The Transfer of Learning: Designs and Assessment

The Transfer of Learning: Designs and Assessment

Rodney Reynolds
Copyright: © 2021 |Pages: 9
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-7665-6.ch006
OnDemand:
(Individual Chapters)
Available
$37.50
Current Special Offers
No Current Special Offers
TOTAL SAVINGS: $37.50

Abstract

The focus of this chapter is on insights for and evaluation of if the transfer of learning by training and development professionals will sustain the training field. The chapter begins with the need for a model of learning. Then there is a section on a proposed evaluation of the trainer presentation of a model of learning or training development. The chapter then progresses to a proposed measure of the potential for the transfer of learning and the need to assess self-efficacy with gradations of attainments on the training topic. Finally, the chapter turns to trainee engagement and to having a results orientation for a training program.
Chapter Preview
Top

Introduction And Background

The major premise for this chapter is that training materials and training assessment should have a base in a model of long-term learning and training development. Any use of a model of learning should draw a consistent focus on how trainees are most likely to transfer their learning from their training(s) to their self-development while becoming an added-value to their profession and, thus, their employers. Evidence is essential (Reynolds & Reynolds, 2002; Reynolds, 2020) especially of post-training achievements (Kirkpatrick, 1994) Thus, any assessment of the potential for the transfer of learning must involve an evaluation of the introduction and projection of the future learning and development. The timing, method, and wording of any measure or the transfer of learning must also be based on the model of learning and training development that forms the base for the training sessions.

Model of Learning or Training Development

Most education and learning professionals are familiar with Bloom’s Taxonomy (Bloom, Engelhart, Furst, Hill, & Krathwohl, 1956; Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Many learning professionals prefer one of the variations and extensions of Vygotsky’s (1978) Constructivist Learning Theory. Previously, I argued (Reynolds, 2017) that Training and Development professionals should be well acquainted with Donald Kirkpatrick’s Model (Kirkpatrick, 1994; 1998; Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2007; 2010). Praslova (2010) adapted Kirkpatrick’s thinking to curriculum development. Thus, Prasolva drew a tie between learning theory and advancements for educators as well as training and development professionals.

Complete Chapter List

Search this Book:
Reset