Doctoral Dissertations

Robert Cooper

Date of Award

8-1983

Degree Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Education

Major Professor

George W. Weigers Jr.

Committee Members

Robert K. Roney, Carroll B. Coakley, George Harris Jr.

Abstract

The problem of the study was a lack of validated criteria (guidelines) against which program planners and evaluators could assess their programs. The purpose of the study was to Identify and validate basic criteria associated with quality technical and skills training programs. A secondary purpose was to determine the extent of agreement among a select panel of experts representing three groups in the training community: The American Society for Training and Development, the American Vocational Association, and Educational Accrediting Associations.

The design of the study was descriptive in nature with Initial data gathered from the literature and the validated list obtained through a modified Delphi technique. The Initial listing of 113 criterion statements was elicited from the literature and organized into the following categories: PHILOSOPHY, GOALS, PROGRAM PLANNING, PROGRAM MANAGEMENT, INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORT AND ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, PUBLIC RELATIONS, INSTRUCTIONAL STAFF, FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT, RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION, TRAINING PROCESS, EVALUATION, and OTHER. Panel members were Invited to specify additional criteria under the OTHER category In the Probe I survey. Three criterion statements were Identified by the panel and added to the Initial 113 criterion statements. Criteria specified OTHER were then subjected to ratings by all panelists In the Probe II survey.

The primary method of validating criteria initially gleaned from the literature was the use of a series of modified Delphi surveys which were designed to achieve consensus among a group of 12 select panel members. Panel members were identified by their peers as being knowledgeable in technical training program design and evaluation. Frequency ratings were compared to determine the degree of concurrence or disagreement on selected criterion statements among respondent groups.

Results showed that 111 of the initial criterion statements including OTHER were rated DESIRABLE OR ESSENTIAL by 100 percent of the panel members. Only 35 of the criterion statements were rated ESSENTIAL by 100 percent of the panel. Varying percentages of the panel, 1:12 (8.3 percent) to 5:12 (41.6 percent), rated only 8:113 criterion statements as unimportant.

Based on the results of the study, the researcher concluded that the 35 criterion statements validated by 100 percent of the panel were essential criteria (guidelines) for planning or evaluating technical, skills, and related training programs. A secondary conclusion by the researcher was that 111 of the criterion statements validated by 100 percent of the panel were at least desirable with reference to technical, skills, and other related training programs.

Download
Files over 3MB may be slow to open. For best results, right-click and select "save as..."

Share

COinS