Re: techwr-l digest: May 31, 2000

Subject: Re: techwr-l digest: May 31, 2000
From: Glen Warner <gdwarner -at- ricochet -dot- net>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 04:43:35 -0700

Steven Schwarzman <StevenS -at- Amdocs -dot- com> wrote:

> Probably the most commonly used model to measure success of training
is by
> Donald Kirkpatrick.
> That model has four levels. They go something like this:
> Level one - reaction, or did the students like the course?
> This is commonly measured by a questionnaire, aka a smile sheet,
> typically scores are falsely high. It doesn't tell you much.


That depends on the student.

I took a class on writing for magazines last year from a published
writer with over 700 articles to his credit.

After about two hours of this four hour class, I realized I hadn't
heard anything I hadn't read elsewhere. I discussed this during the
break with one of my fellow victims -- er, students -- and she also
wasn't impressed, and was not coming back after the break.

The instructor was big on using humor in his articles, but weak on
teaching about it. No mention of "The Rule of Three," for instance.

Long story short, my comments for this instructor included a
comparison of the class to sex: "Lots of foreplay and no payoff"
(though I didn't use the word 'payoff').

I also made a few suggestions to improve the course so as not to have
the instructor quit in despair.

Any way ... I got a refund, plus an extra $10 bucks, and an invitation
to take the class again.

I declined ... but I kept the money. :o)

So ... "smile sheets," with comments as strong as the ones I submitted
for this particular class, should be taken very seriously.


Previous by Author: RE: Date format
Next by Author: Re: Shareware
Next by Thread: Re: techwr-l digest: May 31, 2000

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads