A Conceptual Framework for Evaluating the Implementation of the Integrated Science Curriculum in Zhejiang Province, China Using the CIPP Model

Aidoo, B. (2023). Teacher educators’ experience adopting problem-based learning in science education. Education Sciences, 13(11), Article 11113. doi:10.3390/educsci13111113
Arjaya, I. B. A., & Suma, K. (2023). Problems of biology learning and evaluation analysis at the CIPP model-based higher education level. Biosfer: Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi, 16(1), 152–167.
Ashby, I., & Exter, M. (2019). Designing for interdisciplinarity in higher education: Considerations for instructional designers. TechTrends, 63(2), 202–208. doi:10.1007/s11528-018-0352-z
Åström, M. (2008). Defining integrated science education and putting it to test (Doctoral dissertation). Linköping University, Sweden. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
Aziz, S., Mahmood, M., & Rehman, Z. (2018). Implementation of CIPP model for quality evaluation at school level: A case study. Journal of Education and Educational Development, 5(1), 189–206. doi:10.22555/joeed.v5i1.1553
Bashri, A., Prastiwi, M. S., & Puspitawati, R. P. (2020). CIPP model for curriculum evaluation of biology education. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Arts and Humanities (IJCAH 2020) (Vol. 491, pp. 1247–1251). Atlantis Press. doi:10.2991/assehr.k.201201.209
Boulton, J. G., Allen, P. M., & Bowman, C. (2015). Embracing complexity: Strategic perspectives for an age of turbulence. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Bybee, R. W. (1997). Achieving scientific literacy: From purposes to practices. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED461491.
Byrne, D., & Callaghan, G. (2022). Complexity theory and the social sciences: The state of the art. New York, NY: Routledge.
Closs, L., Mahat, M., & Imms, W. (2022). Learning environments’ influence on students’ learning experience in an Australian faculty of business and economics. Learning Environments Research, 25(1), 271–285. doi:10.1007/s10984-021-09361-2
Darman, D. (2023). The effect of teaching quality and campus facilities on student learning motivation. The Eastasouth Journal of Learning and Educations, 1(2), 36–43.
Davis, B., & Sumara, D. (2014). Complexity and education: Inquiries into learning, teaching, and research. New York, NY: Routledge.
Eilks, I., & Hofstein, A. (2017). Curriculum development in science education. In K. S. Taber & B. Akpan (Eds.), Science education: An international course companion (pp. 169–181). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: SensePublishers. doi:10.1007/978-94-6300-749-8_13
Fei, M. (2012). Strategies for strengthening conceptual integration in the implementation of integrated science curriculum. Education and Teaching Forum, 8, 81–82.
Fernandez, C., Hochgreb-Haegele, T., Eloy, A., & Blikstein, P. (2024). Making for science: A framework for the design of physical materials for science learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 72(1), 59–82. doi:10.1007/s11423-023-10340-y
Frye, A. W., & Hemmer, P. A. (2012). Program evaluation models and related theories: AMEE guide no. 67. Medical Teacher, 34(5), e288–e299.
Glatthorn, A. A., Boschee, F., Whitehead, B. M., & Boschee, B. F. (2018). Curriculum leadership: Strategies for development and implementation (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Grant, J. (2002). Learning needs assessment: Assessing the need. BMJ, 324(7330), 156–159.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Jaakkola, E. (2020). Designing conceptual articles: Four approaches. AMS Review, 10(1), 18–26. doi:10.1007/s13162-020-00161-0
Jani, W., Razali, F., Ismail, N., & Ismawi, N. (2023). Exploratory factor analysis: Validity and reliability of teacher’s knowledge construct instrument. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 12(1), 944–953.
Hagermoser Sanetti, L. M., Williamson, K. M., Long, A. C., & Kratochwill, T. R. (2018). Increasing in-service teacher implementation of classroom management practices through consultation, implementation planning, and participant modeling. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 20(1), 43–59.
Heine, S., Krepf, M., & König, J. (2023). Digital resources as an aspect of teacher professional digital competence: One term, different definitions – a systematic review. Education and Information Technologies, 28(4), 3711–3738. doi:10.1007/s10639-022-11321-z
Howes, A., Kaneva, D., Swanson, D., & Williams, J. (2013). Re-envisioning STEM education: Curriculum, assessment and integrated, interdisciplinary studies. London, UK: The Royal Society.
Jia, L. (2013). Research in the installation of integrated science curriculum in junior middle school (Master’s thesis). Shandong Normal University, Jinan, China.
Jibril, S., & Bagceci, B. (2024). Comparative evaluation of the 12th grade chemistry curriculum according to the CIPP evaluation model: Türkiye and Nigeria. Journal of Research in Education, 2(1), 1–27.
Jin, H., Mikeska, J. N., Hokayem, H., & Mavronikolas, E. (2019). Toward coherence in curriculum, instruction, and assessment: A review of learning progression literature. Science Education, 103(5), 1206–1234.
Kereeditse, M. (2021). Evaluation of strengthening of mathematics and science in secondary education (SMASSE) program in Botswana using the CIPP model. Mosenodi Journal, 24(1), 21–41.
Laveault, D., & Allal, L. (2016). Assessment for learning: Meeting the challenge of implementation (Vol. 4). New York, NY: Springer.
Liang, Y. Q. (2024). Evaluation practice of kindergarten science curriculum based on the CIPP model. Educational Science Forum, 16(6), 31–35.
Ling, L. S., Pang, V., & Lajium, D. (2017, May). An evaluation of the development and implementation of integrated STEM module using CIPP evaluation model: A proposed study. Paper presented at the Simposium Psikologi dan Kesihatan Sosial-i (SPKS-i) 2017, Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia.
Liu, X. M., & Li, G. (2024). Research on the construction of evaluation system of STEM education implementation in China’s primary and secondary schools under the perspective of CIPP. Research in Teaching, 47(3), 41–55.
Margot, K. C., & Kettler, T. (2019). Teachers’ perception of STEM integration and education: A systematic literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), 2. doi:10.1186/s40594-018-0151-2
Masfuah, S., Fakhriyah, F., & Hilyana, F. S. (2022). Blended learning based on science literacy in science concept learning. In AIP Conference Proceedings (Vol. 2600). Paper presented at the 6th Science Education International Conference (SEIC), Semarang, Indonesia. doi:10.1063/5.0117329
McComas, W. F. (2024). Considering the lessons of curriculum studies in the design of science instruction: Varieties of meaning and implications for teaching and learning. Education Sciences, 14(3), Article 238. doi:10.3390/educsci14030238
Miao, Q. (2024). High-quality development of science education in rural schools: Value implications, existing challenges, and potential solutions. Modern Distance Education, 214, 29–39.
Michael, W. B., Stanley, J. C., & Bolton, D. L. (1957). [Review of the book Taxonomy of educational objectives, the classification of educational goals, handbook I: cognitive domain, by B. S. Bloom]. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 17(4), 757–760. doi:10.1177/001316445701700420
Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China. (2022). Compulsory education science curriculum standards (2022 edition). Retrieved from http://www.moe.gov.cn
Mitchell, M. (2009). Complexity: A guided tour. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Nieminen, J. H., & Carless, D. (2023). Feedback literacy: A critical review of an emerging concept. Higher Education, 85(6), 1381–1400. doi:10.1007/s10734-022-00895-9
Pan, S. D. (2004). From specialized to integrated science course: Research on the mode of science course offering in Chinese junior high school (Doctoral dissertation). East China Normal University, Shanghai, China.
Pareek, R. B. (2019). An assessment of availability and utilization of laboratory facilities for teaching science at secondary level. Science Education International, 30(1).
Penuel, W. R., Reiser, B. J., McGill, T. A. W., Novak, M., Van Horne, K., & Orwig, A. (2022). Connecting student interests and questions with science learning goals through project-based storylines. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 4(1), Article 1. doi:10.1186/s43031-021-00040-z
Piaget, J. (1997). The principles of genetic epistemology. London, UK: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Scriven, M. (1991). Prose and cons about goal-free evaluation. Evaluation Practice, 12(1), 55–63. doi:10.1177/109821409101200108
Rakhmonkulov, F., & Usarov, S. (2019). Organization of practical and laboratory activities in the educational process. European Journal of Research and Reflection in Educational Sciences, 7(12).
Rios, F. A., & Stanton, C. R. (2011). Understanding multicultural education: Equity for all students. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
San Diego STEM Ecosystem. (2014). A criteria for quality STEM/STEAM in San Diego. Retrieved from https://www.sdstemecosystem.org/references/criteria-quality-stemsteam-san-diego
Schnitzler, K., Holzberger, D., & Seidel, T. (2021). All better than being disengaged: Student engagement patterns and their relations to academic self-concept and achievement. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 36(3), 627–652. doi:10.1007/s10212-020-00500-6
Shen, Y. (2024). Empowering digital intelligence: Creating new boundaryless learning spaces for rural primary schools—Research on the establishment and application of a digitized rural experimental science space. Education and Equipment Research, 2, 68–98.
Soysal, Y. (2022). Science curriculum objectives’ intellectual demands: A thematic analysis. Journal of Science Learning, 5(1), 127–140.
Spektor-Levy, O., Eylon, B.-S., & Scherz, Z. (2008). Teaching communication skills in science: Tracing teacher change. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(2), 462–477. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2006.10.009
Stake, R. E. (1976). A theoretical statement of responsive evaluation. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 2(1), 19–26.
State Council of the People's Republic of China. (2021). Outline of the National Action Plan for Scientific Literacy (2021–2035). Retrieved from https://www.gov.cn/gongbao/content/2021/content_5623051.htm
Stufflebeam, D. L. (2003). The CIPP model for evaluation. In T. Kellaghan & D. L. Stufflebeam (Eds.), International handbook of educational evaluation (pp. 31–62). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-94-010-0309-4_4
Suphasri, P., & Chinokul, S. (2021). Reflective practice in teacher education: Issues, challenges, and considerations. PASAA: Journal of Language Teaching and Learning in Thailand, 62, 236–264.
Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in Science Education, 48, 1273–1296. doi:10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2
Thorndike, E. L. (1904). Theory of mental and social measurements. New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University.
Tyler, R. W. (1934). Constructing achievement tests. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University.
Vaidya, S. (2014). Curriculum evaluation. In S. Vaidya (Ed.), Developing entrepreneurial life skills: Creating and strengthening entrepreneurial culture in Indian schools (pp. 83–99). New Delhi, India: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-81-322-1789-3_6
Villa, G. (2018, October). Bridging the gap between neuroscience and classroom teaching: New pathways in the application of social and emotional neuroscience [Conference abstract]. 2nd International Conference on Educational Neuroscience, Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. doi:10.3389/conf.fnhum.2018.225.00013
Voss, P., Thomas, M. E., Cisneros-Franco, J. M., & De Villers-Sidani, É. (2017). Dynamic brains and the changing rules of neuroplasticity: Implications for learning and recovery. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1657. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01657
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wang, R., Wang, Y., Xu, X., Li, Y., & Pan, X. (2023). Brain works principle followed by neural information processing: A review of novel brain theory. Artificial Intelligence Review, 56(Suppl 1), 285–350. doi:10.1007/s10462-022-10204-5
Wang, Y., Lavonen, J., & Tirri, K. (2019). Twenty-first century competencies in the Chinese science curriculum. In H. Liu, F. Dervin, & X. Du (Eds.), Nordic-Chinese intersections within education (pp. 151–171). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-28588-3_7
Wang, Y. (2024). Practical exploration of integrated science curriculum development in junior high schools. Primary and Secondary School Science Education, (2), 31–35.
Wanselin, H., Danielsson, K., & Wikman, S. (2022). Analysing multimodal texts in science—A social semiotic perspective. Research in Science Education, 52(3), 891–907. doi:10.1007/s11165-021-10027-5
Wieman, C. E. (2014). Large-scale comparison of science teaching methods sends clear message. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8319–8320.
Wu, X., Yang, Y., Zhou, X., Xia, Y., & Liao, H. (2024). A meta-analysis of interdisciplinary teaching abilities among elementary and secondary school STEM teachers. International Journal of STEM Education, 11(1), 38. doi:10.1186/s40594-024-00500-8
Yara, P., & Omondi, K. (2010). Teaching/learning resources and academic performance in mathematics in secondary schools in Bondo District of Kenya. Asian Social Science, 6(12), 126–132. doi:10.5539/ass.v6n12p126
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. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 15(4), 57–84.
Zhang, J. (2022). Strategies for experimental teaching and management of rural primary school science curricula. Tianjin Education, 9, 162–163.
Zhang, R. (2019). Research on the evaluation index system of STEM education projects in China (Master’s thesis). Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Beijing, China.
Zhuo, Z. L. (2017). Beyond classroom: The implementation and evaluation of American K-12’s out-of-school time STEM programs. China Educational Technology, 11, 7–13.

Xiangfei, Z., Ghazali, N. H. C. M., Yao, Y., & Dongyuan, H. (2025). A Conceptual Framework for Evaluating the Implementation of the Integrated Science Curriculum in Zhejiang Province, China Using the CIPP Model. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 14(3), 103–115.

Copyright: © 2025 The Author(s)
Published by HRMARS (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode