�ݺ�ߣ

1. First installment—actually before all 4 CIPP parts were introduced— as
published more than 35 years ago (Stufflebeam, 1966) and stressed the
need for process as well as product evaluations.
2. The second installment—published a year later (Stufflebeam, 1967)—
included context, input, process, and product evaluations and emphasized
that goalsetting should be guided by context evaluation, including a needs
assessment, and that program planning should be guided by input
evaluation, including assessments of alternative program strategies.
3. The third installment (Stufflebeam, D. L., Foley, W. J., Guba, E. G., Hammond,
R. L., Merriman, H. O., & Provus, M., 1971) set the 4 types of evaluation
within a systems, improvement-oriented framework.
4. The model’s fourth installment (Stufflebeam, 1972) showed how the model
could and should be used for summative as well as formative evaluation.
5. The model’s fifth installment—breaks out product evaluation into the four
subparts in order to help assure and assess a program’s long-term viability.

The CIPP Model’s current version
Stufflebeam,Gullickson,Wingate,
2002) reflects prolonged effort
and a modicum of progress to
achieve the still distant goal of
developing a sound evaluation
theory which includes a coherent
set of conceptual , hypothetical,
pragmatic, and ethical principles
forming a general framework to
guide the evaluation.

Daniel Stufflebeam et.al.
• D. L. Foley
•W. J., Guba
• E. G., Hammond
• R. L., Merriman
• Provus, M.
• Shinkfield, A. J.
• Gullickson
• Wingate

1. Assess overall environmental
readiness of the project;
2. Examine whether existing goals and
priorities are attuned to the needs;
3. Refers to as NEEDS ASSESSMENT;
4. Provide rationale for setting
objectives;
5. The expanded focus is to identify
the strengths and weaknesses of an
institution, program to indicate
direction for improvement;
6. One of the basic use is to convince
funding agencies of the worth of the
project/program.

1. Refers to the ingredients of the
curriculum which include the goals,
instructional strategies, the learners,
the teachers, the contents and all
the materials needed;
2. This includes the steps and
resources needed to meet the new
goals and objectives and may also
include successful external programs
and materials as well as gathering
information.

1. Refers to the ways and means of
how the program has been
implemented;
2. Monitors the program/project
implementation process;
3. Assess to which participants accept
and carry out their roles;
4. The focus is the implementation of a
program or a strategy;
5. The main purpose is to provide
feedback about needed
modifications if the implementation
is inadequate.

1. Indicates if the program
accomplishes its goals;
2. Measure, interpret, and judge a
program’s outcomes by assessing
their merit, worth, and significance;
3. Ascertain the extent to which the
needs of all the participants were
met;
4. Should document both intended and
unintended effects/ positive as well
as negative outcomes;
5. Determine whether a program
should be continued, repeated,
and/or extended.

1. It delineates 4
different types of
evaluation which
addresses goals,
priorities,
potential
alternatives;
2. The evaluation
procedures are
very specific.

1. The specific steps
and/or methodologies
for executing the
evaluation are not
identified;
2. Needs multiple
procedures for
gathering data which in
most cases needs a lot
of time.

USING CIPP IN THE DIFFERENT STAGES OF
EVALUATION
Context: What needs to be done?
vs.
Were important needs addressed?
Input: How should it be done?
vs.
Was a defensible design employed?
Process: Is it being done?
vs.
Was the design well executed?
Product: Is it succeeding?
vs.
Did the effort succeed?

�ݺ�ߣ

Cipp model

More Related Content

Cipp model