Research Paper Undergraduate 1,584 words

Professional Development Evaluation Models Explained

~8 min read
Abstract

This paper examines five prominent models used to evaluate professional development programs in educational settings. Beginning with an overview of professional development and its importance to student learning outcomes, the paper analyzes the Kirkpatrick Four-Level Evaluation Model, Guskey's Five Critical Levels, Joellen Killion's Eight-Step Evaluation Process, Joyce and Showers' Peer Coaching Model, and the Mosaic Approach developed by Shinohara and colleagues. For each model, the paper describes the evaluation stages, their sequence, and their practical application in assessing the effectiveness of staff development programs for teachers, school leaders, and ultimately students.

📝 How to Write This Type of Paper Writing guide — click to expand

What makes this paper effective

  • Systematically surveys five distinct evaluation frameworks, giving readers a comparative overview of the field rather than focusing on a single model.
  • Each model section follows a consistent pattern—introducing the model's origin, outlining its stages in sequence, and explaining the practical purpose of each stage—making the content easy to follow and compare.
  • Grounds each model in its educational context (school improvement, teacher behavior, student outcomes), keeping the discussion applied rather than purely theoretical.

Key academic technique demonstrated

The paper demonstrates effective use of framework synthesis: rather than arguing for one model over another, it describes each model's internal logic and hierarchical structure, allowing the reader to understand how the levels within each framework build upon one another. This technique is particularly useful in literature-survey style papers where the goal is comprehension and comparison rather than argumentation.

Structure breakdown

The paper opens with a definitional introduction that establishes the scope and importance of professional development evaluation. It then dedicates a section to each of the five models—Kirkpatrick, Guskey, Killion, Joyce and Showers, and the Mosaic/Shinohara approach—treating them as parallel case studies. The paper concludes within the final model section rather than adding a separate conclusion, which is typical of descriptive survey papers at the undergraduate level.

Introduction to Professional Development Evaluation

"Professional development" is an extensive term that can apply to a range of education, training, and developmental opportunities. For the purposes of this paper, the term is applied to a broad range of activities whose general aim is to enhance the knowledge and skills of staff and volunteers (Promoting Quality through Professional Development: A Framework for Evaluation).

Professional development refers to the process of acquiring the competencies needed to advance one's career (Professional Development). The ultimate value of professional development lies in the central role it plays in improving student learning. This means that educators must pay attention to the outcomes of professional development with respect to job performance, organizational effectiveness, and overall student achievement. Each professional development activity should be accompanied by a carefully designed assessment plan for measuring its effectiveness.

Professional development programs must be analyzed to understand their value to the school, to teachers, and ultimately to students. Assessing a professional development program serves two important objectives: to improve the quality of the program, and to determine its overall effectiveness. Assessment results should be presented in a format that can be understood and supported by all stakeholders in the professional development process. Assessment designed to determine the overall effectiveness of a professional development program is known as summative evaluation. Clear communication of findings helps ensure that results are used to guide school improvement efforts and inform professional development activities at successive levels. This paper describes several models useful for conducting such evaluations (Critical Issue: Evaluating Professional Growth and Development).

Kirkpatrick Four-Level Evaluation Model

The final step in the ADDIE instructional design model is a summative evaluation in which one measures how effectively the training program achieved its stated goals. This step is often overlooked due to the additional time and resources it requires. Training departments with limited budgets frequently assume new programs are effective and redirect evaluation funds toward the next program. However, as senior executives demand greater accountability from training activities, interest in evaluating and reporting results is certain to grow.

In 1975, Donald Kirkpatrick introduced a four-level model of assessment that has since become an industry standard. The four levels are: Reaction, in which participants evaluate the training after completing the program; Learning, which measures the outcomes derived from the learning experience; Behavior, which assesses whether participants' behavior and attitudes changed as a result of new learning; and Results, which measures the business or organizational impact of the training program. These levels can be applied to technology-based training as well as to more traditional delivery formats (Evaluating e-Learning: Introduction to the Kirkpatrick Model).

The four levels can be explained in greater detail as follows. Reaction measures how participants responded to the program; a positive reaction is important to encourage continued learning. Learning measures the extent to which participants acquired knowledge in line with program goals, such as gains in skill or knowledge, changes in attitude, and early application of new learning. Behavior calculates the degree to which behavioral change has occurred as a result of the program and assesses whether the knowledge gained is being applied on the job. Results evaluates the ultimate outcomes achieved as a result of the learning obtained through the program (The Kirkpatrick Evaluation Model).

In an era of standards and accountability in education, professional development for school leaders is more essential than ever. Yet the resources dedicated to developing principals are far from guaranteed. Schools and districts must make the most of the time and money committed to supporting school leaders. Equally important, a consensus has emerged that the primary focus of professional development for both principals and teachers should be improvement of student learning (Evaluating Professional Development Programs).

Guskey's Five Critical Levels Model

In assessing professional development, Guskey identifies five critical levels of information to consider. These levels are arranged sequentially, from simple to more complex. Each successive level requires more time and more resources to gather assessment data. More importantly, each higher level is built upon the ones that precede it — success at one level is generally required for success at the levels that follow. The five levels are:

Participants' Reactions: assesses whether participants found a professional development activity valuable and enjoyable. Participants' Learning: focuses on measuring the knowledge, skills, and new approaches that participants acquired. Organizational Support and Change: examines the organizational qualities and structural features essential to success. Participants' Use of New Knowledge and Skills: assesses whether participants are applying their newly acquired knowledge in their professional environments. Student Learning Outcomes: assesses the impact of the program on students — specifically, any benefits students gained as a result of the activity (The Age of Our Accountability).

Schools assess their professional development programs in a variety of ways. Sophisticated assessments of professional development include teacher portfolios, action plans, evidence of goal achievement, principal observations, examination of student work, Pay for Performance recognition, career ladder advancement, state examinations, and peer assessment (Evaluating Professional Development).

3 Locked Sections · 650 words remaining
Sign up to read these 3 sections

Joellen Killion's Eight-Step Evaluation Model · 270 words

"Eight-step process for program evaluation"

Joyce and Showers Peer Coaching Model · 190 words

"Peer coaching teams and transfer of classroom learning"

Mosaic Approach and Shinohara Evaluation Model · 190 words

"Mosaic framework linking staff development to outcomes"

You’re 51% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 3 sections.

Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log in
130,000+ paper examples AI writing assistant Citation generator Cancel anytime
Key Concepts in This Paper
Kirkpatrick Model Summative Evaluation Peer Coaching Student Outcomes Guskey Framework Staff Development Formative Assessment Transfer of Learning Evaluation Levels Mosaic Approach
Cite This Paper
PaperDue. (2026). Professional Development Evaluation Models Explained. PaperDue. https://www.paperdue.com/study-guide/professional-development-evaluation-models-62164

Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.