Evaluasi Pengembangan KTSP: Suatu Kajian Konseptual

Said Hamid Hasan

Abstract


Evaluasi  kurikulum KTSP  diarahkan pada beberapa sasaran, diantaranya  tingkat pemahaman ide dan prinsip pengembangan KTSP;  keberhasilan pengembangan dokumen  KTSP dan keberhasilan  KTSP. Fokus evaluasi diarahkan pada ide,pengembangan dokumen, pelaksanaan KTSP dan hasil belajar.Untuk  menentukan tingkat keberhasilan   pengembangan KTSP secara komprehensif  digunakan  dua dimensi , yaitu dimensi nilai dan dimensi arti. Evaluasi dimensi nilai berkaitan dengan keunggulan  intrinsik KTSP tanpa mempersoalkan lingkungan dimana  KTSP dilaksanakan, sedangkan dimensi arti  berkaitan dengan nilai pengaruh KTSP terhadap lingkungan.

Keywords


Evaluasi; dimensi arti; dimensi nilai.

References


Botcheva, L., White, C.R., dan Huffman, L.C. (2002). Learning Culture and Outcomes Measure-ment Practice in Community Agencies. The American Journal of Evaluation, 23, 4: 421-434

Brecher, C., Silver, D., Searcy, C. and Weitzman, B.C. (2005). Following the Money: Using Expenditure Analysis as an Evaluation Tool. American Journal of Evaluation, 26, 2: 166-188

Burke, J. (Ed.) (1995). Competency Based Education and Training. London: The Falmer Press.

Carr, J.F. dan Harris, D.E. (2001). Suceeding with Standards: Linking Curriculum, Assessment, and Action Planning. Alexandria, VA: Asso-ciation for Supervision and Curriculum De-velopment.

Chen, Huey-Tsyth (2005). Practical Evaluation: Assessing and Improving Planning, Implementa-tion, and Effectiveness. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications

Cinterfor (2001). Competen-cy-based Curriculum Design. Available at http://www.ilo.org, tanggal 24 Januari 2002.

Conley, D. (1999). Statewide Strategies for Implemen-ting Competency-based Admissions Standards. Denver: State Higher Education Executive Officers.

Constantino, T.E. dan Greene, J.C. (2003). Reflections on the Use of Narrative in Evaluation. The American Journal of Evaluation, 24, 1: 35-50

Crew, Jr. R.E. dan Anderson, M.R. (2003). Accountability and Performance in Charter Schools in Florida: A Theory-Based Evaluation. The American Journal of Evaluation, 24, 2: 189-212

Cronholm, S dan Goldkuhl, G. (2003). Strategies for Information Systems Evaluation – Six Generic Types. Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation, Vol. 6, 2: 65-74. Academic Conferences Limited. Availabe at www.ejise.com

Daugherty, R. (1995). National Curriculum Assessment: Review of Policy 1987 – 1994. London: The Palmer Press

Davidson, E.J. (2005). Evaluation Methodology Basics: The Nuts and Bolts of Sound Evaluation. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications

De Stefano,L. (1992). Evaluating Effectiveness: a Comparison of Federal Expectations and Local Capabilities for Evaluation Among Federally Funded Model Demonstration Evaluans. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14, 2: 175-180.

Ellison, C.M. (2004). Talent Development Professi-onal Development Evaluation Model: A Paradigm Shift, dalam Co-Constructing a Contextually Responsive Evaluation Framework: The Talent Development Model of School Reform (Eds. Thomas, V.G. dan Stevens, F.I.). New Direction for Eva-luation., Number 101

Feller, I. (2002). Performance Measurement Redux. The American Journal of Evaluation, 23, 4: 435-452

Gall, M.D. (1981). Handbook for evaluating and selecting curriculum material. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.

Guba,E.G. dan Lincoln,Y.S. (1981). Effective evaluation: Improving the usefulness of evaluation results through responsive and naturalistic approach. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers

Harbour,J.L. (1997). The Basics of Performance Measurement. New York: Quality Resources.

Longstreet, W.S. dan H.G. Shane (1993). Curri-culum for a new millenium. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Madaus, G.F., Scriven, M.S. dan Stufflebeam, D.L. (Eds)(1983). Evaluation Models: Viewpoints on Educational and Human Services Evaluation. Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff Publishing.

McCormick, R. dan James, M. (1983). Curriculum Evaluation in Schools. London: Croom Helm

McDavid, J.C. dan Hawthorn, L.R.L. (2006). Evaluan Evaluation and Performance Measurement: an Introduction to Practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications

McLaughlin, M.W. dan Phillips, D.C. (1991). Evaluation and Education: at Quarter Century. Chicago, Illinois: National Society for the Study of Education.

McNeil, J.D. (1977), Curriculum: a compre-hensive introduction. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.

Melrose, M. (1996). Encouraging Transac-tional and Critical Models of Curriculum Evaluation. Different Approaches: Theory and Practice in Higher Education. Proceedings HERDSA Conference 1996. Perth, Western Australia, 8-12 July. Available at: http://www.herdsa.org.au/confs/1996/melrose.html

Neuber, K.A. dan kawan-kawan (1980). Needs Assessment: A Model for Community Planning. Sage Human Services Guides, Volume 14. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications

Print, M. (1989). Curriculum development and design. Wellington: Allen & Unwin.

Picciotto, R. (2003). Inter-national Trends and Development Evaluation: The Need for Ideas. The American Journal of Evaluation, 24, 2: 227-234

Raggart,P. dan G. Weiner (1985). Curriculum and assessment: some policy issues. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Rossi,P.H. dan H.E. Freeman (1990). Evaluation: a Systematic Approach. Newbury Park: Sage Publications

Sanders, J.R. (chair)(1994), The Evaluan Evaluation Standards, 2nd Ed., Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications

Scriven, M. (1991). Evaluation Thesaurus, 4th Ed., Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications

Silverman, D. (1993). Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analysing Talk, Text and Interaction. London: Sage Publications

Skilbeck, M. (Ed.)(1984). Reading in school-based curriculum development. London: Harper and Row.

Storange, J.H. dan V.M.Helm (1992). A Perfomance Evaluation System for Professional Support Personnel. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14, 2: 175-180.

Supovitz, J.A. dan Taylor, B.S. (2005). Systemic Education Evaluation: Evaluating the Impact of Sustemwide Reform in Education. American Journal of Evaluation, 26, 2: 204-230.

Tanner, D. dan L.N. Tanner (1980). Curriculum development. Theory into practice. New York: Macmillan Publishing House.

Torres, R.T., Preskill, H.S., dan Piontek, M.E. (1996). Evaluation Strategies for Commu-nicating and Reporting: Enhancing Learning in Organi-zations. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications

Tucker, M.S. dan J.B. Codding (1998). Standards for Our Schools: How to Set Them, Measure Them, and Reach Them. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Warren, J.R., Jenkins, K.N. dan Kulick, R.B. (2006). High School Exit Examinations and State-Level Completion and GED Rates, 1975 Through 2002. Edu-cational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 28, 2: 131-152

Warwick, D. (1975). Curriculum structure and design. London: University of London Press.

Worthen, B.R. dan Sanders, J.R. (1987). Educational Evaluation: Alternative Approaches and Prac-tical Guidelines. New York & London: Longman

Zais, R.S. (1976) Curriculum: principles and foundations. New York: Harper and Row Publishers.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.17509/jik.v6i2.35697

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2009 Said Hamid Hasan

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

Inovasi Kurikulum
Published by Himpunan Pengembang Kurikulum Indonesia (HIPKIN)
in collaboration with Curriculum Development Study Program
Faculty of Education - Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia
Gedung FIP UPI Lt. 9 Jl. Dr. Setiabudhi Bandung 40154

Indexed By:

SINTA   GARUDA   Crossref      DOAJ DIMENSIONS BASE   ROAD

Google Scholar

Google Scholar p. ISSN 1829-6750 | Google Scholar e. ISSN 2798-1363