1.26 The College considers the evaluation of the training to be essential if it is to obtain feedback on the relevance of that training and the quality of its delivery. It takes this feedback into account when considering the design and content of subsequent courses. The College conducts the evaluation of the Advanced and Higher courses but not for the Junior courses, where responsibility remains with the single Services.
1.27 In carrying out evaluations the College and Services follow broad Departmental guidance but vary in the detailed methods they use. Collocation at Shrivenham, however, has given the College the opportunity to look at how the evaluation strategies for all command and staff training courses can be made more coherent. The College has commissioned a review into this for the near future by the Training Development Support Unit, a specialist agency within the Department. In addition, the Department is currently formulating its policy on the evaluation of all joint training. The College aspires to be one of the leading agencies in the undertaking of this evaluation.
1.28 We compared the evaluation that the College carries out with a widely used model of good practice for evaluating training. The Kirkpatrick model identifies four levels at which evaluation of training and development activities can be made: immediate student satisfaction; testing of the student's learning; impact on the student's performance; and long term impact on the organisation's performance (Appendix 2).
1.29 Examination of the training evaluation carried out by other organisations comparable to the College has shown that most organisations only carry out evaluation of student satisfaction and the extent of their learning. Few evaluate the impact of the training on the graduate's performance and on the organisation's performance. These are more difficult to assess as the evaluation is more subjective and other factors influence the graduate's and organisation's performance.
1.30 The results of our comparison show clearly that the College's evaluation of its training compares well against the Kirkpatrick model and the evaluation carried out by other organisations. In particular, the College's plans for the evaluation of the long-term impact of its training are in line with the best of the evaluation carried out by the comparable organisations that we examined (Figure 5). Overall, feedback on the training to date has been generally positive.