Evaluation of Speaking Curriculums at the Erbil Private Universities using Context, Input, Process and Product model

Lava Noori Ali; Suleyman Celik

doi:10.25212/lfu.qzj.5.1.07

Authors

Lava Noori Ali Department of English Language Teaching, College of Education, University of Tishk International, Erbil, Kurdistan Region, Iraq
Suleyman Celik Department of English Language Teaching, College of Education, University of Tishk International, Erbil, Kurdistan Region, Iraq

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.25212/lfu.qzj.5.1.07

Keywords:

Curriculum evaluation, CIPP model, Context evaluation, Input evaluation, Process evaluation, Product evaluation

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to explain the effectiveness of the Speaking curriculum in English Language Teaching (ELT) Department in Private Universities in Erbil, Iraq. The theoretical background behind this evaluation study is Stufflebeam’s evaluation model (1983), CIPP, Context, Input, Process and Product. Students’ and instructors’ perspectives are taken regarding the studying goals and objectives, used teaching methodologies, studying environment, materials and assessments of the courses. This study will help teachers to find out more engaging ways of teaching that focus on using the language more fluently and accurately rather than memorization. The objective of this study is to recommend necessary changes, adaptions, or improvements required for the university curriculums. Participants were English department 169 students and 11 teachers in three private universities of Erbil-Iraq. The results showed that the speaking courses are satisfactory but they need some minor changes and improvements regarding course goals and objectives, course materials and instrumentation in order to obtain a better curriculum to fulfill the students’ and teachers’ expectations of the course.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Akpur, U., Alcı, B., & Karataş, H. (2016). Evaluation of the curriculum of English preparatory classes at Yildiz Technical University using CIPP model, 11(7), 466–473. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2016.2638

Allan A. Glatthorn, Floyd Boschee, Bruce M. Whitehead, B. F. B. (2016). Curriculum Leadership: Strategies for Development and Implementation. United States of America: SAGE Publications.

Awan, R. (2010). An Investigation Of Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety And Its Relationship With Students‟ Achievement. Journal of Colege Teaching & Learning, 7(11), 33–40.

Aziz, S. (n.d.). Implementation of CIPP Model for Quality Evaluation at School Level : A Case Study, 5(1), 189–206.

Aziz, S. (2018). Implementation of CIPP Model for Quality Evaluation at School Level : A Case Study. Journal of Education and Educational Developement, 5(1), 189–206.

Edward S. Ebert, R. C. C. (2011). School: An Introduction to Education. United States of America: Wadsworth.

Erden, M. (1998). Eğitimde Program Değerlendirme [Curriculum Evaluation in Education]. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.

Gredler, M. E. (1996). Program Evaluation. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

Gronlund, N. E. (1985). Measurement and Evaluaion in Teaching (5th ed.). New York: MacMillan Publishing Company.

Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. California: Pergamon Press.

Nicholson, T., Journal, S., & Jan, N. (2016). Using the CIPP Model to Evaluate Reading Instruction model to evaluate Using the GPP, 32(4), 312–318.

Nunan, D. (Ed.). (2003). Practical English Language Teaching (First edit). Singapore: McGraw Hill.

Özüdoğru, F. (2018). Analysis of curriculum evaluation studies conducted in foreign language education : 2005-2016. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 14(2), 113–134.

Patil, Y., & Kalekar, S. (2014.). CIPP MODEL FOR SCHOOL EVALUATION Mr. Yogesh Patil, Mr. Sunil Kalekar Adhyapak Mahavidyalaya, Aranyeshwar, Pune 9, 2, 2615–2619.

Robinson, B. (2002). CIPP Approach to Evaluation COLLIT Project: A background Note from Bernadette Robinson. In Collit.

Science, A. (2016). European Journal of English Language Teaching EVALUATION OF ENGLISH AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE PROGRAM - USING CIPP ( CONTEXT , INPUT , PROCESS AND PRODUCT ) MODEL, 114–137.

Shabiralyani, G., Hasan, K. S., Hamad, N., & Iqbal, N. (2015). Impact of Visual Aids in Enhancing the Learning Process Case Research: District Dera Ghazi Khan. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(19), 226–233.

Stufflebeam, D. L. (1983). The CIPP Model for Program Evaluation. In M. and S. D. L. Madaus, F.F., Scrivem (Ed.), Evaluation Models: Viewpoints on Educational and Human Services Education (pp. 117–141). Boston, MA: Kluwer-Nijhoff Publishing.

Stufflebeam, D. L. and A. J. S. (1985). Systematic Evaluation. Boston: Kluwe-Nijhoff.

Stufflebeam, D. L. and G. Z. (2017). The CIPP Evaluation Model: How to Evaluate for Improvement and Accountability. New York: Guilford Publication.

Wang, Z. (2014). Developing Accuracy and Fluency in Spoken English of Chinese EFL Learners, 7(2), 110–118. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v7n2p110

Wei, H., Kuo, L., Lin, H., & Yang, H. (2012). Evaluating Innovation by CIPP Model. Recent Advances in Communications, Circuits and Technological Innovation, (116), 137–142.

Willekens, F. (2012). How to create a syllabus.

Worthern, B. R., S. J. R. & F. J. L. (1997). Program Evaluation Alternative Approaches and Practical Guidelines. New York: Longman, Inc.

Young, D. J. (Ed.). (1999). Affect in foreign language and second language learning : a practical guide to creating a low-anxiety classroom atmosphere. Boston: McGraw Hill.