Evaluation has been identified as an “over-arching” component of workplace literacy and essential skills training (CAEL 2006: 102-6). It is what allows stakeholders to determine the value of and make decisions about their program. Evaluation, properly carried out, will show to what extent a program is meeting its goals and also reveal unexpected results. The information provided by evaluation will inform decisions about whether to continue the program or not and how to improve it. The central importance of evaluation is repeatedly stressed in the literature (Gray 2006: 36-7; Salomon 2009: 6; Folinsbee 2007: 23-5; WfDB 2007: 21).
The collaborative approach to workplace training outlined earlier extends to evaluation as a best practice. The literature also recommends that evaluation be part of the planning and design stage of a training program (Gray 2006: 6). Incorporating evaluation into this initial stage helps stakeholders define clear, realistic goals at the outset of the program and helps in early decisions about resources (money, time, space, personnel) that need to be allocated to support the evaluation process. The discussion about resources will in turn influence and fine-tune the design of the program (Gray 2006: 76-7; Salomon 2009: 10-11).
Another best practice promoted in the literature is the use of both formative (ongoing during the
program) and summative (final, end-of-program) evaluation (Gray, 2006: 6, 36-38; Salomon
2009: 11). The summative evaluation is concerned with a program’s overall effectiveness and
the extent to which it met its goals. It is particularly important to making a case for a program’s
continued existence and funding, and introducing changes to a program. It can also “contribute
to the field’s understanding of best practices … and invite replication”
(CAEL 2006: 103; Descy
and Tessaring, 2005: 7-9).
Formative evaluation provides important feedback on how a program is doing (how it’s
operating, how well the trainees are doing) that can be used to “realize continuous improvement
in both design and implementation”
while the program is in progress. The process has been
likened to taking a pulse or monitoring your vital signs during a marathon (CAEL 2006: 103,
105; Descy and Tessaring 2005: 7-9). In both cases, it is important to note not only what
worked, but what did not or not so well. This will allow for improvements (Gray 2006: 76-7).
A number of reports have cautioned against evaluating programs from the narrow perspective of
measurable gains and outcomes without taking into consideration the environment in which the
program was offered. Recent research, for instance, has shown that one of the barriers to
knowledge transfer in workplace literacy and essential skills training is the “organizational
climate, including poor communication, poor employee morale, lack of a learning culture or
lack of encouragement”
. From this perspective, evaluation needs to expand its lens beyond the
training itself and factor in how the entire organization functions (Folinsbee 2007: 33; Dunberry
and Péchard 2007: 43).