Sub-Badge: Evaluate Instructional and Non-Instructional Interventions (2 Challenges)

Challenge One

Criteria: Evidence of implementing a summative evaluation plan to evaluate the effectiveness of the instruction and decide whether to continue to use instruction.

Artifact: Evaluation Plan

Reflection

For the competency, “Implement summative evaluation plans,” I have selected an evaluation plan I created with a partner in class. The evaluation plan we made was for training for a company that leases buildings. At the time, the company had had some issues involving safety procedures. My partner was in the middle of revising the safety training and wanted to come up with a solid evaluation plan that would measure if her new training program was successful. Using the information she was collecting, we devised an extensive evaluation plan.

Although I had conducted assessments to measure what students were learning and created training surveys, I never developed an evaluation plan to outline how to conduct evaluations. We would use the knowledge checks to assess how students performed in that particular course, and the surveys to gauge how students felt about the course and what we could do to improve. While developing this evaluation plan, I gained a perspective I hadn’t fully understood before. By following this plan, I could provide stakeholders with a broader overview of the evaluation process at levels 1-4.

         This evaluation helped my partner and me in several ways. She was able to give her stakeholders a holistic picture of how she would use knowledge checks and surveys to assess whether the training was improving safety procedures. It also taught me how to use the Kirkpatrick model. After this project, I created an evaluation plan for the training project I was working on.

Challenge Two

Criteria: Evidence of implementing a formative evaluation plan to provide information that can be used to make adjustments and improvements in the design.

Artifact: Part one of the Evaluation Plan

For the competency of “demonstrating the skill of implementing formative evaluation plans,” I am using the "Safety Training Evaluation Plan" developed for Cushman Wakefield’s multifamily property management safety program. This document outlines a detailed strategy for assessing the effectiveness of a series of self-paced safety training modules delivered online to property management staff, supervisors, and maintenance teams.

I chose this artifact because it directly addresses the need for continuous assessment and improvement in instructional design. My partner and I recognized that implementing a robust formative evaluation process was essential to ensure learners are not only engaged but also acquire the necessary knowledge and skills. The evaluation plan includes Level 1 and Level 2 assessments, using Microsoft Forms for surveys and Power BI for data visualization. These tools provide real-time feedback and actionable insights, enabling the team to improve the training modules continually.

While working on this assignment, I drew on my past experience in instructional design, particularly from my time on the Navy intelligence cyber training team. During the rewriting of that course, formative assessments played a crucial role in identifying curriculum gaps and increasing learner engagement, which previously had not been a priority.

This experience helped me understand the importance of integrating structured formative evaluation processes into instructional design projects. In the future, I see opportunities to expand the scope of formative evaluations to include on-the-job behavior changes (Level 3 Kirkpatrick), add more frequent milestone check-ins during module development, and utilize predictive analytics to identify at-risk learners earlier in the process.