CIPP evaluation model for the coaching program of running athletes

Eki Aldapit(1*), Suharjana Suharjana(2),

(1) Universitas Muhammadiyah Kotabumi
(2) Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


This study aimed to evaluate the training programs of sprinting, middle distance running, and long distance running athletes. This type of research is the study evaluation using CIPP models. The approach used in this study is a qualitative approach with qualitative data analysis model of Miles & Huberman. The results of the evaluation include: (1) context  evaluation shows that there are lack of budget, facilities, government’s support, sponsorship, health experts, test instrumens and test spaces, (2) evaluation of the inputt indicates there is a lack of facilities and infrastructure as the main support of the running track, (3) evaluation of the process demonstrates the ability of trainers to implement the training process is very helpful to the achievement of a good coaching program and achievements of athletes. The recruitment of athletes should be open to all people, so there should not be the impression of nepotism and collusion, (4) evaluation of the product shows the achievements have been at national and international level. Achievement would be better and more sustainable if supported by a context and a perfect addition of the input to the process which has been good.


Keywords


program evaluation; development; running athletes; athletic club

Full Text:

FULLTEXT PDF

References


Arikunto, S. (2014). Metode penelitian kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan kombinasi (mixed methods). Bandung: Alfabeta.

Arikunto, S., & Jabar, C. S. A. (2009). Evaluasi program pendidikan (2nd ed.). Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.

Astuti, D. A., Haryanto, S., & Prihatni, Y. (2018). Evaluasi implementasi kurikulum 2013. Wiyata Dharma: Jurnal Penelitian Dan Evaluasi Pendidikan, 6(1), 7–14. https://doi.org/10.30738/WIYATA DHARMA.V6I1.3353

Bell, K. (2006). A message from the coaches council: Using evaluation strategies to enhance coaching effectiveness. Strategies, 19(6), 7–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/08924562.2006.10591218

Bompa, T. O. (2000). Total training for young champions. Champaign: Human Kinetics.

Brown, L., & Ferrigno, V. (2014). Training for speed, agility, and quickness, 3E. Human Kinetics.

Bukit, A. V, Bastari, A., & Putra, G. E. (2019). Evaluation of learning programs in Indonesian Naval Technology College with the context, input, process, and product (CIPP) model. International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, 14(20), 3823–3827.

Chen, Y., Wong, S. H., Wong, C., Lam, C.-W., Huang, Y., & Siu, P. M. (2008). The effect of a pre-exercise carbohydrate meal on immune responses to an endurance performance run. British Journal of Nutrition, 100(6), 1260–1268. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114508975619

Cresswell, J. (2016). Research design: Pendekatan metode kualitatif, kuantitatif, dan campuran (Edisi 4). Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Darmayanti, S. E., & Wibowo, U. B. (2014). Evaluasi program pendidikan karakter di sekolah dasar Kabupaten Kulon Progo. Jurnal Prima Edukasia, 2(2), 223–234. https://doi.org/10.21831/jpe.v2i2.2721

Emzir, E. (2012). Metodologi penelitian kualitatif: Analisis data. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo.

Gomez-Cabrera, M.-C., Martínez, A., Santangelo, G., Pallardó, F. V., Sastre, J., & Viña, J. (2006). Oxidative stress in marathon runners: interest of antioxidant supplementation. British Journal of Nutrition, 96(S1), S31–S33. https://doi.org/10.1079/BJN20061696

Hanifah, M., & Irambona, A. (2019). Authentic assessment: Evaluation and its application in science learning. Psychology, Evaluation, and Technology in Educational Research, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.33292/petier.v1i2.4

Harsuki, H. (2012). Pengantar manajemen olahraga. Jakarta: PT Raja Grafindo Persada.

Hidayatullah, F. (2016). Pembangunan olahraga bagian integral dari pembangunan bangsa. In Pidato Pengukuha Guru Besar. Surakarta: Universitas Sebelas Maret.

Lutan, R. (2013). Pedoman perencanaan pembinaan olahraga. Bandung: Asdep Iptekor Kemenpora.

Mawardi, I. (2019). Evaluasi penerapan pembelajaran sistem blok di jurusan teknik pemesinan SMK Muhammadiyah Prambanan. Jurnal Pendidikan Vokasional Teknik Mesin, 7(2), 127–134. Retrieved from http://journal.student.uny.ac.id/ojs/index.php/mesin/article/view/14948

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Los Angeles: Sage.

Mulyatiningsih, E. (2011). Riset terapan bidang pendidikan dan teknik. Yogyakarta: UNY Press.

Nuruhidin, A., Putra, F., Pamungkas, O. I., Ardiyanto, H., & Saputro, D. P. (2018). An evaluation of powerlifting and weightlifting development program. Psychology, Evaluation, and Technology in Educational Research, 1(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.33292/petier.v1i1.19

Puspitasari, L., In’am, A., & Syaifuddin, M. (2018). Analysis of students’ creative thinking in solving arithmetic problems. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 14(1), 49–60. https://doi.org/10.12973/iejme/3962

Republik Indonesia. Undang-Undang Nomor 3 tahun 2005 tentang sistem keolahragaan nasional. , Pub. L. No. 3, Undang-Undang (2005).

Rohyani, R., Herpratiwi, H., & Djasmi, S. (2014). Evaluasi program pembelajaran tematik. Jurnal Teknologi Informasi Komunikasi Pendidikan (Old), 2(4). Retrieved from http://jurnal.fkip.unila.ac.id/index.php/JT/article/view/5676

Stufflebeam, D. L. (2003). The CIPP model for evaluation. In International Handbook of Educational Evaluation (pp. 31–62). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0309-4_4

Sudjana, D. (2006). Evaluasi program pendidikan luar sekolah untuk pendidikan nonformal dan pengembangan sumber daya manusia. https://doi.org/2006

Thumm, H. P. (2006). Talent identification in Indonesia: a model for other countries? New Studies in Athletics, 21(2), 29.

Thumm, H. P. (2019). Significance of basic training. Modern Athlete and Coach, 1, 9–12.

Tseng, K.-H., Diez, C. R., Lou, S.-J., Tsai, H.-L., & Tsai, T.-S. (2010). Using the Context, Input, Process and Product model to assess an engineering curriculum. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, 8(3), 256–261.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.33292/petier.v1i2.10

Article Metrics

Abstract view : 160 times
FULLTEXT PDF - 88 times

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2019 Psychology, Evaluation, and Technology in Educational Research

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Our Journal indexed by:

Psychology, Evaluation, and Technology in Educational Research
ISSN: 2622-5506

Creative Commons License
Psychology, Evaluation, and Technology in Educational Research is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Based on a work at http://petier.org/index.php/PETIER.

 

PETiER Stats