Evaluation of nature school in Indonesia

using illuminative evaluation model

Cite as: AIP Conference Proceedings 2019, 030005 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5061858
Published Online: 10 October 2018

Soeprijanto Soeprijanto and Gina Femalia

ARTICLES YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN

Exploring youngest consumers perceptions of traditional foods and fast foods product in Java
Island
AIP Conference Proceedings 2019, 030006 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5061859

Development of Adiwiyata curriculum model based on local wisdom

AIP Conference Proceedings 2019, 030012 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5061865

Social-environment factor as a weak point of sustainable development in Indonesia

AIP Conference Proceedings 2019, 030013 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5061866

AIP Conference Proceedings 2019, 030005 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5061858 2019, 030005

© 2018 Author(s).
Evaluation of Nature School in Indonesia Using Illuminative
Evaluation Model
Soeprijanto Soeprijanto1,a) and Gina Femalia1,b)
1
Graduate Program the Study Program, Educational Research and Evaluation, State University of Jakarta, Jalan
Rawamangun Muka, East Jakarta, 13220, Indonesia

Corresponding author: [email protected]

a)
b)
[email protected]

Abstract. The objective of this evaluation research is to describe the characteristics of a nature school Sekolah Alam
Cikeas. The Evaluation Model used in this research is Illuminative Model originated by Parlett- Hamilton, using both of
qualitative and quantitative approaches. The evaluation research is classified into the two components namely
Instructional System and Learning Milieu. Naturalistic Method is used in gathering information through observations and
interview, and quantitative method for gathering information through questionnaires. The research stages are divided by
general observation and focused observation. The result shows that Sekolah Alam Cikeas has a high awareness in
environment-related issues, character building and entrepreneurship. Curriculum is implemented in thematic learning,
while the instruction is delivered using inquiry and project based learning through some outdoor learning activities in a
positive learning environment at green school environment. The authentic approach is used in classroom assessment
instead of written test in formative assessment and selection process.
Keywords: character building, entrepreneurship, environment-related issues, nature school.

INTRODUCTION
Instructional or learning activity research has been done by many researchers and becomes exciting topic in
education fields. Nowadays, evaluation studies keep developing in the education field. Evaluation is not only about
examining students’ results but also covers a more common evaluation such as evaluation of schools, their programs,
and any other common policy. Such as the evaluation of the learning program that conducted by Wong, Li-Tsang,
and Sui,1 or evaluation of state primary schools in Turkey. 2 In Indonesia, private schools historically have
complimented public schools to allow more full access for all children to attend primary education. 3
There are private schools called sekolah alam (lit. nature school) that recently grow in numbers in Indonesia.
They support experiential learning from nature surrounding.4 The schools provide students with more opportunities
to interact with nature and have an open classroom design called saung (gazebo) which is not bounded by concrete
walls. In Finland, nature schools are supported as a model to foster environment education.5 However, how nature
schools are different from regular school have not been much investigated. In Indonesia, there have been researches
on the instructional learning carried out in nature schools.6,7 However, little has been done to evaluate nature school
programs and investigate the characteristic of nature schools. To address this gap, the purpose of this paper is to
evaluate the nature school program and describe the characteristics of nature school in Indonesia. This research
followed the illuminative evaluation model introduced by Malcolm Parlett and David Hamilton. This model was
made to study the innovatory program.8 Specifically, this paper focus on evaluating the characteristics, programs
and learning practice in Sekolah Alam Cikeas (Cikeas Nature School), Bogor, Indonesia.

The 9th International Conference on Global Resource Conservation (ICGRC) and AJI from Ritsumeikan University
AIP Conf. Proc. 2019, 030005-1–030005-8; https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5061858
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-1737-3/$30.00

030005-1
 Program Evaluation
Evaluation is process of determining merit, worth, or significance.9 Program evaluation using social research
methods to investigate some social programs.10 However, while investigating school, questioning teachers or
students does not mean to judge the individuals.11
Evaluation program is using systematic methods to address questions about program operations, ongoing
monitoring program or its results.12 For this purpose of evaluation research, I can say that program evaluation is an
act of activity to answer questions about the program, planning, implementation, program monitoring, and valuation
of the program by gathering information using social research.
There is a dominant approach to evaluation research, quantitative approach, and qualitative approach. Qualitative
evaluation approach uses the naturalistic method.13 This method studies the activities and the processes naturally in
the real world without any manipulation of a phenomenon like in the experimental method. Evaluators will portray a
program, documenting various situations.

Illuminative Evaluation
Illuminative evaluation model introduced by Malcolm Parlett and David Hamilton is to evaluate an innovative
education program. This evaluation model is using a social anthropology paradigm as an alternative form of
Tylerian or experimental approach.14
In the illuminative evaluation model, Parlett and Hamilton introduce two concepts as its components; they are
instructional system and learning milieu. Now we will describe each of these components.
Regarding instructional system, they consider that an innovative program started from a catalog description. It is
the ideal specification scheme that contains a set of elements that is arranged to be a coherent plan including goals,
objectives, and criteria established formally. However, the instructional system may remain in form share ideas,
abstract model and slogan that teachers and staff may interpret differently according to particular individual
circumstances.8 Further clarify the meaning of the instructional system as it was intended Parlett and Hamilton as
"educational prospectus" and statements that typically contain a formal plan and standards relating to the lesson
plan.15
Next one is about Learning Milieu. In evaluating educational program, especially innovative program, we should
not ignore the term learning milieu.8 It is a network of cultural, social, institution and psychological variables for
students and teachers in an educational environment. These variables interact in the class complexly and can form a
unique pattern in various situations.8 Learning Milieu can make a peculiar instructional system different for each
condition.
For this research, we assume that the instructional system is also closely related to the school concept and the
school curriculum, which also contains the characteristics of the school, the vision, mission, purpose of education,
the structure of the curriculum, programs, lesson plans. Moreover, that will be the focus and aspects of this research.
Besides blueprint in the form of a written plan, according to the characteristics of the model illuminative
instructional system, I will also examine jargon or instructional system that is understood in practical terms by the
school community. As for the learning milieu, we focus on portraying the peculiarities of the learning activities,
classroom management, the implementation of educational assessment, and environmental and educational facilities.
Evaluation includes identification and clarification to determine the evaluation object values based on the
defensible criteria.16 For this evaluation research, the interpretation and recommendation of this evaluation would be
compared base on the national standard of education for public elementary school.

METHOD
The purpose of research, in general, is to examine the concept, curriculum, programs and educational activities at
Cikeas Nature School so that we can describe the nature and the characteristics of the value and implementation
environmental and primary education in the nature school.
Illuminative evaluation can provide broader exploration in the perspective of implementers and also
participants.17 lluminative evaluation is not a standard methodology package. Illuminative evaluation is only a
research strategy that can be adapted and eclectic.18 Once the problem is defined, the new evaluator and researchers
can determine the right method. 14 Therefore, they determine three general stages called three characteristics of
illuminative evaluation they are investigators observe, inquire further, then seek to explain.

030005-2
 The research method that is used in this illuminative evaluation is a naturalistic method. Naturalistic inquiry is an
inquiry that carried out in a natural setting.19 The approach that is used is qualitative approach supported by
quantitative data survey from questionnaires. With the design of two stages: a preliminary study followed by
focused research.
Data collection techniques used is observation, open interviews, gathering records and documents, and
questionnaires. Random and also purposive sampling is used while collecting the data. For data analysis, the
collected data are prepared, reduced, unitized, and categorized then defined the theme or pattern.
As for the validity of the data, I rely on triangulation, either triangulation of methods and triangulation of
sources; and thick description.

RESULTS

Instructional System
From the data collections in the field, we know that Cikeas Nature School is a nature-based school that has a
purpose of forming a noble character generation through creative environmental education. The meaning of nature-
based school is a school whose concept is to rely on the universe or natural environment as a studying method and
character building.
Also, we can conclude the characteristic of Cikeas Nature School
 has a green, vast and lush schoolyard
 has a strong vision and profound care to the world and its environment
 uses the nature surrounding and schoolyard as a laboratory and studying medium
 has one quota per class for a student with special needs
The school has the aim to build a leader generation or khalifatullah fil ardh. The curriculum used is the
combination of national curriculum 2006 and own school curriculum. The latter is divided into 4 fields; moral
curriculum, scientific-logic curriculum, leadership curriculum, and entrepreneurship curriculum. The learning is
given thematically based on the school subjects.
The school that is filled with open space and the gazebos becomes the unique feature of a natural school. With
the jargon “nature experience is the best teacher,” and the socialization in the surrounding community, the
formulation of the concept of the school, has been well communicated among the school community and the
prospective parents. Here are the advantages of Sekolah Alam Cikeas according to the parents who enroll their
children in the natural school. The 3 most advantages are the school concept, child factor, and character building.

FIGURE 1. Reason choosing nature school

030005-3
 In addition to compulsory subjects in accordance national curriculum 2006, the school has Outbound subjects
that can be equated with physical education lessons. Besides that, there are subjects of literacy and subjects which
are characterized by nature, named Greenlab. The school also has intra-curricular units to support its curriculum;
those are including eco-shop, agribusiness, and 3R (reduce, reuse, recycle) units. Also, the school also has an
environment-themed annual event and entrepreneurial activity such as the commemoration of the earth day, plant
trees, market day and our camp. There is also a program and activities for character building such as outbound
training, art performance, religion day, duty rota, spreading a smile and greeting, and ants operation. Ants operation
is a cleaning activity by picking and collecting trash at school area. Fig. 1 present reason for choosing nature school.
For educational planning, they prepared theme and instructional planning ranging from annual, semiannual and
weekly instructional plan. The teachers also provide a syllabus, daily lesson plan and activity preparation for the
daily activities. Those processes are supervised by the school principal and coordinated with other teachers from its
parallel class.

Learning Milieu
As for the studying process, with the nature school concept, the medium of teaching is not only focused on the
class but also involve outdoor activity at schoolyard or school surrounding. The students do not wear a uniform, but
they wear simple and nice casual clothes.
For the learning activity, the subject delivered in a scientific-logic approach. The children are supported to
learning through experience outside the class, conduct an inquiry, gathering data, conduct an interview and present
their work in front of teacher and friends. There are also group tasks assign by a teacher that merge various subjects
or topics into one project task.
To create a positive learning environment, the teachers play a role as facilitator. They must create a comfortable
climate for the students, so they are allowed to study while lesehan (sit above the ground without a chair). The
teachers can act like a friend but still follow the rules of the student-teacher relationship. The students’ evaluation of
the learning milieu can be seen in Fig. 2.

FIGURE 2. Student evaluation regarding Learning Milieu.

A stand out Nature School facilities must have a broad and natural and green schoolyard, classes in the form of
Saung (huts), class buildings which are open and are not blocked by a high wall, but still feel one with the school
environment. The school provides a location for weekly outbound activities. Also, the school has a Greenlab for
gardening, farming and composting.

030005-4
 Cikeas Nature School also has a unique park made by recycled objects known as Recycle Garden. There are also
an open stage amphitheater and a mosque for Islamic activities.
Formative assessment is carried out not by using daily written tests or mid tests, but with daily assignments and
projects. The class assessment concludes in the worksheet of tasks, a portfolio of work, observation sheet, interview
sheet, presentation, and peer or self-assessment.
For the selection process, the Cikeas Nature School does not acknowledge read and written tests. Future students
are observed through ‘sit in’ activity in class for 2-3 days. This step is followed by an interview with parents and
students. The school also gives an opportunity for a student with special needs. They are given one quota per group.
As for educational assessment, Cikeas Nature School has an exciting way of reporting student progress. The
report book is given three times in one semester. There are also of portfolio, moral, and narration reports, besides the
quantitative report.

DISCUSSION
A school cannot be separated from culture and value of its social context. While society itself is dynamic and
continuously being reshaped. Education can play a role in perpetuating and transforming society.20 The educational
system or instructional system at the Cikeas Nature School not only adheres to the principles and values of the local
wisdom but also has a mission to promote nature conservation toward children that are integrated into the
curriculum concepts of morals, logic-scientific, leadership, and entrepreneurship, besides national curriculum. This
curriculum composed of thematic-based subjects from grade 1 to grade 6. The approach used for implement this
curriculum is student-centered.
Regarding the school concept, Cikeas Nature School follows the concept and the brand of existing nature schools
which are intended to make their schoolyard and nature school surroundings as a laboratory and an instructional
medium.
The school integrates their educational objectives and the concept of curriculum with annual events, units and
intra-curricular activities as its uniqueness as a nature school. Those activities are part of environmental education,
culture and entrepreneurship program such as planting trees, outbound, out camp, Greenlab, saving trash, 3R,
agribusiness, and eco shop. There are also activities or programs for leadership and character building such as “the
ant's operation” and spreading “smiles and greeting.”
Regarding the learning milieu, the school strives to actualize a positive learning environment with authoritative
class management. 21 Meanwhile, instructional activity is delivered with a scientific approach and student-centered
principle.
Teachers keep inviting students to do observation outside the class and applying the discovery/inquiry learning
model. Besides that, they sometimes assign some project tasks like applying a project-based learning model.
The learning method in Cikeas Nature School is always supported by the existing and unique school facilities as
its characteristics as a nature school. Learning activities are carried out in an environment that blends with nature
and eco-friendly with the open class design. Learning while lesehan in saung, observing or playing in the green
schoolyard made children comfortable being in school.
Equally important, those unique facilities are supported by the infrastructures that are already meet minimum
standards assigned by the Minister of Education Regulation number 24 in 2007. However, there are some notes and
feedback to be considered as listed in Table 1.

030005-5
 TABLE 1. Infrastructure and Facility in Cikeas Nature School
Infrastructure Feedback Facility Feedback
1 Classroom Some classes (the old 1.1 Teacher’s desk inadequate amount
one) are too small
most of them cannot be 1.2 Sink there are none on the
locked second floor
2 Library - 2.1 Reading table not present, (lesehan
only)
3 Science lab merged with classroom 3.1 Educational placed in the classroom
equipment and teachers’ room
4 Nurse’s Office too small 4.1 Cupboard inadequate medical
equipment
5 Circulation Area Not all classes
connected to the
corridor

About educational assessment, to support the objectives of the learning process, it is clear that the school is
trying to conducting performance and authentic assessment approaches,22 with the least possible use of the
traditional written test. Thus the students feel comfortable in school every day without worrying there will be tests in
school.
For a summary of all discussion, Table 2 points out the highlight comparison between national standard public
school and Cikeas Nature School.

TABLE 2. Highlight Comparison Regular Elementary School and Cikeas Nature School
Regular Elementary School
No Aspect Cikeas Nature School
(National Standard)
1 Vision Based national education aims Based national education aims
Strong environment vision

2 Curricula National curriculum 2006 or 2013 National curriculum 2006

Thematic based subject for grade 1-3 Nature school curriculum
(curriculum 2006) Thematic based subject for grade
1-6
3 Program Vary depend on each school Strong environment program (3R,
Eco shop, Commemorate earth
day)
Outbound activities and leadership
program
Entrepreneurship program
4 Learning Wearing uniform every day Wearing casual cloth
activity Mostly indoor activity Indoor and outdoor activity
5 Classroom Building surrounded by concrete wall Saung or open design building, no
and door door
Schoolyard Limited, minimum plant and usually Natural, green, full of big trees.
cover by cement Recycle garden
Hall, science lab Amphitheater, green lab
School Facility Infiltration well

6 Formative Include written mid-test No written mid-test

assessment

030005-6
 CONCLUSION
Evaluation research using illuminative evaluation model that consists of instructional components system and
learning milieu can explain the characteristics of Cikeas Nature School regarding concept, blueprint curriculum, and
its implementation.
Cikeas Nature School has a concept to utilize their surrounding environment as a laboratory or educational
medium. This school also has the vision to build future leaders who love their nature with various environmental
education programs. Regarding education implementation, Cikeas Nature School strives to create a positive learning
environment with authoritative class management strategy. Instructional strategy adhere student-centered principles
by applying discovery/inquiry or experiential learning outside of class. Meanwhile, classroom assessments prefer to
conducting performance and authentic assessment approaches rather than applying daily paper and pencil task.

RECOMMENDATION
A few recommendations can be conducted as follow: firstly, it is needed to create clear a philosophical
foundation and theoretical concepts of nature school. Secondly, the Green lab should be more of various activities
than just farming and raising farm animals. Also, forming a strong school committee is required to create a
community based school that bonds parents, teachers, students and surrounding community. Finally, a routine
evaluation for all related facilities and infrastructures is needed to meet the minimum national standard.

REFERENCES
1. A. S. Wong, C. W. Li-Tsang and A. M. Siu, Hong Kong J. Occup. 24, 56-63 (2014).
2. E. Nuri and G. Dagli, Proc. Soc. Behav. Sci. 141, 1074-1078 (2014).
3. J. M. Stern and T. M. Smith, Int. J. Educ. Dev. 46, 1-11 (2016).
4. N. Sparlie, N. Utaberta, N. Abdullah, M. Tahir and A. C. Ani, App. Mechan. Materials, 7, 4999-5002
(2011).
5. E. Jeronen, J. Jeronen and H. Raustia, Int. J. Environ. Sci. 4, 1-23 (2009).
6. S. Nurohman, Jurnal Penelitian dan Evaluasi Pendidikan 11, 128-144. (2008).
7. S. Sodiq, IES. 8, 120-125 (2015).
8. M. Parlett and D. Hamilton, “Evaluation as Illumination: A New Approach to the Study of Innovatory
Program,” Occasional Paper (Edinburg University Centre for Research in the Educational Sciences,
London, 1972), pp. 12-13.
9. M. Scriven, Dissensus and the Search for Common Ground edited by H. Hansen (OSSA, Windsor, 2007),
pp. 1-16.
10. D. J. Holden and M. Zimmerman, A Practical Guide to Program Planning Evaluation. (Sage Publications,
California, 2009), pp. 15.
11. M. C. Alkin, Evaluation Essentials: From A to Z (The Guilford Press, New York, 2011), pp. 7
12. J. S. Wholey, H. P. Hatry and K. E. Newcomer, Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation (Jossey Bass,
San Fransisco, 2010), pp. 73.
13. M. Q. Patton, Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (Sage Publications, California, 2002), pp. 39.
14. M. Parlett and D. Hamilton, “Evaluation as Illumination: A New Approach to the Study of Innovatory
Programs,” edited by Gene V. Glass, Evaluation Studies: Review Annual, SAGE Publications 1, 140-157
(1976).
15. D. L. Stufflebeam and A. L. Shinkfield, Systematic Evaluation: A Self Instructional Guide to Theory and
Practice (Kluwer-Nijhoff Publishing, Boston, 1986), pp. 29.
16. J. L. Fitzpatrick, J. R. Sanders and B. R. Worthen, Program Evaluation: Alternative Approaches and
Practical Guidelines (Pearson Education, Boston, 2004), pp. 5.
17. S. Mason, “Braving it out! An illuminative evaluation of the provision of sex and relationship education in
two primary schools in England”, Sex Educ. 10, 157-169 (2010).
18. G.Sloan and H. Watson, J. Adv. Nurs. 35, 664-673 (2001).
19. E. G. Guba and Y. S. Lincoln, Epistemological and Methodological Bases of Naturalistic Inquiry” in
Evaluation Models, edited by D. L. Stufflebeam, G. F. Madaus, and T. Kellaghan (Kluwer Academic,
Boston, 2002), pp. 363-381.

030005-7
20. A. Ornstein and F. P. Hunkins, Curriculum: Foundations, Principles, and Issues (Pearson Education,
Boston, 2004), pp. 14.
21. J. W. Santrock, Educational Psychology (McGraw-Hill, New York, 2008), pp. 500.
22. A. J. Nitko, Educational Assessment of Students (Merril-Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 1996), pp. 264.

030005-8