May 2008

Kirkpatrick’s Column
Evaluating instructors

In regard to the evaluation of instructors, I once faced a situation that I’ll never forget. I selected and hired an instructor from General Electric to conduct a seminar for top management at the University of Wisconsin Management Institute. He had a lot of experience, both on the subject and in conducting seminars both inside and outside the company. However, his audience rating was 3.3, far below our standard of 4.7 (on a 5 point scale). He saw that we used reaction sheets and asked me to send him a summary. He also said, “Don, I know that you conduct and coordinate a lot of seminars. I would appreciate your personal comments and any suggestions for improvement.” I agreed to do it.

“I waited for a thank-you for my constructive suggestions. I am still waiting, and this happened in 1969.”

I enclosed a thank-you letter with a summary of the comment sheets. My thank-you tactfully offered the following suggestions, which, I indicated, were based on the reaction sheets and on my own observations: “Use more examples to illustrate your points. Give the group more opportunity to ask questions. Ask your audiovisual department to prepare some professional slides and/or transparencies that will help to maintain interest.”

I waited for a thank-you for my constructive suggestions. I am still waiting, and this happened in 1969. I did hear through a mutual friend that the instructor was very unhappy with my letter. He complained that he had taken time from a busy schedule to speak at the University of Wisconsin, he didn’t take any fee or expenses, and the only thanks he had gotten was my letter. That was the last time he’d agree to be on our programs.

This example suggests that program coordinators should be very tactful in “helping” instructors by offering suggestions, especially if the instructors are members of top management within their own organization. One practical approach is to let instructors know ahead of time that reaction sheets will be used and that ratings will be compared with a standard. Instructors are usually eager to meet or beat the standard. If they don’t, most will either ask for helpful suggestions or decide that someone else should probably do the teaching in the future. This is usually good news for the training staff, who may want to make a change anyway.

Donald L. Kirkpatrick
From Chapter 4 of Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels (Third Edition), published in 2006 by Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.