A CIPP Model Evaluation: Advancing Learning Through Interest Based-Learning Media Program in Higher Education

Almubarak Almubarak; Nahadi Nahadi; Siti Sriyati; Aidil Adhani; Sukmawati Yasim

doi:10.23917/ijolae.v8i2.16045

Authors

Almubarak Almubarak Faculty of Mathematics and Science Education, University of Pendidikan Indonesia, Indonesia; Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, University of Lambung Mangkurat
Indonesia
Nahadi Nahadi Faculty of Mathematics and Science Education, University of Pendidikan Indonesia
Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0975-7419
Siti Sriyati Faculty of Mathematics and Science Education, University of Pendidikan Indonesia
Indonesia https://orcid.org/0009-0002-9920-1023
Aidil Adhani Faculty of Education, Monash University
Australia https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1836-5967
Sukmawati Yasim Faculty of Modern Languages and Applied Linguistics, University of Limerick
Ireland https://orcid.org/0009-0008-0126-5349

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.23917/ijolae.v8i2.16045

Keywords:

CIPP model evaluation, educational assessment, interest-based learning, student learning outcomes, advanced learning, innovation learning, lifelong learning

Abstract

Evaluation of interest-based education programs is an essential component of assessing a program's effectiveness in higher education. However, valid, contextual, and relevant instruments for curriculum development objectives, such as those in chemistry education, remain limited. The purpose of this study was to determine how to (1) design and develop program evaluation instruments based on the Context, Input, Process, Product (CIPP) model, (2) program effectiveness by looking at evaluation results in each aspect of the model, and (3) relevance between evaluation results and the Model structure. The study used an evaluative approach with the CIPP evaluation model as the main framework. The instrument was developed independently and validated by experts with a logical-theoretical-empirical approach, with samples of chemistry education students in the chemistry learning media lecture program. Data were collected using a questionnaire, analysed using a statistical approach, and the evaluation results were reported. The evaluation results show that (1) the designed and developed evaluation instrument meets the valid criteria (0.91 or high validity), (2) this program has high effectiveness with an average score of Context (3.75), Input (3.5), Process (3.0), and Product (3.5), and (3) the evaluation results show relevance to the model structure and can be used effectively. These results confirm that the CIPP model can not only measure program effectiveness, but also identify areas that still need improvement for continuous improvement. CIPP model-based evaluation can be an effective tool for assessing the effectiveness of interest-based lecture programs in higher education.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Akhtar, S., Nawaah, D., & Jafar, S. H. (2024). Ethical empowerment: Examining the impact of business education in Indian universities through the lens of internati-onal standards and CIPP model. The In-ternational Journal of Management Edu-cation, 22(3), 101066.

Alquraan, M. F., Alazzam, S., & Farhat, D. (2025). Assessing the structural rela-tionships between the CIPP model com-ponents in teacher education program. Asian Education and Development Studi-es, 14(1), 103–114.

Asmussen, G., Rodemer, M., & Bernholt, S. (2023). Blooming student difficulties in dealing with organic reaction mechanisms - an attempt at systemization. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 24(3), 1035–1054. https://doi.org/10.1039/d2rp00204c

Astutik, I., Widiati, U., Ratri, D. P., Jona-thans, P. M., Nurkamilah, N., Devanti, Y. M., & Harfal, Z. (2024). Transforma-tive Practices: Integrating Automated Writing Evaluation in Higher Education Writing Classrooms - A Systematic Revi-ew. Indonesian Journal on Learning and Advanced Education (IJOLAE), 423–441. https://doi.org/10.23917/ijolae.v6i3.23675

Ávila, J. P. Q., & Fernández, M. B. (2025). Evaluation of a teacher pipeline program: Choosing teacher education based on self-confidence and support. Teaching and Teacher Education, 153, 104842.

Barke, H.-D., Harsch, G., & Schmid, S. (2012). Essentials of Chemical Education. In Angewandte Chemie International Edi-tion, 6(11), 951–952. Springer.

Barke, H.-D., Hazari, A., & Yitbarek, S. (2009). Misconceptions in Chemistry (Addresing Perceptions in Chemical Education). Sense Publisher. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70989-3_2

De Witte, M. (2022). Gen Z are not ‘co-ddled.’They are highly collaborative, self-reliant and pragmatic, according to new Stanford-affiliated research. Stanford News.

Dizon, A. G. (2023). Historical development of CIPP as a curriculum evaluation mo-del. History of Education, 52(1), 109–128.

Espinosa, A. A., Monterola, S. L. C., & Pun-zalan, A. E. (2013). Career-oriented per-formance tasks: Effects on students’ inte-rest in Chemistry. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 14(2).

Fitzpatrick, J. L., Sanders, J. R., & Worthen, B. R. (2011). Program Evaluation (Al-ternative Approaches and Practical Gui-delines (4th ed.). Pearson.

Friedenberg, L. (1995). Psychological testing: Design, analysis, and use. In (No Title).

Harefa, N., Sinaga, M., & Silaban, S. (2020). Students perception and interest on che-mistry: Learning evaluation integrated quizziz media. Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia, 12(3), 143–150. https://doi.org/10.24114/jpkim.v12i3.21163

Haynes, S., Richard, D., & Kubiancy, E. (1995). Content validity in psychosocial assessmen: A functional approach to con-cept and method. Psychological Asses-sment, 7(3), 238–247.

Himawan, R., Hermanto, H., Nurgiyantoro, B., Suyono, S., Widyartono, D., Purwan-ti, A., … Pogadaev, V. A. (2024). ITE-MAN-Based Evaluation of End-of-Semester Assessment Items: A Case Stu-dy of Language Test in Indonesian Scho-ol Context. Indonesian Journal on Lear-ning and Advanced Education (IJOLAE), 387–402. https://doi.org/10.23917/ijolae.v6i3.23254

Irene, E. A. (2023). Evaluation of Teacher Education Curricula and its relevance to licensure examination using Context , In-put , Process and Product ( CIPP ) mo-del. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 8(1), 100607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100607

Kain, C., Koschmieder, C., Matischek-Jauk, M., & Bergner, S. (2024). Mapping the landscape: A scoping review of 21st cen-tury skills literature in secondary educa-tion. Teaching and Teacher Education, 151(July), 104739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104739

Kusumaningtyas, D. A., Manyunu, M., Kur-niasari, E., Awalin, A. N., Rahmaniati, R., & Febriyanti, A. (2024). Enhancing Learning Outcomes: A Study on the De-velopment of Higher Order Thinking Skills based Evaluation Instruments for Work and Energy in High School Physics. Indonesian Journal on Learning and Advanced Education (IJOLAE), 14–31. https://doi.org/10.23917/ijolae.v6i1.23125

Kwarikunda, D., Schiefele, U., Ssenyonga, J., & Muwonge, C. M. (2020). The Rela-tionship between Motivation for, and In-terest in, Learning Physics among Lower Secondary School Students in Uganda. African Journal of Research in Mathema-tics, Science and Technology Education, 24(3), 435–446. https://doi.org/10.1080/18117295.2020.1841961

Kwarikunda, D., Schiefele, U., Ssenyonga, J., & Muwonge, C. M. (2021). Secondary school students’ motivation profiles for physics learning: Relations with cognitive learning strategies, gender, attitudes and individual interest. African Journal of Re-search in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 25(2), 197–210.

Kyriazos, T. A., & Stalikas, A. (2018). Appli-ed Psychometrics: The Steps of Scale Development and Standardization Pro-cess. Psychology, 09(11), 2531–2560. https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2018.911145

Lee, S., Shin, J., & Lee, S. (2019). How to execute Context , Input , Process , and Product evaluation model in medical health education. 1–8.

Lin, H. shyang, Hong, Z. R., & Chen, Y. C. (2013). Exploring the Development of College Students’ Situational Interest in Learning Science. International Journal of Science Education, 35(13), 2152–2173. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.818261

Martin, I., & Carey, J. C. (2012). Evaluation capacity within state-level school counse-ling programs: A cross-case analysis. Professional School Counseling, 15(3), 2156759X1201500302.

Meiklejohn, S., Anderson, A., Brock, T., Kumar, A., Maddock, B., Wright, C., Walker, L., & Kent, F. (2023). The utility of an interprofessional education fra-mework and its impacts upon perceived readiness of graduates for collaborative practice. A multimethod evaluation using the context, input, process, product (CIPP) model. Nurse Education Today, 121, 105707.

Neyazi, N., Arab, M., Farzianpour, F., & Majdabadi, M. M. (2016). Evaluation of selected faculties at Tehran University of Medical Sciences using CIPP model in students and graduates point of view. Evaluation and Program Planning, 59, 88–93.

Ødegård, A., Strype, J., Lindqvist, S., Vasset, F., Willumsen, E., Iversen, H. P., Laake, P., & Almås, S. H. (2025). Teachers’ perceptions of interprofessional collabo-ration in higher education: Contributions to a framework. Social Sciences & Hu-manities Open, 11, 101300.

Prameswari, N. S., Cahyono, A., Subiyanto-ro, S., & Haryanto, E. (2024). Visual lite-racy study: influence of Instagram on in-terest in learning photography and its re-lation to gender. Media Practice and Education, 25(3), 237–249.

Prastikawati, E. F., Adeoye, M. A., & Ryan, J. C. (2024). Fostering Effective Tea-ching Practices: Integrating Formative Assessment and Mentorship in Indonesi-an Preservice Teacher Education. Indone-sian Journal on Learning and Advanced Education (IJOLAE), 230–253. https://doi.org/10.23917/ijolae.v6i2.23431

Proger, B. B. (1971). Program evaluation: The model-building game. Journal of Le-arning Disabilities, 4(6), 292–306.

Retnawati, H. (2016). Validitas (Reliabilitas & Karakteristik Butir). Parama Publis-hing.

Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st Century Skills: Learning For Life In Our Times (First (ed.)). Jossey-Bass.

Tuna, H., & Başdal, M. (2021). Curriculum evaluation of tourism undergraduate pro-grams in Turkey: A CIPP model-based framework. Journal of Hospitality, Lei-sure, Sport & Tourism Education, 29, 100324.

van Dinther, R., de Putter, L., & Pepin, B. (2023). Features of Immersive Virtual Reality to Support Meaningful Chemistry Education. Journal of Chemical Educa-tion, 100(4), 1537–1546. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.2c01069

van Dulmen, T. H. H., Visser, T. C., Pepin, B., & McKenney, S. (2023). Teacher and student engagement when using learning materials based on the context of cutting-edge chemistry research. Research in Sci-ence and Technological Education, 41(4), 1617–1638. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2022.2070147

van Nooijen, C. C. A., de Koning, B. B., Bramer, W. M., Isahakyan, A., Asoodar, M., Kok, E., van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (2024). A Cognitive Load The-ory Approach to Understanding Expert Scaffolding of Visual Problem-Solving Tasks: A Scoping Review. In Educatio-nal Psychology Review (Vol. 36, Issue 1). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09848-3

Vlachopoulos, D., & Makri, A. (2024). A systematic literature review on authentic assessment in higher education: Best practices for the development of 21st cen-tury skills, and policy considerations. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 83(November), 101425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2024.101425

Wisudawati, A. W., Barke, H. D., Lemma, A., & Agung, S. (2022). Students’ and teachers’ perceptions for composition of ionic compounds. Chemistry Teacher In-ternational, 4(3), 221–230. https://doi.org/10.1515/cti-2021-0032

Worthington, R. L., & Whittaker, T. A. (2006). Scale Development Research: A Content Analysis and Recommendations for Best Practices. The Counseling Psychologist, 34(6), 806–838. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000006288127

Wright, B. D., & Masters, G. N. (1982). Ra-ting scale analysis. MESA Press.

Yang, H., Yang, M., Batt, L., Xie, X., You, E., & Goff, P. (2021). A new evaluation approach for teacher preparation pro-grams using labor market competitiveness of teacher applicants. Teaching and Tea-cher Education, 104, 103368.

Zhang, G., Zeller, N., Griffith, R., Metcalf, D., Williams, J., Shea, C., & Misulis, K. (2011). Using the Context, Input, Pro-cess, and Product Evaluation Model (CIPP) as a Comprehensive Framework to Guide the Planning, Implementation, and Assessment of Service-learning Pro-grams. Journal of Higher Education Ou-treach and Engagement, 15(4), 57–84.

Zhao, Y., Li, W., Jiang, H., Siyiti, M., Zhao, M., You, S., Li, Y., & Yan, P. (2024). Development of a blended teaching qua-lity evaluation scale (BTQES) for un-dergraduate nursing based on the Con-text, Input, Process and Product (CIPP) evaluation model: A cross-sectional sur-vey. Nurse Education in Practice, 77, 103976.