The North American Transportation Company (NATC) is a very large organization that provides continent-wide facilities for the shipping of goods, from tonnes of wheat and iron ore to individual parcels. Headquartered in Canada, the company uses all forms of heavy equipment to load, transport, and deliver goods and materials for its clients.

In recent years, a number of accidents and near-accidents have occurred. In some cases the accidents caused injuries to people (mainly employees, though some injuries were sustained by bystanders). In three cases in the last five years, people were killed. They also caused substantial material damage to property and/or the environment.

Investigation of these accidents indicated that drug and/or alcohol abuse by company personnel was relatively common and that these may have been contributing factors to the accidents. This analysis also uncovered that absenteeism and job performance problems were also the result of drug/alcohol use by employees.

The CEO of the company asked the HR department to solve the problem. In response, the department formulated a zero-tolerance policy toward workplace alcohol and drug abuse. The policy outlawed alcohol/drug use on the job and made the implementation and enforcement of the policy the direct responsibility of all supervisory personnel in the company. They further developed and implemented a training program to instruct all supervisors on the policy, the means to implement it, and the specific behaviours expected of them. This training program became known as the Alcohol/Drug Abuse Prevention Program (ADAPP).

The day-long training program explained that it was the responsibility of supervisors to be vigilant with respect to drug/alcohol use on the job and to act immediately when there was a problem.

The training program focused on three main aspects of the ADAPP policy that supervisors were to learn and to transfer to the job: (1) explain the policy to their employees as a group; (2) watch for employees who show signs of being under the influence; and (3) choose the specific supervisory action required correctly.

Supervisors were instructed to (a) assess the situation with the employee; (b) immediately relieve the employee from his/her post should the impairment prevent safe and effective job performance; and (c) direct the person to the Employee Aid Program for further investigation and treatment. Supervisors who failed to implement the procedure would face disciplinary actions including, in some cases, immediate dismissal.

The training program consisted of lectures and video presentations, followed by various role-playing exercises and discussions designed to help supervisors learn the policy, motivate them to implement it, and enhance their confidence in their ability to do so.

 

Based on the case study, answer the following questions;

1)How would you go about measuring participant reactions?

a)Questionnaires, focus groups and interviews.
b)Formative and summative exams.
c)Standardized questionnaires and organizational records. 

d)Self-reports, supervisory reports, direct observations. 

e)Indirect observations and informal interviews.

2)What variables could be measued for evaulation of this training program?

a)Learning, motivation or self-efficacy.

b) Self-regulation, intent, ease of use. 

c)Rejection, apathy or derision. 

d)Learning, behaviour, user experience. 

e)None of the above.

3)What data collection design or designs would you consider most appropriate for the evaluation?

a)Pre-post or time series design. 

b)Summative design
c)Interactive model design
d)User experience design 

e)Post-evaluation design

4)What approaches could you take to measure participant learning?

a)Questionnaires, focus groups and interviews. 

b)Declarative and procedural testing

c) Self-reports and questionnaires. 

d)Organizational records.

e)Indirect observations.

5)What data collection design or designs would you consider most appropriate for the evaluation? Explain your reasoning.