Article Sidebar

Submitted
November 25, 2022
Accepted
March 26, 2023
Published
March 26, 2023
Download
pdf
Statistic
Read Counter : 175 Download : 248

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

The achievement coaching program aims to introduce, grow, guide, and develop a personality basis that is balanced, intact, and in harmony to provide knowledge and skills according to talent. Sports teams need the right coaching program to achieve maximum performance. This study aimed to identify, reveal, and evaluate the performance development of the IBL Satya Wacana Salatiga team. The evaluation includes context, input, process, and product. The design used in this research is program evaluation, which uses a quantitative and qualitative approach. In comparison, the model used in this study is the CIPP (Context, Input, Process, Product) model. The subjects in this study are all the administrators, coaches, and athletes of the IBL Satya Wacana Salatiga basketball team. They were directly involved in the achievement coaching program. Data collection techniques were collected using a questionnaire, observation, documentation, and interviews. The data analysis technique study uses quantitative descriptive and the Mile and Huberman interactive analysis model. The results and conclusion of the overall evaluation using the CIPP model for the Satya Wacana Salatiga (SWS) basketball team explained that the achievement coaching program implemented was good. However, there were still some areas for improvement in the SWS basketball team achievement coaching program, starting from facilities and infrastructure, funding, and awards. Evaluation in the coaching process continues to improve from time to time.

Keywords

Basketball CIPP Evaluation program

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2023 Cahyo Wibowo, Dennys Christovel Dese

Creative Commons License

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

 Authors who publish in this journal agree with the following terms:
  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 (CC BY-SA)  that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
  4. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Author Biography

Cahyo Wibowo, Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana

Pendidikan Jasmani, Kesehatan, dan Olahraga

How to Cite
Wibowo, C., & Dennys Christovel Dese. (2023). Evaluation of the IBL Satya Wacana Salatiga Team Achievement Development Program: Evaluation of the IBL Satya Wacana Salatiga Team Achievement Development Program. Kinestetik : Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Jasmani, 7(1), 21–30. https://doi.org/10.33369/jk.v7i1.24990
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)

References

  1. Ashghali F, M., Ghaffari, F., Hoseini-Esfidarjani, S.-S., Hadian, Z., Qomi, R., & Dargahi, H. (2018). Neonatal Intensive Care Nursing Curriculum Challenges based on Context, Input, Process, and Product Evaluation Model: A Qualitative Study. Iranian Journal of Nursing and Midwifery Research, 23(2), 111–118. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijnmr.IJNMR_3_17
  2. Aziz, S., Mahmood, M., & Rehman, Z. (2018). Article Journal of Education and Educational Development Implementation of CIPP Model for Quality Evaluation at School Level: A Case Study CIPP Model for Quality Evaluation (Vol. 5, Issue 1).
  3. Fridrich, A., Jenny, G. J., & Bauer, G. F. (2015). The Context, Process, and Outcome Evaluation Model for Organizational Health Interventions. BioMed Research International, 2015, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/414832
  4. Haaker, J., Diaz-Mataix, L., Guillazo-Blanch, G., Stark, S. A., Kern, L., LeDoux, J. E., & Olsson, A. (2021). Observation of others’ threat reactions recovers memories previously shaped by firsthand experiences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(30). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2101290118
  5. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Ilgen, D. R. (2006). Enhancing the Effectiveness of Work Groups and Teams. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7(3), 77–124. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2006.00030.x
  6. Krist, A. H., Tong, S. T., Aycock, R. A., & Longo, D. R. (2017). Engaging Patients in Decision-Making and Behavior Change to Promote Prevention. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 240, 284–302.
  7. Lee, S. young, Shin, J.-S., & Lee, S.-H. (2019a). How to execute Context, Input, Process, and Product evaluation model in medical health education. Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions, 16, 40. https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2019.16.40
  8. Lee, S. young, Shin, J.-S., & Lee, S.-H. (2019b). How to execute Context, Input, Process, and Product evaluation model in medical health education. Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions, 16, 40. https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2019.16.40
  9. Limbani, F., Goudge, J., Joshi, R., Maar, M. A., Miranda, J. J., Oldenburg, B., Parker, G., Pesantes, M. A., Riddell, M. A., Salam, A., Trieu, K., Thrift, A. G., van Olmen, J., Vedanthan, R., Webster, R., Yeates, K., & Webster, J. (2019). Process evaluation in the field: global learnings from seven implementation research hypertension projects in low-and middle-income countries. BMC Public Health, 19(1), 953. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-7261-8
  10. Linzalone, R., & Schiuma, G. (2015). A review of program and project evaluation models. Measuring Business Excellence, 19(3), 90–99. https://doi.org/10.1108/MBE-04-2015-0024
  11. Morse, J. M., Barrett, M., Mayan, M., Olson, K., & Spiers, J. (2002). Verification Strategies for Establishing Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2), 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690200100202
  12. Oliveira, L., Mesquita, A., Sequeira, A., Oliveira, A., & Silva, P. (2021). Context, Input and Process as Critical Elements for Successful Emergency Remote Learning (pp. 81–91). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72660-7_9
  13. Rooholamini, A., Amini, M., Bazrafkan, L., Dehghani, M. R., Esmaeilzadeh, Z., Nabeiei, P., Rezaee, R., & Kojuri, J. (2017). Program evaluation of an Integrated Basic Science Medical Curriculum in Shiraz Medical School, Using CIPP Evaluation Model. Journal of Advances in Medical Education & Professionalism, 5(3), 148–154.
  14. Sopha, S., & Nanni, A. (2019). The CIPP Model : Applications in Language Program Evaluation. The Journal of AsiaTEFL, 16(4), 1360–1367. https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2019.16.4.19.1360
  15. Stufflebeam, D. L. (n.d.). The CIPP Model for Evaluation. In Evaluation Models (pp. 279–317). Kluwer Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47559-6_16
  16. Sutton, J., & Austin, Z. (2015). Qualitative Research: Data Collection, Analysis, and Management. The Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy, 68(3). https://doi.org/10.4212/cjhp.v68i3.145
  17. Umam, K. A., & Saripah, I. (2018). Using the Context, Input, Process and Product (CIPP) Model in the Evaluation of Training Programs. International Journal of Pedagogy and Teacher Education, 2, 19. https://doi.org/10.20961/ijpte.v2i0.26086
  18. Van Mierlo, H., & van Hooft, E. A. J. (2020). Team Achievement Goals and Sports Team Performance. Small Group Research, 51(5), 581–615. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496420913119
  19. Yarmohammadian, M. H., & Mohebbi, N. (2015). Review evaluation indicators of health information technology course of master’s degree in medical sciences universities’ based on CIPP Model. Journal of Education and Health Promotion, 4, 28. https://doi.org/10.4103/2277-9531.154122
  20. Zhang, G., Zeller, N., Griffith, R., Metcalf, D., Williams, J., Shea, C., & Misulis, K. (2011). 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 Introduction and Review of Literature. In Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement (Vol. 15, Issue 4).
  21. Zhou, Y., & Guo, H. (2018). Research on Methods of Product Evaluation Based on User Experience. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Industrial and Business Engineering, 282–287. https://doi.org/10.1145/3288155.3290584
  22. Zuber, C., Schmid, M. J., & Conzelmann, A. (2020). Achievement-Motivated Behavior in Individual Sports: Evidence for the Construct and Criterion Validity of the AMBIS-I Coach-Rating Scale. Journal of Sports Science & Medicine, 19(1), 10–19.