ability and confidence to decrease the time it takes for students to either get level gains in math or pass the math portion of the GED.
Solution: We looked at existing data and determined that students are scoring lowest on algebraic equations. In a survey to teachers, we realized that many of them are lacking confidence in teaching algebra or are not integrating the CCRS math standards into their lessons, thus leaving out critical components. We decided to run two trainings:
- Introduction to Teaching Algebra
- Integrating the CCRS Math Standards into Algebra Lessons
Level 1: After each training we provided a survey to assess whether educators found the professional development enjoyable and valuable.
Level 2: Through formative assessment and application activities we assess whether educators either increased ability and confidence in teaching algebra or learned how to create algebra lessons that are CCRS aligned.
Level 3: Post-professional development coaching and observations will tell us if teachers apply what they learned in training to their classrooms.
Level 4: Revisit the data. For those who participated, did student gains increase? Did the time it takes to get a gain decrease? Did scores on algebra see an improvement overall?
Our end goal when we design PD within statewide systems is to evaluate our efforts from levels 1-4 and make sure we are creating an effective system that shows positive results at all four levels of the Kirkpatrick Model.