Goal orientation and practice condition as predictors of training results

Abstract

This study examines the training outcomes related to the interaction

Effects of trainer expressiveness, seductive details, and trainee goal orientation on training outcomes

“…Although researchers have recognized the importance of considering individual differences in designing training environments (Noe, 1986), there has been a tendency to emphasize generic training methods that largely ignore the characteristics of trainees. As organizations choose from an increasingly diverse array of training methods, it seems important for HRD professionals to consider these differences in the design and implementation of training programs (Hertenstein, 2001;Towler & Dipboye, 2003). Organizations are now offering flexible delivery environments, where trainees are matched with programs that suit their individual differences, whether online, classroom-based, or blended delivery (Elsenheimer, 2000).…”

“…Researchers in human resource development have become interested particularly in trainee mastery orientation because this individual difference taps into trainees' approaches to learning (Ford, Smith, Weissbein, Gully, & Salas, 1998;Brett & Vandewalle, 1999). Researchers have also linked mastery orientation to adult learning through distinguishing between adult learners who take continuing education classes for better pay or a new career and those who pursue classes for the "love of learning" (Hertenstein, 2001). Trainees' level of mastery orientation is a positive predictor of training outcomes and can influence the extent of problem solving (Hertenstein, 2001).…”

“…Researchers have also linked mastery orientation to adult learning through distinguishing between adult learners who take continuing education classes for better pay or a new career and those who pursue classes for the "love of learning" (Hertenstein, 2001). Trainees' level of mastery orientation is a positive predictor of training outcomes and can influence the extent of problem solving (Hertenstein, 2001). High-mastery trainees set their own standards for learning and tend to persevere when learning becomes difficult.…”

Revue des modèles en évaluation de formation : approches conceptuelles individuelles et sociales

“…S'intéressant à la part des variables individuelles et contextuelles, Hertenstein (2001) rappelle la distinction qu'il convient de faire entre, d'une part, l'évaluation en soi de l'action de formation et, d'autre part, la recherche des mécanismes individuels pouvant expliquer pourquoi certains stagiaires ont atteints ou non les objectifs visés. L'utilisation de variables individuelles renvoyant à des dispositions, si elle peut être utile à la démarche de recherche, est vraisemblablement à proscrire dans le cadre d'une démarche d'évaluation de la formation.…”

“…Cette modification des croyances est un résultat bien connu concernant le sentiment de contrôle général des stagiaires qui tend à évoluer positivement suite à la formation (qu'il s'agisse d'élèves, de salariés ou de demandeurs d'emploi; Beauvois et Le Poultier, 1986;Dubois, 1988;Dubois et Trognon, 1989;Gangloff et Sourisse, 1995;Bressoux et Pansu, 1998;Bressoux et Pansu, 2001 ;Pansu et al, 2003). Le sentiment de contrôle des stagiaires est parfois même utilisé comme un indicateur de l'effet d'une formation au même titre que les mesures de satisfaction (Hertenstein, 2001 ;Gist et al, 1989 ;Sharp et al, 1997 ;Inouye et al, 2001). Pourtant rien ne permet de penser que ces croyances générales soient utiles à développer; c'est-à-dire prédictives des apprentissages ou de transfert d'apprentissage.…”