What this is
What is a training material review?
What is a training material review?
A structured check of a specific course's content for accuracy, currency and whether it still reflects how the job is actually done. It is carried out per course, by the person who owns that content, and feeds decisions in the course catalogue and document control rather than judging the trainer or the learner.
Who should carry out a training material review?
The subject owner: someone who understands the job well enough to notice when a slide, a photograph or a referenced procedure no longer matches it. A reviewer who only checks spelling and layout will miss the failures that matter, which are about the world having moved on since the material was built.
How often should training material be reviewed?
At a stated interval, commonly yearly per course, and additionally whenever something changes that the material depends on: equipment removed, a procedure reissued, a regulatory change, or an incident revealing the training taught something no longer true. The interval is a backstop; the changes are what actually make a review overdue.
Scope
When is a training material review required?
This review is one step in a larger training programme. Its remit is the content of a specific course, not whether that course changed anyone's behaviour on the floor, which is a separate evaluation.
Use this template when
- The stated review interval for a course has been reached
- Equipment, a process or a procedure referenced in the material has changed
- An effectiveness evaluation or knowledge check result has flagged the content as unclear or wrong
- A new version of a referenced procedure has been issued through document control
- An incident investigation has surfaced a practice the training material does not reflect
Do not use it for
- E-Learning Completion Record, which records completion of an online module, with score, time taken and attempts, not whether the module's content is still correct
- Training Effectiveness Evaluation, which evaluates whether training changed anything, using observation, knowledge checks and incident data rather than the accuracy of the slides
- On the Job Coaching Record, which records short coaching given at the workplace, not a review of formal course material
- A course delivery or attendance record, which confirms someone sat through the course, not that the course was worth sitting through
- Anything outside KnowTrain, which belongs in the workspace that owns that process
Compliance mapping
Which ISO 45001 cl.7.2 requirements does this satisfy?
ISO 45001 cl.7.2 requires competence to be based on appropriate education, training or experience, which only holds if the training itself still teaches the job as it is currently done. The review exists to keep that link intact, and it touches document control and communication as much as it touches training.
| Clause | Requirement | Where it lands |
|---|---|---|
| ISO 45001 cl.7.2(b) | Ensure competence is based on appropriate education, training or experience | Accuracy |
| ISO 45001 cl.7.3 | Workers aware of the consequences of departing from established procedures | Accuracy |
| ISO 45001 cl.7.4 | Determine the internal communications needed relevant to the OH&S management system | Outcome |
| ISO 45001 cl.7.5.3 | Documented information available, suitable and adequately protected, with changes controlled | Outcome |
| ISO 45001 cl.7.2(d) | Retain documented information as evidence of competence | Outcome |
| ISO 45001 cl.9.1.1 | Monitor and measure the effectiveness of the OH&S management system's arrangements | Related records |
| ISO 45001 cl.4.4 | Establish and maintain the processes needed for the management system | Header |
What it does not cover
- Attendance or completion record, which confirms someone sat through the course, not that its content was reviewed.
- Training effectiveness evaluation, which asks whether training changed behaviour, using observation and incident data rather than a content check.
- Competency sign-off, which certifies an individual can do the job, and belongs in a competency matrix, not a content review.
- Document control approval of the underlying procedure, a separate record even though the material should be reissued once it changes.
- The knowledge check result itself, which measures whether learners answered correctly, not whether that content is still right.
Global
Training Material Review requirements by country
No jurisdiction prescribes a training-material review as a named legal instrument. The duty is inferred from broader competence and training obligations, which is why the review's defensibility rests on evidence that content was actually checked against the current job.
OSHA subpart-specific retraining triggers; General Duty Clause
No standalone requirement to review training content for currency. Specific standards, such as powered industrial trucks under 1910.178, require retraining when the job, equipment or hazard changes.
A content review is the practical mechanism that catches the change before it becomes an unmet retraining duty under a specific standard.
Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, reg.13
Requires training to take account of capability and to be repeated periodically where appropriate, adapted to reflect new or changed risks.
Material depicting a risk, a machine or a procedure that no longer applies is itself the kind of gap reg.13 is aimed at closing.
ISO 45001 cl.7.2
Competence must be based on appropriate education, training or experience, and evidence retained as documented information.
Certification auditors ask not only whether training took place but whether its content matches the job as currently performed.
How to complete it
How to complete a training material review, step by step
Most reviews are completed against the deck rather than against the workplace. The steps that determine whether a review actually caught anything are the ones no template field can force by itself.
A subject owner who has run the course for years can see what they expect to see rather than what is there. Walking the area, or working from current photographs, catches the machine that was removed and the layout that changed in a way that reading the deck at a desk does not.
A course that cites a procedure by name is only as current as that procedure's latest issue. Checking the reference against document control, rather than assuming the citation still points at the right version, catches a course quietly teaching a superseded method.
Correct content delivered at the wrong length, wrong reading level, or without a practical element, is absorbed poorly regardless of accuracy. Accuracy and usability fail independently, and a review checking only one will miss failures in the other.
A major revision that updates the slides but never reaches the people delivering the course next week has changed a file, not the training. Briefing the trainers and confirming the new version is in use is what makes a revision take effect.
What auditors find
Most common training material review findings
Training material review findings are rarely about content that was wrong when it was written. They are almost always about content that became wrong afterwards, and nobody was watching for it.
| Finding | Clause | What fixes it |
|---|---|---|
| Material shows equipment or a layout that has since been removed or replaced. | ISO 45001 cl.7.2(b) | Cross-check every referenced piece of equipment against the current asset register before signing the review off. |
| Course cites a procedure that has since been reissued at a later revision. | ISO 45001 cl.7.5.3 | Check the citation against the live document control record, not the revision the owner remembers writing. |
| Legal or regulatory content in the course is out of date. | ISO 45001 cl.7.3 | Route legal content through whoever owns regulatory change tracking before the course is reissued. |
| Review completed at a desk without checking material against site conditions. | ISO 45001 cl.7.2(b) | Require the reviewer to walk the area or work from current photographs, and record which was done. |
| Major revision issued but the trainers delivering the course were never briefed. | ISO 45001 cl.7.4 | Make trainer briefing a condition of closing the review, not an optional follow-up. |
| Knowledge check no longer aligned to the content after a revision. | ISO 45001 cl.7.2(d) | Re-validate the knowledge check against the revised content when the material is reissued. |
Case in point
Case in point: the review that read the slides and missed the machine
A site's induction course included a section on guarding, illustrated with photographs of a wrapping machine decommissioned two years earlier and replaced with a different model under a different interlock. The annual review was completed on schedule: the subject owner read every slide, confirmed the wording matched the written procedure it cited, and signed it off as current.
A new starter later leaned across what she had been taught was a fixed guard, because that was what the slide showed. The guard on the actual machine opened outward under a different interlock, and the near miss that followed was investigated as a training gap. The review had never left the office; the subject owner had checked the slide against the procedure, and neither against the machine on the floor.
The template
The template, field by field
The form exactly as it installs. Every field, option, score and conditional rule is editable, and the links to other templates come with it.
5 sections
- Reference
- TRN-084
- Archetype
- Review
- Record ID
- TMR-2026-000
- Scoring
- Materials current
- Direction
- High is good
- Singleton
- No
- Basis
- ISO 45001 cl.7.2
- Links
- Links Courses, Document control
- Tags
- Training, Content
- Sections
- 5
- Fields
- 37
- Follow up fields
- 3
- Repeating sections
- 0
- Links out
- 5
Header
10 fieldsReview ID*
Auto sequence. Format TMR-2026-000.
The record's own ID. Other templates point at this value.
Status*
Drives who this goes to next.
- Planned2 pts
- In progress2 pts
- Complete3 pts
- Deferred0 pts
- Open0 pts
- Closed3 pts
- Overdue0 pts
Date and Time*
Completed By*
Site*
Site ID*
Format SITE-000.
Links to FDN-001 Site ID
Slides Showing Equipment We Removed
Out of date material teaches people that the training is theatre. It is the fastest way to lose a room.
Course Reviewed*
Content Owner*
Months Since Last Review*
Accuracy
6 fieldsReflects Current Process*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Equipment Shown Still Exists*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Procedures Referenced Are Current*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Legal Content Current*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Site Photographs Used*
Photographs of your own plant work far better than stock images of somebody else's.
- Yes3 pts
- Some1 pt
- Stock images only0 pts
Recent Incidents Reflected*
- Yes3 pts
- No1 pt
Usability
6 fieldsLength Appropriate*
- Yes3 pts
- Too long1 pt
- Too short1 pt
Reading Level Appropriate*
- Yes3 pts
- Marginal1 pt
- No0 pts
Available In Needed Languages*
- Yes2 pts
- No0 pts
- N/Aexcluded from denominator
Practical Element Included*
- Yes3 pts
- Demonstration only1 pt
- None0 pts
Knowledge Check Aligned To Content*
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Trainer Notes Provided
- Yes3 pts
- No1 pt
Related records
1 fieldEffectiveness Evaluation ID
The evaluation that prompted the content review.
Links to TRN-083 Evaluation ID
Outcome
14 fieldsReview Outcome*
- No change needed3 pts
- Minor amendment2 pts
- Major revision1 pt
- Merge2 pts
- Retire2 pts
Changes Required
New Version Issued
- Yes3 pts
- Partly1 pt
- No0 pts
Document Control Record ID
Links to CMP-022 Record ID
Trainers Briefed On Changes*
- Yes3 pts
- Not needed3 pts
- No0 pts
Next Review Due*
Action Required*
Raise the action record, then enter its reference here.
- No2 pts
- Yes0 pts
Priority
- High0 pts
- Medium1 pt
- Low3 pts
CAPA ID
Format CAPA-2026-00000.
Links to FDN-014 CAPA ID
Action Owner
Content Owner*
Signature*
Training Lead*
Second Signature*
TRN-084 · record IDs look like TMR-2026-000 · Links Courses, Document control
Open in KnowellaRun it with agents
From a document you fill in to a programme that runs itself
The review itself is a judgement call by one person against a set of slides. What actually fails is the surrounding machinery: the equipment change that never reached the course, the revision that never reached the trainers, and the knowledge check nobody re-checked.
Holds the course library against the review interval, flags courses referencing equipment that the asset register shows as retired, and routes each review to its subject owner.
Watches the equipment and asset register for retirements and replacements, and raises a training material review when a course cites something that no longer exists.
Coordinates the crew, rolls review completion and overdue courses into one view, and holds every write for your approval before it touches a record.
This template lives in KnowTrain — training and credentials. Induction, competency, toolbox talks, refreshers and expiry tracking.
Meet KnowTrain→Glossary
Training Material Review definitions and key terms
- Content currency
- Whether a course's material still matches the equipment, procedure and law it describes, as distinct from whether the material is internally well written.
- Subject owner
- The person accountable for a course's content, expected to understand the job well enough to notice when the material has drifted from it.
- Document control record
- The controlled record of a course's revisions, used to confirm which version is live and that a superseded version is not still in circulation.
- Practical element
- A hands-on or demonstrated component of a course, as distinct from a purely lecture or slide-based delivery, which affects how well content is retained.
- Knowledge check alignment
- Whether a course's test questions still match its content after a revision, since a knowledge check written against an earlier version can pass learners on material no longer taught.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions about training material review
What is a training material review checking, if not attendance?+
It checks the content itself: whether the equipment, procedures and legal references still match reality, and whether the material is usable in its current form. It says nothing about who attended or whether they learned anything, which are the concerns of a completion record and an effectiveness evaluation respectively.
Who is best placed to review training material?+
The subject owner, someone who understands the job closely enough to notice drift, not necessarily whoever wrote the original course. A reviewer without recent exposure to the work will check the document for internal consistency and miss whether it still describes the workplace.
Does the review need to happen on the floor?+
Not always, but a desk-based review that only reads the slides cannot catch equipment or layout changes the material depicts incorrectly. Where the course describes physical equipment, checking against current photographs or a walk of the area is what makes the review meaningful rather than procedural.
What happens after a review finds the material needs changing?+
The outcome should specify minor amendment, major revision, merge, or retirement, and each should produce a new version through document control plus a briefing to the trainers who deliver the course. An outcome recorded without a version change and a briefing has identified a problem without closing it.
How does this connect to the training effectiveness evaluation?+
An effectiveness evaluation that finds learners are not retaining or applying content is one of the strongest triggers for a material review, since poor effectiveness sometimes traces back to content that no longer matches the job rather than to delivery. The two records are linked so a poor result routes back to a content check, not just a delivery problem.
How often is a training material review expected?+
Yearly per course is the common interval, but the interval is a backstop. A change to the equipment, procedure or law the course depends on should trigger a review immediately, rather than waiting for the calendar date, because the gap between the change and the next scheduled review is exactly where the drift accumulates.
Keep going
Related templates and programmes
Industries this is written for
Programmes this belongs to
Used together in Training Delivery and Effectiveness
Course Catalog
Lists every training course available, with its length, validity period and who needs it
Slips Trips and Falls Talk
A short talk on preventing slips, trips and falls, with site photographs
Manual Handling Talk
A short talk on lifting, carrying and using handling aids
Line of Fire Talk
A short talk on staying out of the path of moving equipment, loads and stored energy
Hand Safety Talk
A short talk on protecting hands from cuts, crushes and pinch points
Housekeeping Talk
A short talk on keeping work areas clear, clean and organised
More in Training Delivery
E-Learning Completion Record
Records completion of an online module, with score, time taken and attempts
Training Effectiveness Evaluation
Evaluates whether training changed anything, using observation, knowledge checks and incident data rather than attendance
On the Job Coaching Record
Records short coaching given at the workplace, what was covered and how the person responded
Skills Gap Forecast
Forecasts where competency will be short in the coming year from retirements, growth, turnover and new equipment
Training Budget and Spend Record
Records what was planned, committed and spent on training over a period, by type and area
Written and reviewed by
Siddarth Singh
Founder & Chief Executive Officer, Knowella
Certified Safety Professional and industrial and systems engineer with more than a decade inside food supply chain, freight and manufacturing operations. This page was written against the current text of the standards it cites, not against secondary summaries of them.
- Certified Safety Professional (CSP), Board of Certified Safety Professionals
- MBA, University of Chicago Booth School of Business
- MS and BS, The Ohio State University, Industrial and Systems Engineering
- Six Sigma Black Belt
Sources and last review. Reviewed 16 August 2026 against:
- ISO 45001:2018 clauses 7.2, 7.3, 7.4 and 7.5.3
- Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, regulation 13 (GB)
- ANSI/ASSP Z490.1, Criteria for Accepted Practices in Safety, Health and Environmental Training
- OSHA subpart-specific retraining requirements, e.g. 29 CFR 1910.178 (powered industrial trucks)
This page is general guidance, not legal advice. Confirm requirements with your jurisdiction’s regulator.