The Learning Practitioner:

A performance in five acts

Carolyn Lewis FCIPD
The Learning Practitioner
• https://folio.brighton.ac.uk/user/cl78/proposal-the-learning-practitio
ner-lt728-1

• Has my approach to teaching softer management skills aligned to

Employee Relations implementation added value to the student
experience? 
• Are the students stronger and more confident HR professionals as a
consequence of facing challenging employees in the interactive case
studies? 
• What impact, if any, has their learning had on their employing
organisations?
The Learning Continuum

Kolb (after Lewin) aligned with Honey & Mumford (1986)

Kirkpatrick’s Evaluation of Training Evaluation (1994)

Reaction:
end of course

Ultimate:
Immediate:
impact on
individual learning
organisational performance
(results)

Intermediate:
impact on service
area/delivery
(behavioural)
Training Evaluation Level 1
• Reaction of the trainee – how they felt about the training

• Method – ‘happy’ sheets, verbal or written feedback, informal

feedback, trainer’s observations
Training Evaluation Level 2
• Learning evaluation – measuring the increase in knowledge and skills
acquired: the impact on the individual

• Methods – assessments or tests before and after training, interview,

self assessment or observation
Training Evaluation Level 3
• Behaviour evaluation- how is new learning being applied in the job
role:
the impact on the team/service delivery

• Methods – observation, self assessment, interview, performance

indicators to measure improvement after a time period eg 3 -6
months
Training Evaluation Level 4
• Results evaluation:
the impact on the business overall

• Methods – usual measures of performance for the business eg profits,

productivity, complaints, wastage, errors, growth, quality, employee
turnover and stability, sales
• = Return on investment (ROI)
Training Evaluation Level 5
• Societal Impact:
the contribution of the individual and the organisation

• Corporate Social Responsibility; workplace wellbeing; social policy

• Kaufmann, Keller & Watkins (1995)

• see also Aguinis & Kraiger (2009)
Research Findings
• https://folio.brighton.ac.uk/user/cl78/research-findings-lt728
Next steps
• There is too little data available to facilitate a rigorous analysis of findings
against the literature but potential research objectives include
• Does practical intervention with scenario-based events (Scribner, 1983)
engender greater understanding of contextual Employee Relations than does
observation (Lave & Wenger, 1991)?
• To what extent is recognition of learning better facilitated by reflective
practice? (Dewey, 1933; Bourner, O’Hara & Barlow, 2000)
• Does learning preference impact upon one’s understanding if one’s
enjoyment is compromised?  (Dick & Johnson, 2002)
• What of those students who attended the theory sessions but were not
present for the interactive case studies?
References/Bibliography

Aguinis H & Kraiger K (2009) ‘Benefits of Training and Development for Individuals and Teams, Organizations
and Society’ Annual Review of Psychology Volume 60:451–74
Bourner, T, O'Hara, S, & Barlow, J (2000) Only connect: Facilitating reflective learning with statements of
relevance. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 37(1), 68-75
Dewey, J (1933) How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the Educative Process
(2nd edition). New York: DC Heath
Dick, W & Johnson, RB (2002). Evaluation in instructional design: The impact of Kirkpatrick’s four-level
model. RA Reiser & JV Dempsey Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology, 145-153
Giangreco A, Sebastiano A & Peccei R (2009) ‘Trainees’ Reactions to Training: An analysis of the factors
affecting the overall satisfaction with training’, The International Journal of HRM, Volume 20(1) pp96-111
Honey, P & Mumford, A (1986); Using your learning styles. Maidenhead: Peter Honey
Honey, P and Mumford, A (1992); The manual of learning styles. Maidenhead: Peter Honey
References/Bibliography

Kaufman, R, Keller, J, and Watkins, R (1995), ‘What Works and What Doesn’t: Evaluation Beyond Kirkpatrick’,
Performance & Instructions, Volume 35(2) pp8–12
Kirkpatrick, DL (1994); Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler
Kolb, DA (1984); Experiential Learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. New Jersey:
Prentice Hall
Lave, J and Wenger, E (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press
Lewin K (1942) "Field Theory and Learning" in D Cartwright (ed.) Field Theory in Social Science: selected
theoretical papers, London; Social Science Paperbacks, 1951
Scribner, S. (1983, 1997). Mind in action: a functional approach to thinking. Mind, Culture and Activity: Seminal
Papers from the Laboratory of Human Cognition. M. Cole, M, Engeström, Y & Vasquez, O (Eds). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press