培训学员的反应外文翻译.docVIP

外文翻译 原文 Trainees’reactions to training Material Source: The International Journal of Human Resource Management Author: Antonio Sebastiano The literature on training evaluation is highly consistent with respect to two basic conclusions. First, companies are not generally capable of fully evaluating training programmes ,thereby highlighting a major gap between theoretical recommendations in the academic literature and real application in industry and business . As noted by Plant and Ryan within the industrial or commercial setting, time and financial resources severely limit the possibility of evaluating benefit beyond level 1.Second, as emphasised by Olsen , participant reaction is still the most commonly evaluated dimension of training in organisations – ‘The transfer component did not appear to have received as much attention since most organisations were (apparently) looking primarily at reaction. Estimates of the proportion of companies doing full training evaluations vary considerably from one study to the next but tend, on the whole, to be rather low: 31% according to Olsen (1998) 20% ,according to Shelton and Alliger (1993), 7% as estimated by Van Buren and Erskine, only 2% as indicated by Lee and Pershing (2002), and none according to Plant and Ryan . Indeed, the field of training evaluation shows an interesting dichotomy. On the one hand,academics tend to emphasise the need to examine all four of Kirkpatrick’s (1967) evaluation levels, while organisations, on the other, seldom try to apply the full training evaluation model in practice. However, because of the emphasis on full training evaluation, research in this area has tended to downgrade the importance of level 1 evaluation. Thus, in their broad literature review of training evaluation results, Alliger and Janak (1989) noted that only three out of 203 empirical studies examined all four levels. On the other hand, the number of studies dealing explicitly with level 1 was also very limited: 11 out of 203