Evaluasi Program Pembangunan Masyarakat dengan Model CIPP1 Oleh: Utsman2
[email protected] Abstrak Setiap program kegiatan pembangunan perlu dikaji tingkat keberhasilannya. Untuk mengkaji keberhasilan program pembangunan masyarakat dapat menggunakan berbagai pendekatan evaluasi, salah satunya dengan menggunakan model evalusi CIPP. Model evaluasi ini digunakan untuk mengkaji berbagai dimensi. Pada dimensi konteks, yang dievaluasi adalah terkait dengan layanan, manfaat, dan masalah pemenuhan kebutuhan sasaran. Pada dimensi input yang dievaluasi adalah terkait dengan relevansi, kepraktisan, pembiayaan, efektifitas, dan alternatifaltrnatif yang unggul dari suatu program. Pada dimensi proses yang dievaluasi adalah mengetahui sejauh mana rencana telah dilaksanakan dan komponen apa yang perlu diperbaiki. Pada dimensi produk evaluasi yang dilakukan adalah melihat ketercapaian/ keberhasilan suatu program pembangunan dalam mencapai tujuan yang telah ditentukan sebelumnya. Pada tahap ini seorang evaluator dapat menentukan atau memberikan rekomendasi kepada pemangku program, apakah suatu program pembangunan dapat dilanjutkan, dikembangkan atau modifikasi, atau bahkan dihentikan. Pendahuluan Evaluasi program merupakan metode dan alat yang dipergunakan dalam teknologi evaluasi (Owston, 2007). Evaluasi program pembangunan dan kesejahteraan masyarakat dapat dilakukan dengan menggunakan berbagai pendekatan evaluasi. Penggunaan beberapa pendekatan evaluasi bukanlah
sebuah
fenomena
baru,
tentu
saja;
itu
dianggap
lumrah dalam praktek (Chavis, 2004). Bahkan Scriven (1997) menganjurkan melakukan evaluasi yang menggunakan berbagai komponen pendekatan yang berbeda, salah satunya adalah menggunakan pendekatan
model
context, input, process, product. (CIPP).
1
2
Makalah disajikan dalam Seminar dan Temu Akademisi Pendidikan Luar Sekolah tingkat nasional pada tanggal 26 nopember tahun 2014 di UPI Bandung dengan mengusung tema umum: “Penguatan Peran Pendidikan Luar Sekolah dalam Pembangunan Masyarakat”. Dosen Pendidikan Luar Sekolah FIP-Unnes.
Model evaluasi
CIPP memiliki orientasi untuk memberikan layanan
kepada berbagai model kebijakan dan program layanan masyarakat. Model evaluasi CIPP dalam pelaksanaannya lebih banyak digunakan oleh para evaluator untuk mengevaluasi program-program pembangunan, hal ini dikarenakan model evaluasi ini lebih komprehensif dan fleksibel jika dibandingkan
dengan
model
dikembangkan oleh Stuffleabem
evaluasi
lainnya.
Model
evaluasi
ini
(1967) di Ohio State University. Model
evaluasi ini pada awalnya digunakan untuk mengevaluasi ESEA (the Elementary and Secondary Education Act). CIPP merupakan singkatan dari, context, input, masukan, dan process evaluation.. Keempat singkatan dari CIPP tersebut itulah yang menjadi komponen evaluasi. Model CIPP berorientasi pada suatu keputusan (a decision oriented evaluation approach structured). Tujuannya adalah untuk membantu administrator (pimpinan) didalam membuat keputusan. Menurut Stufflebeam, mengungkapkan bahwa, “ the CIPP approach is based on the view that the most important purpose of evaluation is not to prove but improve.” (1993). The CIPP Model is adaptable and widely applicable. This model has been applied to evaluate materials, personnel, students, programs, and projects in a range of disciplines (Stufflebeam,. et. al.,2000). Sementara itu menurut Bledsoe. & Graham (2005) tujuan evaluasi adalah untuk mencari konformasi dari tujuan suatu program. Sedangkan Worthen, B. (1990) menyatakan bahwa tujuan evaluasi adalah untuk:. 1) program installation; 2) continuation,
contribute to decisions about
to contribute to decisions about program
expansion, or "certification"; 3)
to contribute to decisions
about program modifications; 4) to obtain evidence to rally support for a program; 5)
to obtain evidence to rally opposition to a program; 6)
to
contribute to the understanding of basic psychological, social, and other processes. Pernyataan tersebut, menjelaskan bahwa evaluasi model CIPP tidak hanya
bermaksud mengevaluasi aspek tertentu saja, namun dapat
digunakan secara komprehensif untuk melihat berbagai hal terkait dengan suatu program dengan tujuan untuk perbaikan berbagai program, termasuk
program pembangunan.
Implementasi suatu program,
mempunyai
perbedaan dalam evaluasi. Perbedaan tersebut terjadi karena maksud dan tujuan dari suatu program berbeda. Sebagai contoh, evaluasi dalam program pembelajaran
pada pendidikan luar sekolah untuk melihat sejauh mana
program pembelajaran telah berjalan sesuai dengan rencana akan berbeda dengan evaluasi pada kinerja guru yang dilakukan dengan tujuan untuk melihat kualitas, loyalitas, atau motivasi dari kerja
guru, sehingga dapat
menghasilkan hasil belajar yang maksimal. Oleh karena adanya perbedaan tersebut, muncul beberapa teknik evaluasi dalam pengimplementasian suatu program. Salah satu teknik dalam evaluasi ialah model evaluasi CIPP (Context, Input, Process, Product). Evaluasi Model CIPP Model evaluasi CIPP ini merupakan salah satu dari beberapa teknik evaluasi suatu program yang ada, diantaranya
Goal Oriented Evaluation
Model dikembangkan oleh Tyler; Goal Free Evaluation Model dikembangkan oleh Scriven, Formatif Sumatif Evaluation Model dikembangkan oleh Michael Scriven,
Countenance
Evaluation
Model
dikembangkan
Responsive Evaluation Model dikembangkan oleh Stake, Model
yang
dikembangkan
oleh
Provus.
oleh
dan Discrepancy
Model
evaluasi
dikembangkan oleh salah satu pakar evaluasi, Stufflebeam berlandaskan pada empat pijakan utama, yaitu
Stake,
context,
input,
CIPP dengan
process,
dan product. Pertama, evaluasi konteks mempunyai tujuan
untuk mengetahui
kekuatan dan kelemahan yang dimilki suatu program. Dengan mengetahui kekuatan dan kelemahan, evaluator akan dapat memberikan arah perbaikan yang diperlukan. Evaluasi konteks berupaya
menggambarkan dan merinci
kebutuhan yang tidak terpenuhi, populasi dan sampel yang dilayani, dan tujuan program. Evaluasi konteks ini membantu merencanakan keputusan, menentukan kebutuhan yang akan dicapai oleh program, dan merumuskan tujuan program.
Evaluasi konteks menyajikan data tentang: kondisi yang relevan, kondisi yang ada dan yang diinginkan, mengidentifikasi kebutuhan yang belum terpenuhi dan peluang yang ada, mengidentifikasi hal-hal yang perlu dipertimbangkan dalam rencana program, mengidentifikasi keterkaitannya dengan sistem nilai yang ada, menyajikan alat untuk menetapkan prioritas, dan
perubahan-perubahan yang diinginkan. Menurut Stufflebeam (2000) A context evaluation’s main objectives
are to describe the context for the intended service; identify intended beneficiaries
and assess their needs identify problems
or barriers
to
meeting the needs; identify area assets and funding opportunities that could be used to address the targeted needs; and assess the clarity and appropriateness of program, instructional, or other service goals Kedua. Evaluasi input. Evaluasi ini untuk menentukan kesesuaian lingkungan dalam membantu pencapaian tujuan dan objektif program. Evaluasi input untuk membantu mengatur keputusan, menentukan sumbersumber yang ada, alternatif apa yang diambil, apa rencana dan strategi untuk mencapai tujuan, dan bagaimana prosedur kerja untuk mencapainya. Evaluasi ini membantu mengatur keputusan, menentukan sumbersumber yang diperlukan serta alternatif-alternatif yang diambil, mengatur rencana dan strategi untuk mencapai kebutuhan, dan bagaimana strategi untuk mencapainya. Evaluasi pembiayaan,
ini
juga
dikaitkan
dengan
relevansi,
kepraktisan,
efektifitas, dan alternatif-altrnatif yang unggul dari suatu
program. Evaluasi ini juga menjawab ada tidaknya duplikasi kegiatan, ketepatan asumsi yang digunakan, ada tidknya efek samping program kegiatan,
reaksi
masyarakat
terhadap
program,
dan
kemungkinan
keberhasilan program. Komponen evaluasi masukan meliputi : 1) Sumber daya manusia, 2) Sarana dan peralatan pendukung, 3) Dana atau anggaran, dan 4) Berbagai prosedur dan aturan yang diperlukan Ketiga, Evaluasi proses. Worthen & Sanders (1990) bahwa, evaluasi proses memiliki tujuan:
menjelaskan
“ 1) do detect or predict in
procedural design or its implementation during implementation stage, 2) to
provide information for programmed decision, and 3) to maintain a record of the procedure as it occurs “. Pada dasarnya evaluasi proses ini untuk mengetahui sejauh mana rencana telah dilaksanakan dan komponen apa yang perlu diperbaiki. Dengan kata lain,
evaluasi proses dalam model CIPP menunjuk pada
kegiatan apa yang dilakukan dalam program, siapa orang yang ditunjuk sebagai penanggung jawab program, kapan kegiatan akan selesai. Model CIPP, evaluasi proses diarahkan pada seberapa jauh kegiatan yang dilaksanakan didalam program sudah terlaksana sesuai dengan rencana.
Apakah
program terlaksana sesuai dengan jadwal ? Apakah
pelaksana prgram
program akan sanggup menangani kegiatan selama
program berlangsung. Serta kemungkinan jika program berlanjut? Apakah sarana dan prasarana yang disediakan telah dimanfaatkan secara maksimal ? Hambatan dan dukungan apa saja yang terjadi pelaksanaan program dan kemungkinan jika program dilanjutkan. Jadi intinya pada evaluasi proses ini dipergunakan untuk: 1) menyediakan umpan balik efesiensi program; 2) memprediksi kekurangan program; 3) menyediakan data untuk keputusan dan implemnetasi program; .4) menyediakan jenis keputusan yang mungkin dilakukan; 5) menyediakan hubungan keakraban antara pihak terkait, dan 6) menyediakan dokumentasi tentang prosedur kegiatan dan analisis hasil. Keempat, evaluasi produk. Evaluasi ini untuk membantu membuat keputusan selanjutnya, baik mengenai hasil yang telah dicapai maupun apa yang dilakukan setelah program itu berjalan. Jadi evaluasi produk merupakan penilaian yang dilakukan guna untuk melihat ketercapaian/ keberhasilan suatu program pembangunan dalam mencapai tujuan yang telah ditentukan sebelumnya. Pada tahap evaluasi inilah seorang evaluator dapat menentukan atau memberikan rekomendasi kepada pemangku program.
apakah suatu program pembangunan dapat
dilanjutkan,
dikembangkan atau modifikasi, atau bahkan dihentikan. Pada tahap evaluasi ini diajukan pertanyaan tentang ketercapaian tujuan, keterkaitan
antara
rincian proses dengan pencapaian tujuan, rumusan yang mungkin dilakukan,
terpenuhinya kebutuhan dalam program pembangunan, dan dampak yang diperoleh audien dari program pembangunan yang ada. Selain
mempertanyakan
hal
tersebut,
melakukan: 1) pengukuran dan penginterpretasian pembangunan, 2) melihat pengaruh utama dan
evaluasi
produk
juga
pencapaian program pengaruh sampingan
program pembangunan; 3) melihat keunggulan dan efesiensi biaya; 4) penetapan kreteria baik secara absolut atau relatif; dan 5) penetapan kreteria keberhasilan dalam jangka pendek atau panjang. Untuk memahami lebih jauh tentang model CIPP ini, dapat melihat rincian penjelasan keempat dimensi tersebut dari segi tujuan, metode, dan hubungannya dengan pembuatan keputusan sebagai berikut.
Objectives
Context Evaluation
Input Evaluation
to define the institutional context, to identify the target population and assess their needs. to identify opportunities for addressing theneeds, to diagnose probelms underlying theneeds to judge whether proposed objectives are sufficienly responsive to the assessed needs
to identify & assess system capabilities, alternative program strategies, procedural designs for implementing the strategies, budgets, schedules, and program
Process Evaluation To identify or predict, in process, defects in the procedural design or its implementation, to provide information for the preprogrammed decisions, and to record & judge procedural events & activities
Product evaluation To collect descriptions & judgements of outcomes to relate them to objectives, to context, input process information and to in terpret their worth and merit.
Context Evaluation
Input Evaluation
Process Evaluation
Product evaluation
Method
By using such methods as system analysis, survey, document review, hearings, interviews, diagnostic tests, & the Delplir technique
By inventorying & analyzing available human & material resources, solution strategies, & procedural designs for relevance, feasibility & economy. And by using such methods as literature search, visits to “misicle workers”, advocate teams & pilot trials
By monitoring the activity’s potential procedural barriers & remaining alert to unanticipated ones, by obtaining specified information for programmed decisions, by describing the actual process & by continually interacting with & observing the activities of project staff
By defining operationally & measuring outcomes criteria, by collecting judgements of outcomes from stakeholders, & by performing both qualitative & quantitative analyses
Relation to decision making in the change Process
For deciding upon the setting to be served, the goals associated with meeting needs or using opportunities, the objectives associated with solving problems, i.e., for planning needed changes. And to provide a basis for judging outcomes
For selecting sources of support, solution strategies & procedural designs, i.e., for structuring change activities. And to provide a basis for judging implementation
For implementing and refining the program design and procedure, i.e., for effecting process control. And to provide a log of t he actual process for later use in interpreting outcomes
For deciding to continue, terminate, modify, or refocus a change activity, & present a clear record of effects (intended, positive & negative)
(Stufflebeam, D. L. et. al. (2000).
Kelebihan dan Kelemahan Model CIPP Meskipun diakui bahwa evaluasi model CIPP dianggap lebih universal dan relatif lebih lengkap untuk mengevaluasi kegiatan program-program pembangunan, namun demikian masih memiliki beberapa kelemahan dan kelebihan dibandingkan dengan model-model evaluasi yang lain. Beberapa kelemahan yang ada ada adalah: 1) pandangan evaluator mungkin tidak sejalan dengan pengambilan keputusan, 2) fokus evaluasi menekankan pada hasil program, 3) tidak terlalu mementingkan bagaimana proses seharusnya daripada kenyataan yang sedang berlangsung, 4) cenderung fokus pada rational management daripada mengakui realita yang ada, 5) terkesan top down dengan sifat manajerial dalam pendekatannya, dan 6) bila diterapkan secara terpisah (partial) akan melemahkan ide dasar Keunggulan mengembangkan
evaluasi program,
model 2)
CIPP:
menyajikan
1)
memperbaiki
informasi
terkait
dan
dengan
pengambilan keputusan, 3) memberikan umpan balik untuk penyusunan program, 4) merupakan system kerja yang dinamis, 5) memiliki pendekatan yang bersifat holistik dalam proses evaluasinya. 6) dapat melakukan perbaikan selama program berjalan maupun dapat memberikan informasi final, dan 7) lebih komprehensif dari model lainnya
Kesimpulan Evaluasi model CIPP telah dijelaskan bagaimana seorang evaluator dapat menggunakannya untuk memandu upaya perbaikan dan melayani kebutuhan akuntabilitas suatu program. Model ini telah diaplikasikan dalam berbagai bidang. Model ini telah memberikan pedoman secara umum untuk merancang studi evaluasi dengan model CIPP. Model ini bukanlah model evaluasi yang sempurna tanpa kekurangan, namun model ini dianggap oleh berbagai pihak sebagai model yang lebih komprehensive dibandingkan dengan model-model evaluasi program yang lain. Model evaluasi CIPP adalah model evaluasi yang diperlukan dalam sebuah program
untuk perbaikan serta sebagai
wujud tanggung jawab
profesional suatu program. Masyarakat tidak akan mengetahui apakah suatu
program berhasil atau tidak jika tanpa adanya suatu evaluasi. Oleh karena itu suatu program layanan masyarakat perlu dilakukan evaluasi untuk mengetahui kelebihan dan kekurangan yang ada.
DAFTAR BACAAN Bledsoe. Katrina L & Graham, James A. (2005) The Use of Multiple Evaluation Approaches in Program Evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation.; 26; 302
Chavis, D. (2004). Looking the enemy in the eye: Gazing into the mirror of evaluation practice. The Evaluation Exchange, 9, 8-9. Owston, Ron (2007) Models and Methods for Evaluation. Toronto, Canada : York University, Stufflebeam, D. L. et. al. (2000). Evaluation Models Viewpoints On Educational and Human Services Evaluation. Second Edition. New York: Luwer Academic Publishers Scriven, M. (1997). Minimalist theory: The least theory that practice requires. American Journal of Evaluation, 19, 575-604. Worthen, B. (1990). Program evaluation. H. Walberg & G. Haertel (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of educational evaluation (pp. 42-47). Toronto, ON: Pergammon Press.
Program Evaluation for Community Development Using CIPP Model Utsman
[email protected] Each program development activities needs to be assessed the level of success. To assess the success of community development programs may use different evaluation approaches, one using the CIPP model of evaluation. This evaluation model is used to examine various dimensions. In the context dimension, which is related to the services evaluated, benefits, and problems meeting the needs of the target. At the input dimension is evaluated in terms of relevance, practicality, financing, effectiveness, and superior alternative altrnatif of a program. In the dimension of the process being evaluated is to know the extent to which the plan has been carried out and what parts need to be repaired. In the evaluation of the product dimensions do is look at the achievement / success of a development program in achieving predetermined goals. At this stage an evaluator can determine or make recommendations to the program manager, whether a development program can be continued, expanded or modified, or even stopped. Introduction Program evaluation is a method and tools used in the evaluation of technology (Owston, 2007). Evaluation of development programs and social welfare can be done using a variety of evaluation approaches. The use of multiple approaches to evaluation is not a new phenomenon, of course; it is considered commonplace in practice (Chavis, 2004). Even Scriven (1997) recommends evaluating the use of the various components of different approaches, one of which is using a model approach to context, input, process, product. (CIPP). CIPP evaluation model oriented to provide services to a wide range of policy models and community service programs. CIPP evaluation model in practice is more widely used by the evaluators to evaluate development programs, it is because evaluation model is more comprehensive and flexible when compared with other evaluation models. The evaluation model developed by Stuffleabem (1967) at Ohio State University. This evaluation model was initially used to evaluate the ESEA (the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act). CIPP is an acronym, context, input, input, and process evaluation .. The four acronym of the CIPP that is the evaluation component. CIPP model is oriented at a decision (a decision oriented approach structured evaluation). The goal is to help administrators (leaders) in making a decision. According to Stufflebeam, revealed that, "The CIPP approach is based on the view that the most important purpose of evaluation is not to PROVE but improve." (1993). The CIPP model is adaptable and applicable, Instant confirmation. This models has been applied to Evaluate materials, personnel, students, programs, and projects in a range of disciplines (Stufflebeam,. et. Al., 2000). Meanwhile, according to Bledsoe. & Graham (2005) the purpose of the evaluation is to find the conformation of the objectives of a program. While Worthen. (1990) stated that the purpose of the evaluation is to:. 1) Contribute to decisions about program installation; 2) to Contribute
to
decisions
about
program continuation,
expansion,
or
"certification"; 3) to Contribute to decisions about program modifications; 4) to Obtain evidence to rally support for a program; 5) to Obtain evidence to rally opposition to a program; 6) to Contribute to the understanding of basic psychological, social, and other processes. The statement, explaining that the CIPP model of evaluation is not only intended to evaluate certain aspects of the course, but can be used comprehensively to see various things related to a program with the goal of improvement programs, including program development. Implementation of a program, have differences in the evaluation. These differences occur because of the intent and purpose of the program is different. For example, in the evaluation of learning in educational programs out of school to see the extent to which the learning program has been going according to plan will be different from the teacher's performance evaluation is done in order to see the quality, loyalty, or the motivation of teachers' work, which can lead to learning outcomes maximum. Due to these differences, there are some techniques in the implementation of a program evaluation. One of the
techniques in the evaluation is the evaluation model CIPP (Context, Input, Process, Product). CIPP Evaluation Model CIPP evaluation model is one of the few technical evaluation of an existing program, including the Goal Oriented Evaluation Model developed by Tyler; Goal Free Evaluation Model developed by Scriven, Formative Summative Evaluation Model was developed by Michael Scriven, Countenance Evaluation Model developed by Stake, Responsive Evaluation Model developed by Stake, and Discrepancy Model developed by Provus. CIPP evaluation model developed by one of the expert evaluation, Stufflebeam (2000), building on the four a major foothold, namely context, input, process, and product. First, the evaluation context has the objective to determine the strengths and weaknesses of a program of being owned. By knowing the strengths and weaknesses, evaluators will be able to provide direction necessary repairs. Evaluation seeks to describe and specify the context of the unmet needs, populations and samples served, and program objectives. Evaluate this context help plan decisions, determine the need to be achieved by the program, and formulate program objectives. The evaluation context presents data on: the relevant conditions, existing conditions and desired, to identify unmet needs and opportunities, identify issues that need to be considered in planning the program, identify its association with the existing value system, presents a set of tools to priorities, and desired changes. According to Stufflebeam (2000) A context evaluation's main objectives are to describe the context for the intended service; identify intended beneficiaries Reviews their assessed needs and identify problems or barriers to meeting the needs; identify areas assets and funding opportunities that could be used to address the targeted needs; and assess the clarity and appropriateness of the program, instructional, or other service goals. Second. Evaluation of input. This evaluation to determine the suitability of the environment in helping achieve the goals and objectives of the
program. Evaluation of input to help set up a decision, determine the resources available, what alternatives are taken, what plans and strategies to achieve goals, and how the procedures work to achieve it. This evaluation helps to regulate decisions, determine the resources required and alternatives are taken, set plans and strategies to achieve the needs, and how the strategy to achieve them. This evaluation is also linked to the relevance, practicality, financing, effectiveness, and alternative-altrnatif superior to that program. This evaluation also answer whether there is any duplication of activities, the accuracy of the assumptions that are used, there are side effects tidknya activity programs, the public reaction to the program, and the likelihood of success of the program. Evaluation component inputs include: 1) Human resources, 2) Facilities and equipment support, 3) fund or budget, and 4) A variety of procedures and rules necessary. Third, the evaluation process. Worthen and Sanders (1990) explains that, the evaluation process has a goal: "1) do detect or Predict in procedural design or its implementation during the implementation stage, 2) to provide information for programmed decision, and 3) to maintain a record of the procedure as it Occurs " Basically, the evaluation process is to determine the extent to which the plan has been implemented, and what components need to be repaired. In other words, the evaluation process CIPP model refers to what activities are carried out in the program, who is the person designated as the person in charge of the program, when the activity will be completed. CIPP Model, the evaluation process is directed at how far the activities implemented in the program has been implemented according to plan. Is the program implemented in accordance with the schedule? Is prgram implementing the program will be able to handle the activities during the program. As well as the possibility that the program continue? Are the facilities and infrastructure available has been utilized to the fullest? Barriers
and support what is happening and the possible implementation of the program if the program is continued. Basically, the evaluation process is used to: 1) provide feedback efficiency programs; 2) predicts a lack of programs; 3) provide data for decisions and implemnetasi programs; .4) Provide the kind of decisions that may be made; 5) provides the intimacy between the parties involved, and 6) provide documentation of procedures and analysis of results of activities. Fourth, the evaluation of the product. This evaluation is to help make the next decision, either on the results that have been achieved and what is done after the program was running. So the product evaluation is the assessment carried out in order to see the achievement / success of a development program in achieving predetermined goals. In this evaluation phase an evaluator can determine or make recommendations to the program manager. whether a development program can be continued, expanded or modified, or even stopped. At this stage of the evaluation were asked questions about the achievement of the objectives, the relationship between the details of the process to achieving the goals, the formulation of which may be carried out, the requirement in the development program, and audience impact obtained from existing development programs. In addition to this question, the evaluation of the products also do the following: 1) the measurement and interpreting the achievement of program development, 2) see the main effect and side effect of development programs; 3) look at the advantages and cost efficiency; 4) the establishment of criteria for either absolute or relative; and 5) the establishment of criteria for success in the short or long term. To understand more about this CIPP models, can see detailed explanations of the four dimensions, in terms of objectives, methods, and their relationship to decision-making as follows.
Context Evaluation Objectives to define the institutional context, to identify the target population and assess their needs. to identify opportunitie s for addressing the needs, to diagnose probelms underlying the needs to judge whether proposed objectives are sufficienly responsive to the assessed needs
Input Evaluation
Process Evaluation
Product evaluation
to identify & To identify or To collect assess predict, in description system process, s& capabilities, defects in the judgement alternative procedural s of program design or its outcomes strategies, implementatio to procedural n, relate them designs for to implementin to provide information for objectives, g the strategies, the preproto budgets, grammed context, schedules, decisions, input and and to record process program information
& judge procedural events & activities
and to in terpret their worth and merit.
Context Evaluation
Input Evaluation
Process Evaluation
Product evaluation
Method
By using such methods as system analysis, survey, document review, hearings, interviews, diagnostic tests, & the Delplir technique
By inventorying & analyzing available human & material resources, solution strategies, & procedural designs for relevance, feasibility & economy. And by using such methods as literature search, visits to “misicle workers”, advocate teams & pilot trials
By monitoring the activity’s potential procedural barriers & remaining alert to unanticipated ones, by obtaining specified information for programmed decisions, by describing the actual process & by continually interacting with & observing the activities of project staff
By defining operationally & measuring outcomes criteria, by collecting judgements of outcomes from stakeholders, & by performing both qualitative & quantitative analyses
Relation to decision making in the change Process
For deciding upon the setting to be served, the goals associated with meeting needs or using opportunities, the objectives associated with solving problems, i.e., for planning needed changes. And to provide a basis for judging outcomes
For selecting sources of support, solution strategies & procedural designs, i.e., for structuring change activities. And to provide a basis for judging implementation
For implementing and refining the program design and procedure, i.e., for effecting process control. And to provide a log of t he actual process for later use in interpreting outcomes
For deciding to continue, terminate, modify, or refocus a change activity, & present a clear record of effects (intended, positive & negative)
(Stufflebeam, D. L. et. al. (2000).
Strengths and Weaknesses CIPP Model Although it is recognized that the CIPP model of evaluation is considered more universal and relatively better equipped to evaluate activity development programs, however, still has some advantages and disadvantages compared with models other evaluation. Several weaknesses exist are: 1) the views evaluators may not be in line with the decision, 2) focus the evaluation highlights the outcomes of the program, 3) are not too concerned with how the process is supposed to be rather than the reality that is in progress, 4) tend to focus on the rational management rather than admit existing reality, 5) impressed with the nature of top-down managerial approach, and 6) when applied separately (partial) will undermine the basic idea Excellence CIPP model of evaluation: 1) improve the program, 2) provide information related to decision-making, 3) provide feedback to the preparation of the program, 4) is a dynamic working system, 5) has a holistic approach in the evaluation process. 6) be able to make improvements during the program and can provide the final information, and 7) is more comprehensive than other models
Conclusion CIPP model evaluation described how an evaluator can be used to guide efforts to improve accountability and serving the needs of a program. This model has been applied in various fields. This model has provided general guidelines for designing evaluation studies CIPP model. This model is not a perfect model of evaluation without flaws, but this model is considered by all parties as a comprehensive model is compared with models of other evaluation tools. CIPP evaluation model is evaluation model required in a program for improvement as well as a form of professional responsibility program. Society will not know whether a program is successful or not if the absence of an evaluation. Therefore, a community service program needs to be evaluated to determine the advantages and disadvantages that exist.
References Bledsoe. Katrina L & Graham, James A. (2005) The Use of Multiple Evaluation Approaches in Program Evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation.; 26; 302
Chavis, D. (2004). Looking the enemy in the eye: Gazing into the mirror of evaluation practice. The Evaluation Exchange, 9, 8-9. Owston, Ron (2007) Models and Methods for Evaluation. Toronto, Canada : York University, Stufflebeam, D. L. et. al. (2000). Evaluation Models Viewpoints On Educational and Human Services Evaluation. Second Edition. New York: Luwer Academic Publishers Scriven, M. (1997). Minimalist theory: The least theory that practice requires. American Journal of Evaluation, 19, 575-604. Worthen, B. (1990). Program evaluation. H. Walberg & G. Haertel (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of educational evaluation (pp. 42-47). Toronto, ON: Pergammon Press.
Filename: Evaluasi Program Pembangunan Masyarakat Desai_4DE4B4.docx Directory: C:\Users\Aspire\AppData\Local\Temp Template: C:\Users\Aspire\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Te mplates\Normal.dotm Title: Subject: Author: Aspire Keywords: Comments: Creation Date: 19/11/2014 23:07:00 Change Number: 13 Last Saved On: 21/11/2014 16:11:00 Last Saved By: Aspire Total Editing Time: 392 Minutes Last Printed On: 21/11/2014 16:11:00 As of Last Complete Printing Number of Pages: 18 Number of Words: 4.680 (approx.) Number of Characters: 28.274 (approx.)
