Evaluation of the PISD Teacher Induction Program Using Stufflebeam’s CIPP Model

Evaluation of the PISD Teacher Induction Program

Using Stufflebeam’s CIPP Model

Farrah Mae C. Castro

UniversityofSoutheastern Philippines

Abstract

This paper addresses the issue of evaluating whether the training program implemented for teachers adds value to a school’s results using Stufflebeam’s CIPP model. Key informant interviews were conducted to assess target needs in context evaluation. The work plan in input evaluation was assessed using document analysis. Semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions involving the trainees were conducted too asses the program activities for process evaluation and program outcomes for product evaluation, respectively.  Three reports are made after the evaluation namely the program antecedents which include the origin of the program and its environment, the program implementation which includes the program components and the program results comprising of the evaluation design and findings. Bottom line assessment of the program synthesizes the evaluation conclusions and recommendations.

According to a study conducted by Bass and McMurrer, companies that invested in the development of their employees created value for their shareholders by outperforming the relevant market index (2004). These results suggest that the amount of time, money and expertise spent on training staff can serve as a useful predictor of a company’s performance in the future. That is why most companies conduct mentoring trainings to ensure the success of their employees.

Mentoring occurs when an older, more experienced professional assumes a supportive, guiding role with a less experienced individual, often referred to as a protégé or a mentee (Kelly, 1999). ThePhilippines’ Department of Education has been implementing the Teacher Induction program since April 2006.  It is the flagship project of the Teacher Education Council aiming to promote excellence in public education by enhancing the effectiveness in content knowledge and instructional skills of beginning teachers or those who have zero to three years teaching experience. The project also aims to improve the retention rate of beginning teachers and narrow the gap between pre-service and in-service education and training (PIA, 2006). Despite frequent references to mentoring in educational literature, formal evaluation studies of mentoring and empirical evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of mentoring are absent (Fullerton, 1988; Roberts, 1999).

In light of these facts, this paper aims to evaluate whether the training program for neophyte teachers in one private school in the city, the Precious International School of Davao, adds value to its organization.

Program Antecedents

The program started in 1999 under the leadership of its then principal, now president Perla P. Kwan. She envisioned a group of teachers who are not only good in the classroom, but are also well-versed in other areas of the academe. The program’s mission is to equip incoming and even tenured teachers with all the necessary skills to obtain effective learning and at the same time, maintain the standard of education the school is known for. The program started with only her as the main trainer, and has now expanded to the whole academic council involving the administration, the department heads and area coordinators. The first batch of trainees were only 5 teachers, and now, after only 10 years, the program has trained more than 200 teachers from preschool to high school (PISD handbook, 2009).

Program Implementation

The program has three parts.

Part One is the Month-long Summer Training. This is conducted every May and is handled classroom style, that is teachers come as students to study from 8:00 – 3:00 daily. Course outline varies from year to year although basics are consistent, like  foundations of education, teaching strategies, behavior analysis and the like. At the end of the month, teachers’ performances are computed and graded. The second part of the program is the weekly teaching enhancement. This is done every Friday from 3:00 – 5:00 p.m. The main topic discussed during these weekly gatherings is Basic Communication skills, since the school’s main thrust is to promote English proficiency among its teachers and learners. The third part is the Year-long mentoring system wherein a neophyte is paired with a tenured teacher and they are expected to work together for the whole school year.

Program Results

In evaluating a teaching program as this, Stufflebeam’s CIPP model of evaluation is used. Since the question to be answered in this paper is whether this teacher training program improves the results of an organization, a model for evaluating the benefits is constructed.

The target of Context evaluation is to assess target needs using key informant interviews. Program leaders, like the academic coordinators, subject heads, trainers and others, are the interviewees for this part. Document Analysis is used to assess the work plan of Input evaluation. For process evaluation, current and past documents are analyzed to assess program activities. Focus group discussions were conducted during the product evaluation to assess program outcomes.

CONTEXT EVALUATION

The school’s mid-administrators are directly involved in the induction program making them the best people to interview.

Teachers’ Needs

Concerns

Opportunities to Address these Needs

Language Proficiency Some teachers are not fluent in English weekly English classes
Effective Teaching strategies Some teachers do not know the teaching strategies best applied in the classroom Observation and Demonstration
Latest in Educational Trends Some teachers do not know the latest trends in education Seminars, workshops

Analysis:

The school provides opportunities for its teachers to address their needs.

INPUT EVALUATION

Document Analysis was conducted to assess the work plan of the induction program.

1. What are the different program events, their costs and allocations?

 

  1. Month-Long Summer Training Program

Annual budget : P30,000 – P50,000

Inclusive of:

Allowance (newly-hired teachers)

Honorarium (trainers)

Materials and other expenses

Culmination Activity Expenses

  1. Weekly Teaching Enhancement

No specified budget

  1. Year-Long Mentoring System

No specified budget

2. Where do they get their trainers for the program? 

1. Outside Trainers

- Learning Styles – Dr. Archie Miguel of De La Salle University – 2005

- Writing – Mr. Rene Lizada – 2006

- City Disaster Coordinating Council

- Fire Department

2. In-house Trainers

- Assistant Principal, Principal

- Academic Coordinators

Analysis:

The school provides sufficient budget for the induction program, however, there is no fixed rate annually and no actual budget proposals are recorded.

PROCESS EVALUATION

Program Activities and Strategies

  1. Summer Training
  1. Academic Matters
  2. Personnel Policies
  3. Routine trainings

-          Fire and Earthquake Drills, First Aid

  1. Personal Development

-          Make-up Lessons

  1. Spiritual Development

-          faculty Retreat

  1. Social development

-          Kick-Off Party

  1. Weekly Enrichment
  1. Speaking Class
  2. English Remediation
  3. Teaching Strategies Sharing
  1. Mentoring System

1. Buddy-Buddy style

Analysis:

The school provides a wide range of activities for the teacher trainees in response to the needs reflected in context evaluation.

PRODUCT EVALUATION

Focus group discussions were conducted during the product evaluation to assess program outcomes.

In its pilot year, there were only 5 trainees and presently, the school has 69 teachers currently enrolled in the program. Focus group discussions were conducted with the teacher trainees and the results are as follows:

Positive Outcomes Negative Outcomes
  1. Informative
  2. comprehensive; covers a lot of different topics
  3. helps prepare neophyte teachers for the school year
  4. builds teachers’ confidence and self-esteem
  5. Fun, challenging activities
  6. Fosters camaraderie among co-teachers
  7. Regular training helps avoid mediocrity
  8. close supervision through the mentoring system minimizes neophyte errors
  9. time-consuming
  10. stressful sometimes
  11. minimal allowance for incoming faculty (first year teachers)

Analysis:

Positive outcomes according to the trainees far outweigh the negatives.

Bottom-Line Assessment of the Program

The school’s teacher induction program proves to be very effective in terms of training neophyte and tenured teachers. The program’s activities cater to the needs of the teachers as specified in context and process evaluation. In the year-end evaluation of the faculty, most teachers who have undergone the complete program fare well, if not more than satisfactorily. More support may be given into the input, particularly in the allocation of budget for more trainers, better teacher support and varied seminar topics.

References

Bassi, L.and McMurrer, D. (2004) How’s your return on people? Harvard Business

Review 82 (3) 18

PIA Press Release. (2006). DepEd to institutionalize Teacher Induction program.

Retrieved from

http://www.pia.gov.ph/?m=12&fi=p060824.htm&no=19

Stufflebeam, D. L. (2000) The CIPP model for evaluation.In D. L. Stuffelbaum, G. F. Madaus & T. Kellaghan (eds) Evaluation models. Boston: Kluwer Academic

Publishers. 279-317.

Stufflebeam, D.L. (2007) CIPP Evaluation Model Checklist. Retrieved from

http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/checklists.pdf

Stufflebeam, D. L. (1973). Evaluation as

enlightenment for decision-making. In B. R. Worthen & J. R. Sanders (Eds.), Educational evaluation:

Theory and practice.Worthington,OH: Charles A. Jones Publishing Company.

Stufflebeam, DL & Shinkfield, AJ. (2007)

Evaluation theory, models, and applications.Jossey-Bass,California,USA.

Vanderstoep, S. & Johnston, D. (2009).  Research Methods for Everyday Life: Blending Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches.San Francisco,USA: Jossey-Bass: A Wiley Imprint.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s