Guili Zhang, Nancy Zeller, Robin Griffith,
Debbie Metcalf, Jennifer Williams, Christine Shea, and Katherine Misulis
published a study entitled “Using the Context, Input, Process, and Product
Evaluation Model (CIPP) as a Comprehensive Framework to Guide the Planning,
Implementation, and Assessment of Service-learning Programs” in 2011. In this
study, CIPP is recommended as a framework to systematically guide the
conception, design, implementation, and assessment of service-learning
projects, and provide feedback and judgment of the project’s effectiveness for
continuous improvement. Specifically, the study explored the CIPP evaluation
model’s theoretical roots and applications, delineated its four components,
analyzes each component’s role in a service-learning project’s success and
discusses how the model effectively addressed Service-Learning Standards for
Quality Practice.

On the use of CIPP model for studies about
service-learning in educational settings, the authors asserted that studies
such as this are very complicated because service-learning projects often
involve multiple stakeholders and require careful attention in every step of
the study. According to the authors, no evaluation model appeared to be widely
adopted by faculty members to guide service-learning projects up to the date of
the publication (2011). Therefore, the authors, postulated that Stufflebeam’s
(2003) CIPP model can serve as a guiding framework for service-learning
projects.

Belonging to the improvement/accountability
category, out of the five (pseudo-evaluations, quasi-evaluation studies, social
agenda and advocacy, and eclectic evaluation), CIPP model has emerged as the
best approach when compared with professional standards for project evaluation,
and after being rated by their utility, feasibility, propriety, and accuracy.
Moreover, it is one of the most widely applied evaluation models. A survey by
American Society for Training and Development members found that the CIPP model
was preferred over other evaluation models (Galvin, 1983).

In a more specific study, Haung-ju Lin and
Nay-chingTyan presented their study entitled “Using CIPP model to evaluate
‘NTUE 2012 Nepal Snowland school’ service-learning project” in the 4th
Asia-Pacific Regional Conference on Service-Learning in 2013. Their study aimed
to use the CIPP model to evaluate the context, input, process, and product of
the said project which was an overseas service learning project where four
professors from four universities taught Snowland School students and teachers.
The project aimed to create NTUE students overseas job market, enhance the
Department of Education highlights, promote the international education in
Taiwan and enhance the pre- and in-service teacher’s affective domain. In
conclusion, the study ascertained that creating overseas job market for NTUE
students was needed. On the other hand, their teaching goals were achieved as
well, even with the cultural differences encountered.

Another study by Chen (2009) used CIPP
evaluation model in evaluating 20 English training courses offered in the
Applied English Department (AED) of an Institute, given the pseudonym W.G., in
southern Taiwan. The purpose of the research was to attempt an evaluation of
the said English training courses which were designed for and taken by students
who hoped, mainly, to become children’s English language teachers. Through four
key components, namely, “course aims and objectives”, “course
contents and materials”, “course conduct and teaching-learning
process” and “assessment and student performance” the courses
were examined.

Results showed that the CIPP evaluation model
has several aspects to commend the AED which had many positive aspects, all of
which could be built on and added to as the results of the data suggested.

Out of the eight models that Yahaya etal. (2001)
considered in assessing research methods for the effectiveness of the Living
Skills program, the authors chose the CIPP model because it could be used in
assessing a method’s effectiveness before, during and after the implementation
to a specific population. Additionally, the authors asserted that context is
very important when considering the results of the study because the
environment is the location of the changes that will occur in the study. More
specifically, the aspects that the authors considered included the
participants’ background, principal’s role, the effectiveness of the school,
financial status, learning equipment and facilities, the effectiveness of the
course and the way teachers handle teaching and learning in classroom.

To answer the call of educators who are seeking
ways of copying emerging technology, Wei et al conducted a study to create an
evaluating model to measure innovation of the educational reform in a High
School Emerging Technology Curriculum in Taiwan. The CIPP model served as a
foundation for both formative and summative evaluations wherein the study
suggests that innovation should be supported during the process but not only
the end. The study further concluded that according to the formative evaluation
results from context, input, process, and product stages, stock holders such as
administrator, teacher, student, and parent could provide better effort to
maintain innovation. Additionally, there is a need to find a systematic evaluation
for innovation of curriculum reform for better support in science education
reform.