INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR

Reformulating the Paradigm of Technical and Vocational Education

1757

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION MODEL OF
TECHNOLOGY AND VOCATIONAL EDUCATION (TVE):
OPTIMIZING THE ROLE OF TVE IN IMPROVING
CERTIFIED TEACHERS

Eddy Sutadji
State University of Malang

Abstract
Teachers are professional educators with the primary task of educating, teaching,
guiding, directing, training, assessing, and evaluating students. In improving the
quality of learning, there are three important things: (1) teachers have a central role because
it is always associated with learning activities, (2) the evaluation function is not only to know
the performance of students, but also to repair and improve the school institutions, and (3)
the principles of learning assessment are comprehensive and effective. On the other
hand, to improve professionalism, teachers must go through the PPG Program since the
PPG program goals are to produce teacher candidates who have the ability to achieve national
education goals. However, the evaluation is one determinant variable to
maintain and still ensure the existence of educational institutions (schools), including
TVE teachers, that have not yet had a clarity type of the used evaluation model. There are
many models of the TVE performance evaluation such as (1) School Effectiveness Model,
(2) School Quality Model, (3) Determinant of Education Quality Model , (4) Malcolm
Baldrige Model, (5) The Education Quality Benchmark System Model (EQBS), (6) The
Quality Performance System Model (QPSM), (7) Constructivist Models , (8)
Confirmative Evaluation Model, and (9) Program Evaluation Models. Stakeholders can
choose among those as the reference. Therefore, the models concept of TVE performance
evaluation to optimize the role of TVE in order to improve the quality of teachers who have
been certified needs to be developed to encourage teachers to continuously improve their
performance to be better.
Keywords: performance evaluation models, technology and vocational
education,improving the quality of teachers certified
Introduction
Challenges that must be considered in improving the school quality are: (1) measuring
quality, (2) increasing the relevance of education, (3) quality for everyone, (4) reforming the
education system, and (5) better school environment (UNESCO, 2005). The results of the World
Bank study conducted in 2000 to 50 countries showed that the progress of a country was
determined by four main factors: (1) innovation and creativity 45%, (2) networking 25%, (3)
technology 20%, and (4 ) natural resources, 10% (Jan, 2004). The three main factors put the
human resources as a strategic factor. It means that the major demands and needs for the future
are to develop human resources who have the ability to develop creativity and innovation, the
ability to build networks of cooperation, the ability to be creative and innovative to develop and
utilize technology, and also the ability to manage and develop their own natural resources.
To design the development of school quality and Technology Vocational Educational
(TVE), it should be based on the existing regulations and be accompanied by an innovative effort
to develop it. Bulletin of the National Education Association (NEA) on the issue of education
revealed the question "What makes a quality school". In 1989, NEA researchers worked to answer
the question by identifying the conditions required for a school which had the high competence
students. After surveying the field of education nationally, researchers found that a qualified
school was shown through a unit of the same characteristics, namely: (1) shared understanding
and commitment to high goals, (2) open communication and collaborative problem solving, (3)
INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR
Reformulating the Paradigm of Technical and Vocational Education

1758

continuous assessment for teaching and learning, (4) personal and professional learning, (5)
resources to support teaching and learning, and (6) curriculum and instruction (NEA, 2006).
In terms of management, qualified TVE educational institutions are those that fulfill
effectiveness, efficiency, and productivity criteria. Conditioning of learning activities through the
enlightenment and empowerment of the role of teachers and students can not be separated from
the policy of improving the quality of schools and the participation of stakeholders in education.
Development strategy of quality management according to Maguad (2003:3-5) showed that
implementing the integrated quality in the classroom contains: (a) leadership, (b) strategic quality
planning, (c) human resource utilization, (d) quality assurance of products and services, (e) quality
results, and (e) customer focus and satisfaction. Nirwan (1996:5) says that the way to implement
an integrated quality management (IQM) in educational institutions can use two approaches: (1)
an academic approach where the emphasis is focused more on learning outcomes as a result of the
implementation of IQM, and (2) strategic approach where the global strategic perspective is taken,
so that it covered the implementation of IQM between the academic and administrative areas.
Gaspersz (2005:225) said that quality management development strategy includes three
parts, namely: (a) the elements of quality management, (b) the principles and concepts of quality
management, and (c) process improvement strategy. The problem is the implementation of the
PPG program that has been progressing and has not been accompanied by an evaluation model
that can be used, including PPG integrated program.
Assessment Evaluation of Technology and Vocational Education Quality
Concept Evaluation
Gardner in Stark (1994:8) provides definitions of educational evaluation which are (1)
evaluation as professional judgment or decision, (2) evaluation of the measurement, (3) evaluation
as an assessment of the suitability of the accomplishments or outcomes and objectives, (4)
decision oriented evaluation, and (5) the evaluation objectives.
U.S. Department of Education (2003) gives the limitation that the evaluation has three
purposes, (1) provides diagnostic information (formative evaluation), (2) assesses student
progress (summative evaluation), and (3) assesses the overall accomplishment of something that
actually exist (such as classes, program, state). Elder (2006) explained that the types of evaluation
are: (1) formative, which has the function of "improve", periodic and timely, focusing on program
activities and outputs, and leading to early recommendations for program improvement, and (2)
summative, function to "prove", were committed worthwhile resources, focus on outcomes and
impact, and measures based on the value of program impact. Scriven in Fernandes (1984)
mentioned that the two basic functions of formative evaluation are to improve and to develop a
program, while the function of summative evaluation is used for responsibility, for choosing and
for certification, while the standard of evaluation has four criteria, namely (1 ) utility or utilities,
(2) accuracy or timeliness, (3) feasibility or feasibility, and (4) propriety or truth.
In the hierarchy, before an evaluation, there is the assessment. In education, learning and
assessment activities are like two similar sides of the coin (currency) (Glazer, in Asselin,
2003). Cunningham confirmed the Glazers opinion (1998:5) that the Standards for Teacher
Competence in Educational Assessment of Student assumtion are based on two: (1) student
assessment which is an integral part of a teacher's role, and (2) good teaching and good testing
going together. According to Asselin (2003) assessment is to gather information about students
'abilities, while the evaluation is used as information to make judgments about students'
abilities. Purpose and usefulness of educational assessment include planning, management,
education and follow-up process involving both individual, group or institution. According to
INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR
Reformulating the Paradigm of Technical and Vocational Education

1759

Thorndike and Hagen (1977) the purpose and usefulness of educational assessment can be
directed to the decisions regarding (1) teaching, (2) learning outcomes, (3) diagnosis and repair
business, (4) placement, (5) selection, ( 6) guidance and counseling, (7) curriculum, and (8)
institutional assessment.
The principles of effective assessment to improve the assessment and teaching by
Barrentine (in Asselin, 2003) are: (1) combining with higher order thinking skills, (2) embedding
skills in contect, (3) applying skills to real world situations; ( 4) recognizing individual students
learn in different way, at different rates, and bringing different background experience, (5) using
the powerful role of interest and purpose, and (6) using multiple source of evidence.

Quality Evaluation Models TVE
Developing an evaluation model for implementing quality in TVE institutions must go
through an analysis and evaluation of programs that use an approach system. The studies of
theoretical, empirical, and best practices related to quality systems and program evaluation were
analyzed with the concept of an approach system (Mizikaci, 2006). An analysis focused on the
approach system that is based on the model quality evaluation program for the implementation of
TVE. TVE quality evaluation contains elements of teachersneeds of assessment regarding the
components, quality indicators, and criteria used.
a. School Effectiveness Model
Developers of school quality evaluation model through effective school are Jaap Scheerens;
Mackenzie; Edmonds; Rutter; Sillin and Murray and Harris (2002). Glimpses of their concept of
effective schools vary greatly, but the real substance is relatively the same. Scheerens (1999:12)
states that effective schools have five important characteristics: (1) strong educational leadership,
(2) emphasis on the acquiring of basic skills), (3) an orderly and secure environment, (4 ) high
expectations of pupil attainment; and (5) frequent assessment of pupil progress. Mackenzie (in
Koster, 2001) identifies three dimensions of effective education which are leadership,
effectiveness and efficiency, as well as core and supplementary elements of each of these
dimensions.While Edmons mentioned that there are five characteristics of effective schools: (1)
leadership and the principal concern on the quality of teaching, (2) a deep understanding of
teaching, (3) a comfortable and orderly climate for ongoing learning activities, (4) the expectation
that all students will master at least a certain knowledge, and (5) assessment of students based on
the results of measurements of student learning outcomes. According to Rutter (in Glover, 2002)
that effective schools are: (1) a good school ethos, (2) a good classroom management, (3) high
teacher expectations, (4) teachers as positive role models, ( 5) the positive treatment of students,
(6) working conditions of teachers and good students, (7) the responsibility of students, and (8)
activities with staff and students. Ofsted (in Glover, 2002) says that the school improvement
initiatives include: (1) professional leadership, (2) determination of the shared vision, mission and
goals, (3) concentration on teaching and learning, (4) contents of the goal of
teachingcommunicated to students, (5) high expectations for self-esteem, (6) positive
reinforcement, (7) monitoring progress, (8) the rights and responsibilities of students, (8)
cooperation between home and school, and (9 ) organizational learning between teachers and
students.
Site DfEE (1999) describes four key factors to obtain the change: (1) strong leadership, (2)
effective management, (3) a clear plan, and (4) teachers who are committed to
improvement. Through personal experience and professional relationships, Polk (2006:1) has
identified ten basic characteristics of effective teachers: (1) the academic performance of very
INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR
Reformulating the Paradigm of Technical and Vocational Education

1760

good, (2) skills in communication, (3) creativity, (4) professionalism, (5) knowledge of education,
(6) assessment and evaluation of students as appropriate, (7) personal development in learning all
the time, (8) a good personality, (9) talent or knowledge, and (10) the ability to model the
concepts in the their knowledge. Furthermore, Colwell (in Polk, 2006) offers, based on the
findings of research, that effective teachers are assumed: (1) professional development is
continuously performed, (2) changes in school are the result of internal and external
organizational and personal development, (3) the teachers learn in a cycle demonstration, practice,
and feedback, and (4) the development must be integrated into the work.
Effective models of school evaluation are (1) suitable for the use to educational institutions
which have the complete standardization of raw learning, (2) clear, rigid, and comprehensive set
of quality indicators, (3) the observed variables that can be measured through existing indicators,
(4 ) the developed criteria quite holistic, (5) suitable for use in schools that use the system
components in the form of input - output, and (6) suitable for educational policy nuances
positivists such as the National Educational Standards (SNP), the National School-Based
International (SNBI), Featured School, International School, and School Acceleration Program.
b. School Quality Model
The originators of this concept are the William Glasser in 1992, and Aspin, Chapman and
Wilkinson 1994. In this model the pattern is very different from the approach taken with other
concepts in developing a quality culture. The reality on the ground shows that students have to
think about quality and have a good idea at the school in which every activity undertaken is
always considering the quality. Only, most of them look at the quality of the students in
psychomotor activities.
In this model the teacher is an effective manager as he/shet can manage the classroom to be
effective in many settings, but this model will not be effective if administered in different ways to
set the students because it makes an effective teacher having the most difficult job. Glasser
(1992:152) says that the building quality of the school is not only inexact, but also a human-
related education.
William Glasser mentions another concept known as "Control Theory". Glasser's control
theory concept revealed that the theory is far better than any of the existing theory, to explain why
and how a person acts. In his book that talks about Control Theory, published in 1986 (in William
Glasser Institute, 2005), Glasser's view shows that all students' choices are based on five basic and
universal needs. All they need are (1) survival, (2) love/belonging, (3) freedom, (4) fun, and (5)
power. On the other hand, Glasser says in his Choice Theory (1998) that 95% of all behavior
problems in the classroom are students attempting to fulfill their need of power. The most
Important is the need to be loved and belong since Glasser feels that having close relationship is
essential to meet any of the other needs. Thus, spake has listed the seven habits teachers should
have in the classroom (Seven Caring Habits): (1) supporting, (2) encouraging, (3) listening, (4)
accepting, (5) trusting, (6) respecting, and (7) negotiating differences, while he also lists Seven
Deadly Habits: (1) criticizing, (2) blaming, (3) complaining, (4) nagging, (5) threatening, (6)
punishing, and (7) bribing or rewarding to control (Wikipedia, education, 2005, William Glasser
Institute, 2005).
The application of this model in the field indicates that (1) the results are positive and have
real impact on improving the quality of schools, because of the collaborative between schools and
parents, (2) considering the multiple educational process, efforts can be done to improve the
quality of the school if the sense of identity, sense of belonging, a sense of crisis and sense of
community present in the parents and the community, (3) it is more humane, preferred the boss
INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR
Reformulating the Paradigm of Technical and Vocational Education

1761

lead management rather than management, (4) it is not too "set" and "supervise", (5) it is holistic,
(6) it is contextual, (7) it is not mechanistic, and (8) it puts together (collaboration) among all the
components in the system of schooling, ranging from school principals, teachers, students, and
administrative staff.
The implementation of this model has some limitations, such as: (1) to be the nation's
culture of discipline, hard work, honesty and beauty, and difficulties to apply the concept of
Glasser, (2) requires a very high level of awareness of the duties and responsibilities, and (3)
requires a sense of togetherness and a very high tolerance for others. It is difficult to fulfill
because of the very high individualistic nature of the student and the parents' ability.
c. Determinant of Quality Education Model
The initiator of this model is Hard Heneveld in 1994 (Jan, 2004). This concept uses five
criteria, such as: (1) supporting inputs (as well as strong parent and community support; effective
support from the education system, and dequate material support, (2) enable condition (as well as
effective leadership; acceptable teaching force , facility and outonomi, and high time in school,
(3) school climate (as weel as high expert time of the student; positive teacher attitude, order and
discipline, organized curriculum, rewards and incentives, and (4) teaching learning process (as
well fine as high learning, variety and teaching strategies, frequent home work, student
achievement and frequent feedback, and student out comes (as well as participation, academic
achievement, social skills, and economic support).
d. Malcolm Baldrige Model
The originator was Malcolm Baldrige in 1981 (Arcaro, 1995). He used seven categories of
quality criteria, namely: (1) leadership, (2) information and analysis, (3) strategic quality
planning, (4) human resource development and management, (5) management of process quality,
(6) quality and operational result, and (7) client focus and satisfaction.
This model has the advantage if implemented at the school level, namely: (1) Malcolm
Baldrige concept is more flexible to use, both for education and business, (2) prefer the process
than the product or result; very clear, rigid, and comprehensive in setting quality criteria, (3) the
observed variables can be measured through the existing criteria, and (4) the quality criteria
developed quite a holistic, contextual and not mechanistic.
e. The Education Quality Benchmark System (EQBS) Model
This model was designed by Snyder and Hocevar in 1995 and was developed in
Florida. This system (EQBS) is heavily influenced by the Malcolm Baldrige Award Criteria, New
York's Excelsor Education Quality Criteria, Florida's Sterling Criteria and Quality Criteria
System. The process of change described by the theoretical models and conceptual perspective
shows that the indicator is shown by the four stages of development resulting from: (1) the
authority of the bureaucracy, (2) awareness, (3) the transition process, and (4) changes to the
quality system. This system (EQBS) encourages member organizations to assume new
responsibilities for the overall success of the service and result.
f. The Quality Performance System Model (QPSM)
The initiator of this model were Snyder and Hocevar in 2004. The Quality Performance
System Model (QPSM) identified nine dimensions of quality of work within the system: (1)
quality work culture, (2) continual improvement, (3) visionary leadership, (4) strategic planning,
(5) systems thinking and action , (6) information systems, (7) human resource development, (8)
service quality, and (9) customer satisfaction and succes. In this model, the process of change
described by the theoretical models and conceptual perspective shows that the indicator is shown
INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR
Reformulating the Paradigm of Technical and Vocational Education

1762

by the four stages of development resulting from: (1) the authority of the bureaucracy, (2)
awareness, (3) the transition process, and (4) changes to the system quality, and the
transformation of the structure, policies and programs emphasize the exemplary patterns that are
willing to listen to a quality system that requires attention to the development of quality culture
from time to time.
g. Constructivist Model
The initiator of this model were Skerrit and Roche in 2004. Explanation of the experts on
this model as presented by Fink and Roithmary (2002) reveals that the success of an organization
is bound mainly to the "know-how management". Pearson (1999) argued that Ph.D. students need
experience in-depth study. The needs are the development of evaluation methods to help and
university supervisors understand what it takes students from their supervisors. In this model,
Skerrit and Roche filed a fourteen indicators of an effective-ineffective postgraduate supervisor
role. Fourteen effective indicators are: (1) extensive experience, (2) encouraging, (3) learning
facilitator, (4) a rich source, (5) honor student, (6) multidisciplinary, (7) directs the needs of
students, ( 8) is very organized, (9) positive self-image, (10) writer, (11) knowledge/broad
horizons, (12) intelligent, (13) to know what students want, and (14) support.
h. Confirmative Evaluation Model
The initiators of this model were the Joan and James L. Coanway Dessinger Moseley in
2004. The concept is designed to fill gaps and to provide appropriate referrals and practical grip
with high accuracy for the practitioners in education and training, evaluation, and HPT (human
performance tehcnology) or technology to improve human performance on the why, when, and
how a planning and implementation of training program evaluation confirmatif on. This concept
presents an overview of the field of evaluation as a whole (such as: formative, summative,
confirmative, and meta) model-Moseley Dessinger evaluation as a whole. Then, this model is
known as "Dessinger-Moseley Confirmative Evaluation Model". Finally, this book concentrates
on how the hardware and software design and implement evaluation confirmatif effectively and
efficiently.
i. Program Evaluation Models
There are many evaluation models (Stephen & William, 1994) developed by the experts
that can be used in evaluating the technological and vocational education programs
(TVE). Kirkpatrick, one of the training program evaluation in the field of human resource
development in addition offers an evaluation model that is named Kirkpatrick's training
evaluation model. The four steps of evaluation consist of:
Step 1: Reaction - How well did the learners like the learning process?
Step 2: Learning - What did they learn? (The extent to the which the Learners gain
knowledge and skills.
Step 3: Behavior - (What changes in job performance resulted from the learning process?
(Capability to perform the newly learned skills while on the job).
Step 4: Results - What are the tangible results of the learning process in terms of reduced
cost, improved quality, increased production, efficiency, etc.?
Kirkpatrick's concept is quite important as it makes an excellent planning, evaluating, and
troubling-shooting tool, especially if we make some slight improvements as shown below. In
addition, other models can be used as an option in the conducted evaluation of a program at the
institution TVE. Designated models included the:
INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR
Reformulating the Paradigm of Technical and Vocational Education

1763

Jack Phillips' Five Level ROI Model
Daniel Stufflebeam's CIPP Model (Context, Input, Process, Product)
Robert Stake's Responsive Evaluation Model
Robert Stake's Congruence-Contingency Model
Kaufman's Five Levels of Evaluation
Ciro (Context, Input, Reaction, Outcome)
PERT (Program Evaluation and Review Technique)
Alkins' UCLA Model
Michael Scriven's Goal-Free Evaluation Approach
Provus's discrepancy model
Eisner's Connoisseurship Evaluation Models
Illuminative Evaluation Model
(http://www.businessballs.com/ kirkpatrick learning evaluation model.htm)

Setting up the Role of TVE in Power Quality Educators
The low quality of school-related TVE scenario used by the government in the education
building, has been emphasis more on the approach to input - output. The Government believes
that by improving the quality of the input itself will improve the quality of the output. Teachers as
one of the input component is expected to have sufficient capability in carrying out the
teaching. Blanton, et all, (2006:2) defines high-quality teaching focus includes actions involving
teachers, mastery of the knowledge of a teacher, and teachers regarding creativity.
With these beliefs, policies and efforts taken by the government are the provision of
education facilities, provision of teachers, upgrade the teachers, and provide operating funds in
more adequate education. The fact is that the approach gives an overview of input - output at the
macro which does not guarantee improvement in order to improve school quality and school
quality level. This does not only happen in Indonesia but also occurs in other countries. The
results for primary schools in the United States and England show that school inputs have little
effect on student learning outcomes (Scheerens, 1992).
Approach to input - output at the macro level is less attention to the micro aspects of the
processes that occur at school. In other words, the education building, other than using a macro
approach which needs to consider the micro approach, is to provide a broader focus on school
institutions with regard to the overall condition of the school such as school climate and the
individuals involved in both school teachers, students, andprincipals and their role and their
relationship to one another occurs. In this regard, Brookover (1979) revealed that school inputs
are important but more important is how to utilize the inputs associated with the individuals in the
school.
When TVE want improved quality, there is the need for leadership from educational
professionals. Unready Raw input will cause the quality of the output to a minimum, so it can be
said to be productive. Therefore, the education system of products that do not focus on quality
will only be wasting the budget. School as a system has three main aspects that are closely
intertwined with the quality of schools, the teaching and learning, leadership and school
management and school culture (Zamroni, 2000:148). Policies and programs improve the quality
of teachers in implementing the TVE process of learning to touch the three aspects such as: (1)
aspects of ability, (2) aspects of the passion and dedication, and (3) aspects of welfare. Incomplete
policy, which does not include the three aspects are likely to experience failure.
INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR
Reformulating the Paradigm of Technical and Vocational Education

1764

Furthermore, Zamroni said that effective reforms in education requires the participation of
all stakeholders (stakeholders). Education should be viewed as an integrated system within the
community and can not be seen as a separate organization. The success of education reform is
determined by success in empowering teachers.
Concept of Indicators of School Quality (ISQ) developed by Utah State University in 2006
has seven indicators to assess the quality of TVE. Seven quality indicators are: (1) parent support,
(2) teacher excellence, (3) student commitment, (4) school leadership, (5) instructional quality, (6)
resource management, and (7) school safety, while School Quality Survey (SQS) was developed
by the U.S. Department of Education in 2001 had nine dimensions of quality schooling. Unity up
to the sixth dimension is focused on the Learning/Standards Implementation Design
Requirements, to improve the existing learning systems in schools, while the dimensions of the
seven to nine to improve school policies. The nine dimensions of quality schools among others
are : (1) standards-based learning (2) the quality student support, (3) professionalism and capacity
of the system, (4) coordinated team work, (5) responsiveness of the system, (6) focused and
sustained action, (7) involvement of parents, students, and teachers, (8) satisfaction of parents,
students, and teachers, and (9) safety and well-being.
On the other hand, the standard quality of schools (including TVE) by the Council on
Accreditation and School Improvement of the Southern Association of College and School
(2005:7) has ten standards. School quality standards are: Standard to 1: Values and Mission
(Beliefs and Mission). Here comunication school vision, values which is used to all parties, and
the mission is the reference in improving student and school performance. Standards to 2:
Procedures and Leadership (Governance and Leadership). Schools and school committees to
promote the ability of all stakeholders (stakeholders) to improve the quality of learning through
the provision of leadership, governance, and organization. To the standard 3: Curriculum
(Curriculum). Schools provide a curriculum that is based on the results of research on best
practices in other schools and based natural clear expectations about the learning activity learners
will be implemented. To the standard 4: Teaching (instruction). Schools implement teaching
strategies and providing services that can facilitate the implementation of learning for all
learners. Standard to 5: Assessment and Evaluation (Assessment and Evaluation).Schools
implement a comprehensive assessment system to monitor and evaluate the learning activities of
students and to improve the quality of curriculum and teaching activities. Standard 6: Resources
(Resources). Schools have the human resources, finance, physical plant, and materials to support
the vision, mission, and goals for the school. Standards to 7: Learning Support Services (Support
Services for Student Learning). The School has a comprehensive program in the field of guidance
counseling and other services that can support the development of the physical health of students.
Standard to 8: Communications and Stakeholder Relations Interwoven (Stakeholder
Communications and Relationships). Schools promote the establishment of communication and
rapport between the school with all stakeholders. Standards to 9: Community
(Citizenship). Schools help students develop an attitude of social responsibility, social, and
identity. And Standards to 10: Quality Improvement Process School Sustainable (Continuous
Process of School Improvement). Schools to build, implement, and monitor continuous quality
improvement system focused on student performance.
Conclusion
Exposure to the concept and study of models of evaluation of the quality of schools in the
TVE can be concluded that:
INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR
Reformulating the Paradigm of Technical and Vocational Education

1765

1. Wise educational decisions must be based on complete and accurate information.
Measurement and assessment of education as part of the evaluation activities of trying to
get a complete and accurate information are needed for decision-making education.
2. TVE quality revolution takes time, maintenance, change of attitude and training for
staff. Commitment is needed to success the implementation of quality requirements. Each
quality program always includes four components: (a) there is a commitment to change,
(b) understand very well the (school) today, (c) have a clear vision, and (d) has a plan for
implementing quality.
3. The vision is the guide of the team, and help everyone stay focused on and committed to
quality transformation. Quality Program has developed a shared vision among
administrators, staff, teachers, students, parents, government, and society."Vision of
quality: How Evaluators Define, Understand and Represent Program Quality".
4. Tools and techniques are needed to develop a quality culture in schools. It is required to
successfully build the foundations of a solid quality. Private investment is the key to
success factors of quality programs.
5. Optimizing the role of TVE to increase teachers already certified can be done through the
implementation of quality evaluation model TVE.

References:
Arcaro, S.J. 1995. Quality in Education: An Implementation Handbook. New York: Library
Student.
Aspin, N.D., Chapman. D.J., & Wilkinson. H.V. 1994. Quality Schooling: A Pragmatic Approach
Some Current Problems, Topics and Issues. London: Cassell.
Asselin, M. 2003. Assessment Issues and Recommendations. Teacher Librarian. Vol. 30 (5).
Taken on October 3, 2006, from http://www.proquest.com/pqdweb.html
Blanton, P.L., Sindelar. T.P., & Correa. I.V. 2006. Models and Measures of Beginning Teacher
Quality. The Journal of Special Education. Vol.40 (2) pg. 115. Taken on October 19, 2006,
from http://www.proquest.com/pqdweb.html
Cunningham, G.K. 1998. Assessment in the Classroom: Constructing and Interpreting Test.
London: Palmer Press.
Dessinger, J.C. & Moseley, J.L. 2004. Confirmative Evaluation: Practical Strategies for Valuing
Continuous Improvement. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
Fernandes, H.J.X. 1984. Evaluation of Educational Programs. New York: National Educational
Planning. Evaluation and Curriculum Development.
Gaspersz, V. 2005. Total Quality Management. New York: Scholastic Press.
Glasser, W. 1992. The Quality School: Managing Students without Coercion (2rd ed.) New York:
Harper Coolins Publishe. Taken on March 13, 2006, from http://www.WikEd.html
Glover, D., & Sue, L. 2002. Improving learning: Professional practice in secondary
schools. (Translation Willie Koen). Jakarta: PT. Scholastic.
http://www.businessballs.com/kirkpatricklearningevaluationmodel.htm
(taken at Monday, April 2, 2012)
Jan, LLL. 2004. Improving the Quality of Primary and Secondary Outcomes
in Supporting the Establishment of a Strong College.
Maguad, A.B. 2003. Using Total Quality to Achieve Continuous Improvement in the
Classroom. Education. Vol.124. Iss. 2: pg. 412. Taken on September 13, 2006, from
http://www.proquest.com/pqdweb.html
INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR
Reformulating the Paradigm of Technical and Vocational Education

1766

Mizikaci, F. 2006. A Systems Approach to Program Evaluation Model for Quality in Higher
Education. Quality Assurance in Education. Vol.14. Iss. 1. Taken on July 13, 2006, from
http://www.proquest.com/pqdweb.html
National Science Education Standards. 1996. Center for Science, Mathematics, and Engineering
Education. (http://www.nses.org/). Taken on July 22, 2006, from
http://www.proquest.com/pqdweb.html
National Education Association. 2006. School Quality: Issues in Education.
(http://www.nea.org/jobs/). Taken on November 13, 2006, from
http://www.proquest.com/pqdweb.html
Polk, A.J. 2006. Traits of Effective Teachers. Arts Education Policy Review. Vol. 107
(4) pg. 23. Taken on August 25, 2006, from http://www.proquest.com/pqdweb.html
Rilley, A.K., and Nuttal, L.D. (Eds.) 1994. Measuring Quality: Education Indicators. Washington
DC: The Falmer Press.
SACSCASI Accreditation Standards. 2005. Council on Accreditation and School
Improvement. Accreditation Standards for American-International Schools. Taken on
September 13, 2006, from http://www.proquest.com/pqdweb.html
Scheerens, J. 1999. School Effectiveness in Developed and Developing Countries: A Review of the
Research Evidence. University of Twente/The World Bank.
Taken on March 13, 2007, from http://www.proquest.com/pqdweb.html
Skerritt, O.Z., & Val Roche. 2004. A Constructivist Model for Evaluating Postgraduate
Supervision: A Case Study. Quality Assurance in Education. Vol. 12 (2). Taken on August
5, 2006, from http://www.proquest.com/pqdweb.html
Snyder, R. & Hocevar, A.M. 1996. Conceptual Models, Choices, and Benchmarks for Building
Quality Work Cultures. National Association of Secondary School Principal. Vol.80
(576). Taken on September 3, 2006, from http://www.proquest.com/pqdweb.html
Standards for Educational Accountability Systems. 2002. New Orleans: The Cresst
Line. Newsletter of the National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student
Testing.
Stark, S.J., & Thomas, A. 1994. Assessment and Program Evaluation. Ashe Reader Series: Simon
& Schutster Custom Publishing.
Stephen, I., & William, B.M. 1984. Handbook in Research and Evaluation: For Education and
the Behavioral Sciences. (2rd ed.) California: Edits Publishers.
Snyder, R. & Hocevar, A.M. 1996. Conceptual Models, Choices, and Benchmarks for Building
Quality Work Cultures. National Association of Secondary School Principal. Vol. 80 (576).
Taken on Sept 10, 2006, from http://www.proquest.com/pqdweb.html
Taylor, M.J., West, R.P., & Smith, T.G. 2006. The Indicators of School Quality (ISQ).Survey
Manual. Center for the School of the Future. Utah State University.
Thorndike, R.M., Cuningham, G.K., Thorndike, R.L., & Hagen, E.P. 1991. Measurement and
Evaluation in Psychology and Education. New York, NY: Macmillan Publising
Company.
Unesco. 2005a. Improve the Quality of Education. Education: 60 year of education.Taken on May
10, 2006, from http://www.proquest.com/pqdweb.html
Unesco. 2005b. UNESCO Will Celebrate Its 60th Anniversary During 60 Weeks. from 5
September 2005-4 November 2006. Taken on May 10, 2006, from
http://www.proquest.com/pqdweb.html
U. S. Department of Education. 2001. School Quality Survey: Guide for Analysis,
Interpretation, and Use. Taken on August 27, 2006, from
http://www.proquest.com/pqdweb.html
INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR
Reformulating the Paradigm of Technical and Vocational Education

1767

Koster, W. 2001. Comparative Analysis Between Effective School with Ineffective
Schools. Information Portal Education in Indonesia. Jakata: Center for Education
Statistics. Balitbang - Ministry of Education.
Zamroni. 2000. Educational Paradigm of the Future. London: BIGRAF Publishing.