A feasibility study of using evaluation indicators of higher education in evaluation of the post-graduate curriculum, based on the CIPP-model

Document Type : Scientific - Research

Authors

1 PhD student in Curriculum Planning, University of Isfahan

2 Faculty member of the Department of Educational Sciences, University of Isfahan

3 Faculty member of Statistics Department, University of Isfahan

Abstract

In this study, the researchers, selected 73 key indicators to review the present situation and to consider the possibility of their use in the evaluation of contexts, inputs, processes and results of curriculum at postgraduate level based on the CIPP-model in Isfahan, Shahrekord and Isfahan Industrial universities. It is an applied research study and the method used is descriptive-. The statistical population of the quantitative part included all faculty members, students and postgraduate students at the mentioned universities (total: 11635 people).  A sample of 652 people was selected through stratified random sampling. Statistical population of qualitative part included all faculty members of the universities mentioned, from which a sample of 30 was selected by purposeful sampling method. Data were collected by questionnaire and interview. The validity of the tools was approved by 15 professors of IsfahanUniversity. Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the present and possible situation of the questionnaire was 0.96 and 0.97. The reliability of the interview form was assessed by the specialists and the triangulation technique. According to respondents the use of these indicators at present was about average and lower.  Whereas the possibility of using all indicators was high Therefore using all these indicators in the evaluation of the evaluation of curriculum, based on the presented modelwas suggested. 

Keywords

References

Alade, A. (2008). Strategic Application of Evaluation Models for Promoting Higher Education Research of Technology Curricula. Reforming Higher Education in Africa, 22: 103-110.
Bharvad, A. j. (2010). Curriculum Evaluation. International Research Journal. 1(12): 72-74.
Bondi, J & Bondi, J. (2003). Curriculum Development: A Guide to Practice (3th Edition). Columbus, OH: Merrill Publishing Company.
Bransford. B, Brown. J & Cocking, F (2006). How People Learn. National Research Council and the NationalAcademy of Sciences (NRC and NAS).
Danish Evaluation Institute. (2004). Criteria-Based Evaluation, EVA Experience in Evaluations Based on  Criteria .http://www.eva.dk.
Ghazali, D. (2010). Program Evaluation in Higher Education(University of Malaya, Malaysia). The International Journal of Research and Review, 5(2): 56-65.
Griffin, A & Hett, A (2004). Pedagogy Assessment of Teacher Candidates. State of Washington Performance-Based.
Hakan, K & Seval, F.(2009). Evaluation of English Curriculum at YildizTechnicalUniversity Using CIPP Model. Education and Science. 34(153):47-60.
Hakan, K & Seval, F. (2011). CIPP Evaluation Model Scale: Development, Reliability and Validity: Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences:1-8.
Jones, J. (1999). Students' Views of the Roles of a University. Higher Educational Psychology,55 (8): 254-513.
Klien, M. F. (1991). A Conceptual Frame Work for Curriculum Decision Making, In: Klein, M. F.(Ed). The Politics of Curriculum Decision Making. StateUniversity of New york Press. Albeny.
McLemore, A. (2009). The CIPP Model. http://www.MacLemore.edu/eval.
National Research Council (2006). America’s Lab Report: Investigations in High School Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Ng, P. (2008). The Phases and Paradoxes of Educational Quality Assurance: the Case of the Singapore System. Quality Assurance in Education. 16: 112-125.
Phattharayuttawat, S. et al. (2009). An Evaluation of the Curriculum of a Graduate Programme in Clinical Psychology. South East Asian Journal of Medical Education, 3(1): 14-19.
Paul, J. (2005). Evaluation and Assessment. London: Black King's College, U.K.
Rossi, P. H, Freeman, H. E & Lipsey, W. (1999). Evaluation: a Systematic Aapproach, Sixth Edition. Newburg Park: Sage publications.
Scriven, M. (2007). The Logic of Evaluation. Dissensus and the Search  for Common, OSSA, Windsor: 1-16.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (1999). Foundational Models for 21st Century Program Evaluation. The EvaluationCenter Occasional Papers Series. December.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (2003). The CIPP Model for Evaluation. Presented at the 2003 Annual Conference of the Oregon Program Evaluators Network. Portland, Oregon.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (2007). CIPP Evaluation Model Checklist(2th Edition). Evaluation Checklists Project: 1-16. www.wmich.edu/evalctr/checklists 
Stufflebeam, D. L & Shinkfield, A. J. (2007). Evaluation Theory, Models, and  Applications. San Francisco:  Jossey Bass.
Tan, S, Lee, N & Hall, D. (2010). CIPP as a Model for Evaluating Learning Spaces. http://www.swinburne.edu.au/spl/learningspacesproject.
Trochim, K. (2006). Introduction to Evaluation. http://www.socialresearchmethods. net/kb/intreval.htm.
Tseng, H. K et al. (2010). Using the Context, Input, Process and Product model to assess an engineering curriculum. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education (WIETE), 8(3): 256- 261.
Witham, P & Meyer, R. (2009). Evaluations of Performance Incentive Programs: TIF Local Evaluations. USA: Center for Educator Compensation Reform.
Wongbenjarat, A, et al. (2003). CIPP Model in Medical Education Assessment at the NakhonRatchasimaHospitalSchool of Medicine Thailand. Global Standards in Medical Education for Better Health Care. WFME Conference. Copenhagen. Denmark: 70-79.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics