Overview
I’ll admit it from the start – The CIPP Model for evaluation is my favorite. It provides a good evaluation from which informed decisions can be made. It is an ancient model by modern program evaluation standards, but it does the job.
Lesson Objectives
To introduce the method by which the program evaluation assignments will be completed in this class.
The Lesson
The CIPP model was developed by Daniel Stufflebeam as a way to link a program evaluation to decisions about the program. This would seem like an obvious thing, but my bookshelf is loaded with program evaluations that are NEVER USED to guide decision-making in the program. I like Stufflebeam’s model because it forces you to learn about the needs of the organization during the evaluation. In other words, if done correctly, I believe that the CIPP model teaches the members of an organization about the status of its programs while carrying out the evaluation – to make the evaluation relevant from the start.
The CIPP Model
The CIPP Model is an acronym for Context, Input, Process, and Product. These four elements can be broken down into four large questions.
- Who are we and what are we doing with the program?
This question asks, “What is?” Before you begin to tackle the question of the quality of the program, it pays to define what the program is, and the context in which it operates. With regard to the COVID pandemic, UGA initiated distance and online learning for undergraduates in the spring of 2020. If you were a student at Purdue University, Oregon State University, or NC State University, this would be no big deal. These three schools have extensive online learning programs. At UGA, this was a big deal, because we do not value as an institution undergraduate online learning. This is neither good or bad by itself, because UGA’s priority is a “high-touch” teaching program that cannot be offered by an online program. But this does explain why the shift to online learning the 2020 spring and summer was a real chore. In this case, the context informs the program evaluation.
- What do we do, or need to do, in order to carry out the program?
This part of the evaluation examines what resources were used, or needed, in order to carry out the program. The first thing that most of us think of is funding. Does the program get enough funding? But it also includes an examination of human resources – are they trained, committed, and deployed to solve the problem? In my first school job, I worked in a rural community that had few resources. And, the school had a big problem with teen pregnancy. A program was developed that partnered the local health department with the school system to allow pregnant teens to receive prenatal medical care during the regular school day. Transportation to and from the health department was a real problem, so teachers were tasked with transporting pregnant teens to their doctors appointments. As you might imagine, the optics on such a program were borderline – having teachers escort pregnant teens into a building looked, well, sketchy. But that was what was needed at the time. Use the resources you have, and identify the resources you need to carry out the program.
- What processes are we using, and are they being carried out properly?
This part of the evaluation is most familiar to all. It is the “person with the clipboard peering over your shoulder” as you work. It is the DMV officer sitting next to you as you complete the road test for a drivers license. This phase is nerve wracking, but essential to note positive elements of the program and elements that need further refinement. But it is more than an observer with a clipboard. Read the following article to see how an examination of a program’s processes is essential to the evaluation: How to Change a Culture: Lessons From NUMMI, By John Shook
- Did the processes work? Did the program succeed?
In this part of the evaluation, you compare the intended outcomes to the actual outcomes. Did the program meet its goals? It is as simple as that.
The magic of the CIPP model really happens in the evaluation phase. If the program succeeds, you have a rich catalog of inputs, contextual analysis, and process analytics to tell you why it succeeded. If the program failed or did not perform as intended, the post-mortem becomes easier. You have a rich record of detail to draw conclusions from.
Don’t take my word for it.
Read what Stufflebeam had to say about the model. This is a long article, and ancient, but very good at explaining the model.