The e-learning will begin to measure a familiarity with the various programs under the Evening Advisor’s jurisdiction and where they can be found/referenced. They will also gain an understanding of the prerequisites needed to enter any program and the sequencing of classes within each.

​

Kirkpatrick Levels:

Level 1 Reaction: How did the new Evening Advisor react to the training? Did it give them the confidence needed to start in their new position?

• A questionnaire may be issued a couple of weeks after training has occurred to “check-in” with them.

Level 2 Learning: To what extent did the new Evening Advisor acquire the necessary skills to begin advising students after training? Was the training deliberate and purposeful?

• One way of determining is to pre-test the same set of questions from the Captivate training module before the training, then compare them with scoring during/after training.

• Formative testing will take place within each of the four learning modules, and then a summative test will also be given at the end.

Level 3 Behavior: A performance review based on student feedback should be implemented.

• The reward system of this position is the satisfaction of having helped students.

Level 4 Results: At the department level this can be based on the comparative amounts of student complaints.

• This in turn can affect enrollment numbers at the organization level since the desire is to keep classroom seating at optimal capacity (especially since it is a NYC campus with limited space).​

 

Assessment Techniques:

Both declarative and procedural knowledge will be tested since there needs to be a recalling of classes and their sequencing/ordering within a specific program. Procedural knowledge will be employed when the learner fills-out a sample Add/Drop Form and substantiates a reasoning for it (Prerequisite override, Restriction Waiver, etc.) since both are the advisor’s responsibilities.   

​

Assessment Tools:

The kinds of electronic assessment tools that I will be using in my Adobe Captivate course are mostly scenario-driven questions like, “Bella is a prospective student who would like to enroll in the Haute Couture program but has no sewing skills whatsoever. How would you advise the student?”. From here I would give them a list of 4-5 possible answers that seem likely, but only one would be most appropriate. Depending on if their answer is correct or not, they will either be re-directed back to the original question for a second try or be given another level/branching scenario to “cut their teeth” with some advising skills and demonstrate an understanding of the catalogue requirements.

I will also use the drag and drop feature in Captivate for addressing the sequential order of classes that could apply to any one of the programs that the faculty advisor is overseeing.

The “matching” feature is another good (normative) digital source to see if new advisors can recognize catalogue courses by matching them with their corresponding certificate or degree programs.

​

Evaluation Plan:

Data at Evaluation Levels 3/Behavior and 4/Results will be measured/addressed with a poll administered to the faculty member via email a few weeks after the training takes place. At least 80% of the faculty must state that the training helped them with addressing students’ concerns.

Additionally, on the students’ end, surveys will become available at the conclusion of each semester asking them how the registration process went with their evening/weekend advisor. We will need to keep in mind that these surveys are voluntary and are usually only completed by people who have strong feelings either way.

The way to reach a less emotionally involved population is to administer the same survey via phone text to ALL evening/weekend students. This convenient method would hopefully gain more participants and a wider, more accurate survey pool.

Consideration of extending this survey to prospective students in the enrollment process may also be helpful. If there is an unequal weighting of students voicing how helpful the advisor as compared with the disgruntled students, the training would be considered a success (more than 50%). Allowing for any additional commentary/suggestions on this survey will also be helpful in determining the performance of the advisor/learner. Finally, enrollment numbers and metrics from the administration are to be considered so that target numbers coincide with program visibility, classroom capacity, budgets, etc. (aligning with the school’s mission statement).

The data would be used to see if the advisor is performing their duties satisfactorily, but also can determine what training aspects need to be updated due to new protocols and/or course developments.

​

Questionnaire(s):

For Students: Utilizing Google Forms or PollMe, etc.  A Likert scale can be employed when asking students how satisfied they were with their advisor’s guidance during the registration process. Questions would remain brief to ensure that the student completes the survey. Asking them to rate their satisfaction when it comes to how quickly the advisor resolved their inquiry would be beneficial. Also, something more subjective like rating how well they felt that their advisor listened to them during the process can also be helpful.​

For the Faculty Advisor: A questionnaire would be more useful in measuring Kirkpatrick’s/Level 1 Reaction to the training by asking the learner/Faculty Advisor how helpful they thought the training was and why. Also, by asking what aspect of the training they found most useful one can determine what maybe to keep or eliminate when updating the training in the future.