Table 5.

Foreman reaction to training (n=58)

	Avg (SD; range)
Rate how much you agree with each statement (1=Strongly Disagree to 5=Strongly Agree)
The PowerPoint slides were helpful	4.27 (0.81; range 2–5)
The scenarios were realistic	4.31 (0.72; range 3–5)
The animated videos helped me better understand how the leadership skills could be used	4.43 (0.74; range 3–5)
The role-plays helped me practice applying the leadership skills	4.02 (0.95; range 1–5)
The language used in the training was easy to understand	4.75 (0.48; range 3–5)
The discussion questions were helpful for thinking more about the information we were learning	4.72 (0.50; range 3–5)
The instructor did a good job presenting the material on why safety leadership is important	4.96 (0.19; range 4–5)
The instructor did a good job discussing the scenarios	4.94 (0.23; range 4–5)
The training covered too much material*	2.29 (1.48; range 1–5)
The training felt very rushed*	2.31 (1.45; range 1–5)
The student guide was useful to have during the training	4.15 (0.97; range 1–5)
I will probably use the material in the student guide after the training is over	4.29 (0.96; range 1–5)
I plan to use the safety leadership skills from the training on my jobsites	4.81 (0.44; range 3–5)
How valuable was each part of the training for increasing your understanding of safety leadership? (1=Not at all Valuable to 5=Extremely Valuable)
The introductory information	4.02 (0.73; range 2–5)
The model illustrating relationship between safety leadership, safety climate & safety outcomes	4.35 (0.64; range 3–5)
The written scenarios	4.18 (0.79; range 2–5)
The role-plays	4.00 (0.95; range 1–5)
The animated videos of the scenarios	4.33 (0.75; range 3–5)
The conversation created by the discussion questions	4.84 (0.37; range 4–5)
The safety leadership checklists	4.65 (0.56; range 3–5)

^*Scale was reverse coded