The Evaluation of Post PT3 Program Using Stake's Countenance Model

  • Jarisah Gondikit @ Theresa Fakulti Psikologi dan Pendidikan, Universiti Malaysia Sabah (UMS)
Keywords: post PT3 program, secondary school, evaluation


The purpose of the study was to evaluate the Post PT3 Program in a sub-urban secondary school located in the district of Tuaran, Sabah. The program aims to encourage all the form three students’ attendance after they have taken the PT3 examination by occupying them with activities that would enhance their learning ability outside the classroom. This study used Stake’s Countenance evaluation model. The data were collected using observation, informal-interview and documentation techniques. The conclusion was: (1) Intended antecedents congruent to the actual antecedents, minor issues in both intended transaction/outcomes and actual transaction/ outcomes. (2) Post PT3 program worth to be sustained with support from the administration and teachers (3) Evaluator’s major concerns are lack of teachers’ participation and commitment in the implementation of the program.


Download data is not yet available.


Dulasi, N. (2017, April 14). Post PT3 Program. (J. Gondikit, Interviewer)

Greene, J. (2000). Understanding Social Program through Evaluation. In N. K. In Denzin, Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nded) (pp. 981-999). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Greene, J. C. (1998). Qualitative Program Evaluation: Practice and Promise. In N. K. In Denzin, Collecting and Interptreting Qualitative Materials (pp. 372-399). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Greene, J. C. (2002). Mixed-method evaluation: a way of democratically engaging with the difference. Evaluation Journal of Australia, 2 (New series), 23-29.

Lewis, L. &. (1994). Experiential Learning: A New Approach (pp. 5-16). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Micheal, W. a. (1994). Evaluation Design, Evolution of. In T. a. Husen, The International Encylopedia of Education. 2nded Vol. 4 (pp. 2079-2089). U.K.: Pergamon.

Miki, R. (2017, April 21). Post PT3 Program. (J. Gondikit, Interviewer)

Shaw, I. (. (1998). Qualitative Evaluation. London: Sage.

Shaw, M. 2. (2003). Comprehensive Approaches to school safety and security:An International View. Paris Conference on School Safety and Security. PEB.

Shaw, M. 2. (2005, September 20). Promoting Safety in Schools: International Experience and Action. Retrieved from Bureau of Justice Assistance Monograph. USA.[Online].Available:

Stake, R. 1. (n.d.). The Virtual Reality of Systemic Effects of NSF Programming On Education: Its Profession, Practice, Research and Institutions. In J. A. Frectling, Footprints: Strategies for Non-Traditional Program. (pp. 107-125). Arlington, V.A: Westat, Inc.

Stake, R. E. (1986). Quieting Reform: Social Science and Social Action in an Urban Youth Program. Urbana: University of Illinois.

Stake, R. E. (1995a). The Art of Case Study Research. London: Sage.

Thornton, R. a. (2000). Student voice in Curriculum making.

Woods, J. (1998). Curriculum Evaluation Models: Applications for Teachers. Australia. Journal Of Teacher Education 13(1).

Wurdinger, S. (2005). Using Experiential Learning in the Classroom. . Lanham: ScarecrowEducation.
How to Cite
@ Theresa, J. G. (2018) “The Evaluation of Post PT3 Program Using Stake’s Countenance Model”, Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH), 3(4), pp. 109 - 118. doi: 10.47405/mjssh.v3i4.137.