EVALUATION OF ENGLISH AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE PROGRAM - USING CIPP (CONTEXT, INPUT, PROCESS AND PRODUCT) MODEL
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46827/ejel.v0i0.377Keywords:
CIPP model, EFL program, evaluation, program, program evaluationAbstract
The aim of this study is to evaluate a state high school EFL Program through CIPP (context, input, process and product) model. The participants of the study include 504 students. The source of data has been obtained through a 46 - itemed questionnaire and an interview for the students. In the study, the data has been analysed using statistical techniques (SPSS 20.0). By looking at the responses to the scales displaying the program components such as context, input, process and product, it was understood that most of the students partly agreed about these components. Yet, regarding the course book of the program, the students mostly did not favour it. Furthermore, the students stated that the course time was too much and they always had the same topics in the courses, as well as hinting on the difficulty of the common exams specified in the program. At the end of the study, some recommendations were taken into consideration such as adjusting the common exams properly, implementing a variety of activities in the courses and shortening the course time in order not to discomfort the students.
Article visualizations:
References
Aliakbari, M., & Ghoreyshi, M. (2013). On the Evaluation of Master of Arts Program in Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL) at Ilam University. European Online Journal of Natural and Social Sciences, 2(2s), pp-545.
Castillo, J.J. (2009). Convenience Sampling. Retrieved 10 Nov. 2012 from
http://explorable.com/convenience-sampling.html
Dalkey, N. C., & Helmer, O. (1963). An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of experts. Management Science, 9(3), 458–467.
Dermot, F. M. (2000). Key concepts in ELT, Evaluation. ELT Journal, 54(2), 210-211.
Harris, W. (1968). The nature and function of educational evaluations. Peabody Journal of Education, 46(2), 95-99.
Hunkins, F. P., & Ornstein, A. C. (1998). Curriculum: Foundations, principles, and issues.
Karatas, H., & Fer, S. (2009). Evaluation of English curriculum at Yildiz Technical
University using CIPP model. Egitim ve Bilim, 34(153), 47.
Kizlik, B. (2011). Measurement, assessment, and evaluation in education.
Oppenheim, A.N. (1992). Questionnaire design, interviewing and attitude measurement. London: Printer.
Ornstein, A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (1993). Curriculum: Foundations, principles, and issues. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Owen, J.M. (1999). Program evaluation: Forms and Approaches. New York: Routledge. 3rd Edition.
Owston, R. (2008). Models and methods for evaluation. Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, 605-617.
Pollak, C. J. (2009). Teacher empowerment and collaboration enhances student engagement in data-driven environments. Teacher Empowerment and Student Engagement, 1, 1-47.
Rossi, P. H., & Freeman, H.E. (1993). Evaluation: A Systematic Approach. London ua: Sage.
Steele, S. M. (1970). Developing a Concept of Program Evaluation. Madison, Wisconsin: National University Extension Center.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (2003). The CIPP model for evaluation. In International handbook of educational evaluation (pp. 31-62). Springer Netherlands.
Stufflebeam, D. L., & Shinkfield, A. J. (2007). Evaluation theory, models, & applications. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Stufflebeam, D. L., and Shinkfield, A. J. (1985). Systematic evaluation. Boston: Kluwe-Nijhoff.
Tessmer, M. (1993). Planning and conducting formative evaluations: Improving the quality of education and training. Psychology Press.
Thiede, W. (1964). Evaluation and Adult Education. Adult Education. ed. Gale Jensen et al. Adult Education Association of USA.
Tseng, K. H., Diez, C. R., Lou, S. J., Tsai, H. L., & Tsai, T. S. (2010). Using the Context, Input, Process and Product model to assess an engineering curriculum. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education. Vol, 8.
Wall, J. E. (2014). Program Evaluation Model. 9 – Step Process. Sage Solutions,1-26.
Wholey, J. S., Hatry, H. P., & Newcomer, K. E. (2010). Handbook of practical program evaluation (Vol. 19). John Wiley & Sons.
Wall, J. E., & Solutions, S. (2014). Program evaluation model 9-step process. Sage Solutions. http://region11s4.lacoe.edu/attachments/article/34, 287(29), 209.
Yahaya, A. (2001). The using of model context. input, process and products (CIPP) in learning programs assessment. International Conference on Challenges and Prospects in Teacher Education.1-4.
Zhang, G., Zeller, N., Griffith, R., Metcalf, D., Williams, J., Shea, C., & Misulis, K. (2011). Using the context, input, process, and product evaluation model (CIPP) as a comprehensive framework to guide the planning, implementation, and assessment of service-learning programs. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 15(4), 57-84.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- 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 this journal.
- 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).
