The Cipp Model-Based Evaluation on Integrated English Learning (IEL) Program at Language Center

Authors

  • Noor Qomaria Agustina Kent State University Ohio
  • Fanni Mukhtaruddin Institut Teknologi Nasional Yogyakarta

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v2i1.1043

Keywords:

Cipp Model, evaluation, ELT, and language center

Abstract

The competition in the workforce demands quality programs to make the learners to have competitive advantage by mastering the foreign language especially English. Language Training Centre is one institution that provide service on teaching language skill. The aim of this research was to make an evaluation on the program conducted by the Centre using the CIPP Model developed by Stufflebeam that evaluated the effectiveness and quality of the program seen from the context, input, process and product, and was applied for a program namely Integrated English Learning (IEL). The methodology was the combination of quantitative and qualitative design. The setting was a a language Center and the participants were the students from two departments. This study described the program from the point of view of its context, input, process and product. The context is seen from the effectivity of the program, while the input discusses about the quality.  The process is to describe the implementation of the program and the product reveals how the goals are achieved.

References

Aziz, S., Mahmood, M., & Rehman, Z. (2018). Implementation of CIPP model for quality evaluation at school level: A case study. Journal of Education and Educational Development, 5 (1), June 2018, pp. 189-205
Bazargan, A. (1997). Quality and its evaluation in higher education: A look at national and international experiences. Quarterly Journal of Rahyaft, 4,155-163.
Bazargan, A. (2007a). Educational evaluation. Tehran: SAMT publisher press.
Bazargan, A. (2007b). Higher Education in Iran. In James J. I. Forest and P.G. Altbach (Eds.); International Handbook of Higher Education; Dordercht, the Netherlands: Springer.
Birjandi, P., &Nosratinia, M. (2009). The qualitative program evaluation of the postgraduate English Translation major in Iran. The Journal of Modern Thoughts in Education, 4, 37-5
Boon, K.B. (1987). Effectiveness of the diploma in education program: perceptions of former Bahasa Malaysia methods student. Kuala Lumpur: University of Malaya.
Brence, I. & Rivza, B. (2012). Quality evaluation of higher education programs: process and challenges in Latvia. Proceeding of International Conference of Management, knowledge and learning international, Celje, Slovenia (pp. 787-79).
Cheng, V.C. (1996). School effectiveness and school-based management: A mechanism for development. London: The Fulnmer Press.
Dixson, D.D., & Worrell, F.C. (2016). Formative and summative assessment in the classroom. Theory Into Practice, 55:153–159, 2016. DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2016.1148989
Doll, R. C. (1992). Curriculum improvement: Decision making and process. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
English, J., & English, T. (2019). Combining summative and formative evaluation using automated assessment. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 16, 143-151. https://doi.org/10.28945/4293
Halimah, U. S. & Hadjar, I. (2018). Arabic language learning evaluation in higher education with context input process product (CIPP) model. Alsinatuna-Journal of Arabic Linguistics and Education, 4 (1), December 2018, pp. 33-47. P-ISSN: 2477-5371; E-ISSN: 2503-2690.
Houston, D., & Thompson, J. N., (2017). Blending formative and summative assessment in a capstone subject: ‘It’s not your tools, it’s how you use them’, Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 14(3), 2017. Available at:http://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol14/iss3/2.
Mahshanian, A., Shoghi, R., & Bahrami, M. (2019). Investigating the differential effects of formative and summative assessment on EFL learners’ end-of-term achievement. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, Vol. 10, No. 5, pp. 1055-1066, September 2019. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1005.19.
Oscarson, M. (2019). Framing modern language education – A european approach. Pertanika J. Soc. Sci. & Hum. 27 (2): 773 – 786 (2019).
Piccardo, E., North, B., & Maldina, E. (2019). Innovation and reform in course planning, teaching, and assessment: The CEFR in Canada and Switzerland, a comparative study. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, Special Issue: 22, 1 (2019): 103-128.
Sowell, E. J. (2004). Curriculum development: An integrative approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Staub, D. F. (2017). Quality assurance and foreign language programme evaluation in S. Hidri and C. Coombe (eds.), Evaluation in Foreign Language Education in the Middle East and North Africa. Second Language Learning and Teaching, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-43234-2_16 © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017
Stufflebeam, D. L. (1971). The relevance of the CIPP evaluation model for educational accountability. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 5, 14-28.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (2002). CIPP Evaluation Model Checklist. Retrieved on October 19, 2006. From http://www.mich.edu/evalctr/checklists/cippchecklist
Tootian, S. (2019). Evaluation of training courses applied in succession planning in organizations using the CIPP model. International Journal of Human Capital in Urban Management (IJHCUM), 4(2):111-118, Spring 2019. Homepage: http://www.ijhcum.net/
Tunc, F. (2010). Evaluation of an English language Teaching program at a public university using CIPP model. Unpublished master thesis, Middle East Technical University, Turkey. Retrieved fromhttp://www.etd.libmetu.edu.tr/upload/12611570/index
Tyler, R. (1990). Reporting evaluation of learning outcomes. Oxford: Pergamum.
Ulumi, G. O. (2016). Evaluation of english as a foreign Language program - using CIPP (context, input, process and product) model. European Journal of English Language Teaching, 1 (2), 2016, pp. 114-137. www.oapub.org/edu105281/zenodo.203077.
Umam, K. A. I. & Saripah, I. (2018). Using the Context, Input, Process and Product (CIPP) Model in the Evaluation of Training Programs. International Journal of Pedagogy and Teacher Education (IJPTE), 2, July 2018), pp.183-194. DOI: 10.20961/ijpte.v%vi%i.26086.
Wisniewski, K. (2017). Empirical learner language and the levels of the common European framework of reference. Language Learning, 67(S1), 232-253.
Xiao, Y., & Yang, M. (2019). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: How formative assessment supports students' self-regulation in English language learning. System, 81, 39-49.

Downloads

Published

2019-11-07

How to Cite

Agustina, N. Q., & Mukhtaruddin, F. (2019). The Cipp Model-Based Evaluation on Integrated English Learning (IEL) Program at Language Center. English Language Teaching Educational Journal, 2(1), 22–31. https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v2i1.1043

Issue

Vol. 2 No. 1 (2019)

Section

Articles

License

Authors who publish in ELTEJ agree to the following terms: Authors retain copyright and grant the ELTEJ right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share (copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material) the work for any purpose, even commercially with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in ELTEJ. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in ELTEJ. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).