Using Kirkpatrick Model and Success Case Model.

Majd Al Rammah and Kathryn E. Patrick

NITTP Objective: Teach students a different aspect of Nissan/Infiniti new vehicles technology.Evaluation: Conducted through Kirkpatrick model.

Level one: ReactionThe reaction was positive, we knew this after using different methods to evaluate how much the learners were satisfied with the program, methods such as surveys, questionnaires and direct contact.The most important thing the learners mentioned was: we enjoyed the combination of seven and a half weeks of lessons followed by seven and a half weeks of practicing the skills that we learned.

Level two: Learning

In the first level, we didn’t measure the skills acquired, but in this level, our aim was to compare the actual skills with the skills the learners had before the program, the results came out positively upon the tests, now they are able to repair Nissan and Infinity cars in an outstanding time records and less mistakes.

Level three: Behavior

As we noticed during the implementation of the program/training that learners were comfortable with the process. Their behavior was outstanding because they were helping each other through the transformation of knowledge. The high quality in performance reflected how effective the skills learned.

Level four: Results

ROI or the Crops was unexpected, the high quality performance in the repairing service that is due to the learning program resulted an increase in sales, easy and simple, customers became satisfied due to the good repairing service and this help growing a good reputation, good reputation means trust, and trust means more customers

NITTP Objective: Teach students a different aspect of Nissan/Infiniti new vehicles technology.Evaluation: Conducted through the success-case model.

Most Successful:

The most successful students of the NITTP reported that they used the skills learned every day in their jobs, allowing them to work more efficiently and effectively. The results are proving highly valuable—fixing more cars with fewer mistakes each day increases profit, and the increased reputation is bringing in more business.

Most Successful:

The successful students reported that they were able to implement what they learned because of the effective hands-on teaching in the second half of the program. They reported that they reviewed what they had learned in the first seven and a half weeks before each hands-on session, so that they would get the most out of the program. They also reported that their workplaces followed the standards and procedures suggested by NITTP.

Least Successful:

The least successful students reported that they did not make much use of the training they received. They did not notice any difference in their work on Nissan/Infiniti vehicles, and did not think that the program had provided a valuable result.

Least Successful:The unsuccessful students reported that they were unable to implement what they learned because the training was too specific. Their workplaces service a wide variety of vehicles, meaning that they are not always working on Nissans and Infinities, or they work on models that are older than was covered by the training. They also reported that their workplaces had very different operating procedures than the NITTP had prepared them for, and that they were held to different standards.

Comparison of the Kirkpatrick Model and the Success Case Method

Both methods:

•Use surveys, questionnaires, and direct communication to gather information.

•Measure results, including changes in behavior.

•Measure students’ value gained from the training.

•Allow a trainer to determine what is and is not working in their program.

Contrast of the Kirkpatrick Model and the Success Case Method

Kirkpatrick Model

•Four “levels” divided by what is examined

•Conclusions from data

•Focuses on positive aspects

Success Case Method

•Two parts divided by who is examined

•Narrative data

•Shows positive and negative aspects