1. Pembentangan oleh:
KU MAHANI BT KU MAT DESA
Pensyarah:
Dr. Jamil Ahmad
1

2. Journel of Construction Education-Summer 1998, vol 3, No. 2, pp64-66
 The Discrepancy Evaluation Model (DEM), developed in 1969 by
Malcom Provus to provides information for programme assessment and
programme improvement.
 What is the definition of evaluation?
 He defined evaluation as the process of agreeing upon program
standards, determining whether a discrepancy exists between some
aspect of the program and standards governing that aspect of the
program, and using discrepancy information to identify weaknesses of
the program.
 Under the DEM evaluation is defined as the comparison of an
ACTUAL PERFORMANCE to a DESIRE STANDARD
2

3.  What is the purpose of evaluation?
His stated the purpose of evaluation is to determine whether to
improve, maintain or terminate a program (Gredler, 1996).
 His model is primarily a problem-solving set of procedures that
seeks to identify weaknesses (according to selected standards)
and to take corrective actions with termination as the option of
last resort
.
 With this model, the process of evaluation involves moving
through stages and content categories is such a way as to
facilitate a comparison of program performance with
standards,while at the same time identifying standards to be
used for future comparisons.
3

4.  The Provus method identifies four specific stages of
all programs.
The are:
 Program Definition Stage
 Program Installation Stage
 Program Process Stage
 Program Product Stage
Stage 1:
Program Definition – where the purpose of the evaluation is to assess
the program design by first defining the necessary inputs, processes,
and outputs, and then, by evaluating the comprehensiveness and
internal consistency of the design. Evaluation Stage 1 asks the question,
“Is the program adequately defined”?
4

5. Stage 2:
Program Installation – where the purpose of the evaluation is to assess
the degree of program installation against Stage 1 program standards.
Stage 2 asks, “Is the program installed as defined in Stage 1”?
Stage 3:
Program Process – where the purpose of the evaluation is to assess the
relationship between the variables to be changed and the process used
to effect the change. Stage 3 asks, “Are the resources and techniques
being used congruent with the goals of the program?
Stage 4:
Program Product – where the purpose of the evaluation is to assess
whether the design of the program achieved its major objectives. Finally,
in Stage IV the question is asked, “Are the program objectives achieved
in the implementation”?
Stage 5:
Program Comparison
5

6. Provus Terminology Defined
The following definitions will be useful in understanding the evaluation
which follows:
 Enabling Objectives
– intervening behaviors/tasks which students must complete
as a necessary basis for terminal outcomes.
Terminal Outcomes
– the behaviors the clients are expected to demonstrate upon
completion of the program.
Design Criteria
– contains a comprehensive list of program elements (input,
process,output) that become the standard of performance in
Stage 1.
6

7.  Manakala Journel of Extansion: September/Oktober, 1998 (pg 10).
“ The Provus Discrepancy Model provide a basis for evaluating programme. Provus
considers discrepancies to be the essential clue in program evaluation. Discrepancies
point out differences that exist between what program planners think is happening in the
program and what’s actually happening. Provus recommends that when discrepencies
occur, either program performance or program design standards be changed”
 Three important basis phrases in the Provus Model.
 Discrepancy : mean differences
 Program performances : what Extansion refers to as program
implementation, result, and/or accomplishment
 Program design standard : means objectives.
 The Discrepancy Evaluation Model can be visualised as an ongoing cycle, as shown in
Figure 1.
7

8. The Discrepancy Evaluation Model can be visualised as
an ongoing cycle, as shown in Figure 1
PROVUS EXTENSIONESE
Start here Translate into Start here
Establish program design = Specify program
standards objectives
Plan evaluation using the = Plan evaluation based
discrepancy model On objectives
Collect information = Collect information on program
On performance accomplishments
Identify differences between
Identify = program objectives and
discrepancies
program accomplishments
Alter performance and/or = Modify programs
Alter the standard
end here end here
or or
Recycle to start Recycle to start
8
Figure 1: Discrepancy Evaluation Model

9. To use the Discrepancy Evaluation Model, need to follow these steps.
 STEP 1: Decide which program to evaluate. This might be:
A. A new program just being developed for introduction.
B. An ongoing program that may appear to be running out of steam.
C. A program that seems to be working just fine, but appears to have switch
directions.
 STEP 2: Determine objectives for the targeted program
Question to/be ask
A. Are written objectives already available?
B. As participants know it?
C. The advisory committee?
D. If there’s any confusion about program objectives, get them clarified before
proceeding. Involve several people and, if nesessary, determine objective now.
(Which Pruvos says is okay to do at this time if it hasn’t already been done
before) to establish the base against which discrepencies can be measured.
9

10. To use the Discrepancy Evaluation Model, need to follow these steps.
 STEP 3: Plan the evaluation
Question to/be ask
A. What information do you need to know whether and how well objectives are
being accomplished. Whatever information is needed must be possible to
collect, and reasonable in terms of the work that collection entails.
B. How can you get at that, who can help? Specialists often help with developing
evaluation plans and usually have advice and experience to share. Don’t try to
reinvent the evaluation wheel all by yourself!
 STEP 4: Follow through by implementing plans to collect information.
10

11. To use the Discrepancy Evaluation Model, need to follow these steps.
 STEP 5: Identify discrepancies between program objektives and program
accomplishments.
Question to/be ask
A. Where do differences exist?
B. What have you learned about them – their causes, effect on program,
participants, other pertinent information?
 STEP 6: Plan what to do next.
At this point, the Discrepancy Evaluation Model says it’s time for remedial planning.
Either the basic program design standard or performance should be revised so that
objectives abd acconplishments are consistent.
Question to/be ask
A. But which should change? Objectives or implementations?
11

12. Use of the Provus Discrepancy Model
The Provus model is most effective under the following circumstances:
1. When the type of evaluation desired is formal, and the program is in the
formative, rather than summative stages.
2. When evaluation is defined as continuous information management
addressing program improvement and assessment, and where
evaluation is a component of program development.
3. Where the purpose of evaluation is to improve, maintain or terminate a
program.
4. Where the key emphasis of evaluation is program definition and
program installation.
12

13. Use of the Provus Discrepancy Model
5.Where the roles of the evaluator are those of facilitator, examiner of
standards, observer of actual behaviors, and design expert.
6.When at each stage of evaluation program performance is compared
with program objectives (standards) to determine discrepancies.
7.Where the program evaluation procedure is designed to identify
weaknesses and to make determinations about correction or
termination.
8.Where the theoretical construct is that all stages of programs continuously
provide feedback to each other.
13

14. Use of the Provus Discrepancy Model
9. Where the criteria for judging programs includes carefully evaluating
whether:
a. The program meets established program criteria
b. The actual course of action taken can be identified, and
c. A course of action can be taken to resolve all discrepancies
(Gredler, 1996).
14

15. CONCLUSION
 Ralph Waldo Emerson once said that most of the shadows in
life are caused by our standing n our room sunshine.
 Provus Diserepancy Evaluation Model can help us be in the
best way to focus more light on the many excellent features
extansion programes already have.
Thanks for your attention
15

16. LESSON PLAN
 Mata Pelajaran : Ekonomi Asas
 Tajuk: Perdagangan Antarabangsa
 Objektif = Standard      (P’s DEM)
 Selepas P & P pelajar dapat menyenaraikan dengan
baik 3 perbezaan diantara PAB dan Perniagaan dalam
negeri.
 Aktiviti: dijalankan
 Refleksi = Actual      (P’s DEM)
 80% pelajar berjaya menyenaraikan dengan baik
perbezaan diantara PAB dengan Perdagangan dalam
negeri.
16

17. Purpose of evaluation - (Gedler, 1996)
 A: To improve
 B: To maintain
 C: Terminate – biasanya pilihan terakhir apabila A dan
B tidak dapat dijayakan.
17

18.  Menurut Provus, program ini memiliki kitaran hayat (life-cycle,
yang mempunyai langkah-langkah pengembangan mengikut tahap
yang berkaitan .
 Model Evaluasi/Pertenatangan adalah suatu model evaluasi
program yang menekankan peri pentingny a pemahaman
sistem sebelum membuat sesuatu penilaian. . (Provus, 1971:
Dalam Azizi, 2008)
TAHAP 1: Tahap definisi
Fokus kegiatan/aktiviti
1. Merumuskan tujuan program diadakan.
2. Menyiapkan murid/staf dan kelengkapan keperluan.
3. Merumus standard dalam bentuk rumusan pada suatu yang dapat
diukur.
4. Cth rumusan standard: “ Keberhasilan Program KPSM yang
disandarkan adalah 70% warga belajar menngkatkan pendapatannya
dan ketrmpilannya. (by Suciptoardi.posted 3 jan 2011.)
18

19. TAHAP 2: Tahap penetapan kelengkapan
 Tahap penetapan kelengkapan program iaitu
melihat apakah kelengkapan yang tersedia sudah
sesuai dengan yang diperlukan. Dalam tahap ini
dilakukan kegiatan:
 Meninjau kembali penetapan standard
 Meninjau program yang sedang berjalan
 Meneliti discrepency yang wujud dalam
program actual dan standard
19

20. TAHAP 3: Tahap Proses
 Pada tahap proses ini, penilaian difokukan kepada
bagaimana memperolehi data tentang kemajuan para
peserta program, untuk menentukan apakah
perilakunya berubah sesuai dengan yang diharapkan
atau tidak.
 Jika tidak; maka perlu dilakukan perubahan terhdap
aktiviti-aktiviti yang terlibat.
 Tahap ini juga disebut sebagai tahap “Mengumpulkan
data dari pelaksanaan program”.
20

21. TAHAP 4: Tahap Produk
 Tahap mengadakan analisis data dan menetapkan
tingkat output yang diperolehi.
 Penilaian dilakukan untuk menentukan apakah tujuan
akhir program tercapai atau tidak. Provus
membedakan antara dampak terminal (immediates
outcomes) dan dampak jangka panjang. (long term-
outcomes).
 Dalam tahap ini pertanyaannya adalah “Apakah
sasaran program telah dicapai?
21

22. TAHAP 5: Tahap perbandingan / cost-benefit
 Iaitu tahap membandingkan hasil yang dicapai dengan tujuan yang telah
ditetapkan. Dalam tahap ini penganalisa akan menyenaraikan semua pertentangan
(discrepancy) yang wujud.
 Mengambil keputusan untuk memutuskan kelanjutan dari program tersebut,
samada:
 Menghentikan program tersebut
 Menggantikan
 Meneruskan
 Memodifikasikan tujuannya.
 Biar apapun pertentangan yang ditemui, Provus menganjurkan agar pemecahan
masalah dlakukan secara kopertif diantara penilai dan penganjur program.
 Pada tahap ini, Perlu adanya proses kerjasama yang baik antara kedua pihak kerana
Menurut Provus penilaian adalah untuk membangunkan program bukan untuk
menghakimi sesuatu. (Provus, 1971: Dalam Azizi, 2008)
 Proses kerjasama yang dilakukan antara lain membincangkan tentang:
 Mengapakah wujudnya pertentangan?
 Apakah langkah-langkah pembaikkan yang mungkin dilakukan.
 Apakah langkah paling baik yang paling baik dilakukan untuk memecah masalah
yang dihadapi.
22

23. TAHAP 5: Tahap perbandingan / cost-benefit
 Anilisis biaya-manfaat (cost-benefit analysis) , dimana
hasil-hasil yang diperolehi dbandingkan dengan biaya
yang dikeluarkan.
 Analisis ini menjadi sangat penting dalam keadaan
sumber (biaya) pendidikan yang sangat terbatas
(limted resources).
 --------------------------------------------------------------------
 Menurut Provus semua program mempunyai pusingan
hayat (life cycle), yang terdiri dari langkah-
langkah/tahap-tahap pengembangan: demikian juga
dengan P’s DEM, turut mempunyai pusingan hayat.
23