Content area
Full text
Introduction
Educational programs need a system that can assess their performance and effectiveness regardless of their type. Stufflebeam (1971) stated that evaluation is the process of defining, gaining and providing helpful information for judging decision alternatives. Umam and Saripah (2018) add that it is an activity of collecting, analyzing and reporting information about an object, the results of which can be used in decision-making. Kuo et al. (2012) believe that evaluation is an activity that aims to understand how things happen.
Although program evaluation in education starts with gathering information (Brown, 1989), it achieves different purposes such as decision-making (Nunan, 1991; Aziz et al., 2018), assessing the program quality to deliver useful information to the program stakeholders (Lynch, 1990), gaining feedback to improve the program and prepare it for accountability (Peacock, 2009), and determining whether a program is effective or not (Tyler, 2013).
Many approaches in the literature can be used to evaluate educational programs. One of these approaches is the CIPP model. This approach was developed by Stufflebeam (1971), and it is used for formative or summative purposes by linking the four stages of the program: context (C), input (I), process (P) and product (P) stages of the program. The CIPP model has been a valuable tool for evaluating programs in higher education (Kitivo and Kavulya, 2024). It is a bidirectional model with a proactive approach in directing needs assessment, aims setting, planning, application, quality assurance and the focus on continuous improvement. In addition, it has a reactionary orientation by assessing the accountability and value of programs and provides effective participation of program stakeholders throughout the evaluation process (Stufflebeam and Zhang, 2017).
Robinson (2002) reported that this model was invented to link evaluation with program decision-making by providing information and choices to enhance the quality of decisions made by program administration (Fitzpatrick et al., 2011; Sankaran and Saad (2022). Nikijuluw (2020) added that CIPP can be used to help form a customized program that benefits participants of these programs.
This approach consists of four stages of evaluation: context, input, process and products. A stage selection relies on the program’s aims (Sankaran and Saad, 2022). According to Stufflebeam et al. (2000), the primary goals of a context assessment are to provide...