This workshop handout looks specifically at higher education (specifically in the medical field) and helps to evaluate training design as targets both students as learners, as well as educators as learners. This is a great resource for helping to identify what kinds of level 4 outcomes might be tracked in higher level/medical education.

This article explores some of the practicalities of operationalizing level 4 evaluation, including evaluating feasibility (time, costs), design, and data analysis.

This overview of the training evaluation process is of particular value due to its exploration of the limitations of training evaluation (including Level 4 evaluation)

This article is an in-depth review of how the Kirkpatrick model can be adapted to help develop and assess training in higher education. It discusses all four levels of the model and assesses not only ways that the Kirkpatrick model can provide feedback to the educators, but also to the institutions of higher learning.

This article is most notable for an *excellent* graphical description of how to integrate all four levels of the Kirkpatrick levels of evaluation into an overall training plan. The article focuses on integration of the four levels of training with each other to optimize training, and discusses using the training model backwards, i.e. focusing on results first, before designing the training plan.

This article is a great primer specific to Kirkpatrick levels 3 and 4 and is a very simple explanation of how to work levels 3 and 4 into an overall training curriculum from the very beginning.

This article debunks some myths about the Kirkpatrick model and discusses evaluation tools/techniques that can be used to help operationalize evaluations including Level Four evaluations. The article discusses how the Kirkpatrick model is applicable to training in this day and age.

This article gives a good overview of the Four Levels of Evaluation by its creator himself, Donald Kirkpatrick, and explains how they are interrelated. One of the most interesting points is that he stipulates here and explains why he does NOT consider Level Four evaluation to be more important than other levels--which is an accusation that has been levied at his model by some critics.