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

Noor Qomaria Agustina, Fanni Mukhtaruddin


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.


Cipp Model, evaluation, ELT, and language center

Full Text:



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.

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:

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:

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

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:

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 from

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.

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.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2019 Noor Qomaria Agustina, Fanni Mukhtaruddin

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

English Language Teaching Educational Journal
Kampus 4 Universitas Ahmad Dahlan
Jl. Ringroad Selatan, Tamanan, Bantul, Yogyakarta

e-ISSN: 2621-6485


View My Stats