AHoward-HR410 AssignmentUnit7

docx

School

Purdue Global University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

HR410

Subject

Business

Date

Jun 12, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by CommodoreBuffaloPerson780

1 Unit 7 Assignment Alexis Howard Purdue Global University HR410 Employee Training and Development Robert Freeborough June 4, 2024

2 Introduction After completing a needs analysis, the university found that they needed to create a student end-of-term evaluation that was more effective. A needs analysis, sometimes referred to as a gap analysis, is a procedure that finds issues or shortcomings, examines the reasons behind them, and makes recommendations for fixing them (Newbauer, 2023). Organizations can use it to make sure they are on track to meet their objectives and to better understand where they are and where they want to be (Newbauer, 2023). They have some worries that the material on the present evaluation form needs to be revised after reviewing it. At the moment, the university employs the Student-of-Term Evaluation as a tool to confirm that the classes offered are in line with the student's degree plan, the instructor is providing the necessary training, and the students are receiving the correct contact for their class. Towards the conclusion of the term, the student receives an online survey with questions for this evaluation. They must answer using the options offered, which include strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, or disagree strongly. This kind of student review aids the university in assessing the training that their professors have imparted. Level of Evaluation The student evaluation at the conclusion of the term is a formative assessment that prioritizes knowledge transfer and student happiness (Purdue Global, n.d.). I would talk about the first evaluation level, which is reactions. In their survey questions, this gauges how satisfied the student is with the program, content, and material (Noe, 2022). This would be the ideal level to evaluate because the university requires an assessment that would provide them with the data they need to improve student learning outcomes. Levels 2 and 3 are additional levels to take into account. In order to ensure that the University produces the finest results for their students, these additional levels ought to be incorporated. It might offer the university insight into the opinions

3 of the students on the courses. Did they learn anything from the offered content, and was it useful? Additionally, the university would gain insight into how successfully the instructors are instructing the classes. By evaluating the transfer of learning which is the process of applying knowledge, abilities, and tactics to new circumstances or contexts (Turn Learning Into Action, 2014). Changes ` I would update or modify a few sections of the University's training evaluation now that I have determined the levels of evaluation. Upon reviewing the assessment questions, I've discovered that they should be more detailed as they are now quite vague. It is divided into categories on the course subject, academic performance, if the material is relevant to your career success, and the instructor's effectiveness in the classroom. The student responds with a generic response, yet they are able to reply on certain questions but not all of them. The inquiries ought to be focused on the student's field of study. I would rephrase the question's original formulation. The current format of the question is, "The course activities have practical application to my degree and/or career." The only response options available to the student are agree or disagree. Instead of only offering them a choice, I would give them the chance to explain by asking, "Did you find that course activities had relevance for this class, why or why not?" I would ask every question in this way because it would provide the university a precise indication of how effectively each course is serving the needs of the students. These open-ended questions promote critical thinking and creativity by allowing people to freely express their views (Mcnamara, 2018). Leaving open-ended questions till the end of the survey is usually a good approach in order to catch any information that closed-ended questions may have missed (Mcnamara, 2018). In addition, they could delve deeper and see whether any adjustments are required.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

4 Strengths and Weaknesses One of the EOT's strengths is its brief evaluation, which enables students to complete the questions on time. You run the danger of the student rushing through or not finishing the evaluation at all if it is too long. Even if you modify the format as I recommended to accommodate comments, it should still just have a minimum of questions and shouldn't take more than ten to fifteen minutes to finish. Because shorter surveys are more likely to be completed, the data quality is generally higher (Nicholson, 2018). You want as many responses as you can when sending a survey to students. You may accomplish precisely that by keeping the survey brief (Nicholson, 2018). One other advantage is that the assessment appears every time the student checks in and continues to appear until the survey is finished. The survey's flaw is that it offers pupils generic responses, which could lead them to choose "neutral" for every issue. This would not be helpful input for the university because it would not enable them to make any changes to the course materials or provide professors with feedback on any training that would help them teach the course more effectively. Improvement Students' evaluations of the course, the technology used, and the teachers are a good place for the university to start looking into potential changes. Asking for input, even if it's unfavorable, helps the university and, if needed, the instructors' ability to teach better. Giving kids a voice in the classroom allows teachers to become more proficient in their craft (Levine, 2018). Through the use of a student survey, instructors can get feedback from their students about what they need, want, and concerns in order to improve their performance in the classroom (Levine, 2018). Actually, scholarly studies in the fields of management and organization demonstrate that exceptional performers' readiness to seek out criticism in order to better

5 themselves is a key characteristic. The purpose of evaluation should be to enable the university to assess each response and classify the statements according to their subjects. Examining this categorized report would help the university identify areas for development and rank them according to importance. It would also help them determine what aspects of the university are succeeding. Positive or bad outcomes of this kind could be included in yearly reports to help instructors identify areas for improvement and make adjustments to their classes. Conclusion The university needs these kinds of assessments in order to identify areas that require improvement and to find out what is beneficial for both the students and the institution. The student end-of-term evaluation is a crucial tool for assessing how well the university's programs are designed and how well training is transferred. I get the impression that the university is concerned about my experience with their technology, instructors, and course materials when I complete an evaluation that is well-written. Changes should be made to the evaluation such that it emphasizes learning transfers and allows for open discussion. The evaluation should be used to identify areas where the program is falling short of its objectives and those where changes to the curriculum are necessary. By taking these steps, the institution can ensure that the evaluation is a valuable tool for assessing the standard of their program design and training transfer. Reference

6 Levine, M. (2018). Implementing an Effective 360-Degree Feedback Process. TD: Talent Development, 72(12), 20–22. Mcnamara, B. (2018). Just CARE More. TD: Talent Development, 72(11), 52–56. Newbauer, K. (2023). A Needs Assessment Is Not a Needs Analysis. TD: Talent Development, 77(10), 20–22. Nicholson, C. (2018). Master Delivering Virtual Workshops. TD: Talent Development, 72(5), 69DL–72DL. Noe, R. (2022). Employee Training & Development (9th ed.). McGraw-Hill Higher Education (US) . https://purdueuniversityglobal.vitalsource.com/books/9781265925802 Purdue Global. (n.d.). Satifactory Academic Progress. https://catalog.purdueglobal.edu/purdue- global-law-school/policy-information/academic-standards/satisfactory-academic- progress/#:~:text=maximum%20time%20frame.-,Academic%20Progress %20Evaluations,periods%20for%20financial%20aid%20purposes Turning Learning Into Action: A Proven Methodology for Effective Transfer of Learning. (2014). TD: Talent Development, 68(9), 75.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Related Documents

HRM 300 5-1 HR Learning Journal.docx

LWA 7- Team and Student Reflection- What Did This Course Mean to You-4.docx

IDS-105 Module 6 assignment by Laxmi Khanal.docx

Comstock Quality Case Study.docx

Final Practice 3.pdf

BUS-400 4-2.docx

BUSN 604 Week 7 Assigment Sheila Seal.docx

Unlocking Apple's Competitive Edge with Information Systems

Week 3 Assignment 2 of 2.docx

Key Concepts in Selection Process for Human Resources

Quiz_ Ch 01 HW_ Managers and Economics.pdf

SITXCCS016 Student Assessment Tasks Version 1.0 - Copy.docx

Recommended textbooks for you

Understanding Management (MindTap Course List)

Management

ISBN:9781305502215

Author:Richard L. Daft, Dorothy Marcic

Publisher:Cengage Learning

Management, Loose-Leaf Version

Management

ISBN:9781305969308

Author:Richard L. Daft

Publisher:South-Western College Pub

Purchasing and Supply Chain Management

Operations Management

ISBN:9781285869681

Author:Robert M. Monczka, Robert B. Handfield, Larry C. Giunipero, James L. Patterson

Publisher:Cengage Learning

Marketing

ISBN:9780357033791

Author:Pride, William M

Publisher:South Western Educational Publishing

Foundations of Business (MindTap Course List)

Marketing

ISBN:9781337386920

Author:William M. Pride, Robert J. Hughes, Jack R. Kapoor

Publisher:Cengage Learning

Foundations of Business - Standalone book (MindTa...

Marketing

ISBN:9781285193946

Author:William M. Pride, Robert J. Hughes, Jack R. Kapoor

Publisher:Cengage Learning

SEE MORE TEXTBOOKS

Recommended textbooks for you

Understanding Management (MindTap Course List)
Management
ISBN:9781305502215
Author:Richard L. Daft, Dorothy Marcic
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Management, Loose-Leaf Version
Management
ISBN:9781305969308
Author:Richard L. Daft
Publisher:South-Western College Pub
Purchasing and Supply Chain Management
Operations Management
ISBN:9781285869681
Author:Robert M. Monczka, Robert B. Handfield, Larry C. Giunipero, James L. Patterson
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Marketing
Marketing
ISBN:9780357033791
Author:Pride, William M
Publisher:South Western Educational Publishing
Foundations of Business (MindTap Course List)
Marketing
ISBN:9781337386920
Author:William M. Pride, Robert J. Hughes, Jack R. Kapoor
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Foundations of Business - Standalone book (MindTa...
Marketing
ISBN:9781285193946
Author:William M. Pride, Robert J. Hughes, Jack R. Kapoor
Publisher:Cengage Learning