Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE)
Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE)

an Open Access Journal

SINTA

1.6519

Impact

GScholar

16

H-Index

Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE)

an Open Access Journal

Curriculum Alignment, Implementation Fidelity, and Outcome Evidence in a Pesantren-Based Intensive English Course: A Discrepancy Evaluation of the Madani Course Program

Muh Junaidi
Ganesha University of Education ROR
Indonesia
muhjunaidi13@gmail.com
Ni Nyoman Padmadewi
Ganesha University of Education ROR
Indonesia
I G A Lokita Purnamika Utami
Ganesha University of Education ROR
Indonesia
Putu Suarcaya
Ganesha University of Education ROR
Indonesia
Share

  • Purpose of the study: The Intensive English programs in pesantren often provide rich exposure and strong motivational support, yet their curriculum, implementation, assessment, and documented outcomes may not be systematically aligned. This study evaluated curriculum alignment, implementation fidelity, outcome evidence, and improvement priorities in the four-week Madani Course Program using the five stages of the Discrepancy Evaluation Model (DEM).

    Methodology: A qualitative evaluative case study involved one program director, one coordinator, four tutors, and twenty-four students. Data were generated through semi-structured interviews, six classroom observations, and analysis of schedules, materials, attendance records, tutor notes, assessment records, and program reports. The evidence was thematically coded, triangulated in student- and program-level evidence matrices, compared with explicit standards, and classified as minor, moderate, or major discrepancies.

    Main Findings: Triangulated evidence indicated positive perceived and observed outcomes in confidence, participation, routine vocabulary use, self-introduction, and learning discipline. However, moderate discrepancies affected measurable outcomes, curriculum sequencing, tutor preparation, structured modules, target-language use, feedback, monitoring, and reporting. A major product-stage discrepancy remained because comparable diagnostic and final speaking assessments were unavailable; therefore, firm claims about linguistic improvement could not be made.

    Novelty/Originality of this study: The study contextualizes DEM by integrating communicative pedagogy, formative assessment, and pesantren educational culture into a transparent program-alignment framework. The findings imply that similar residential programs should connect measurable weekly outcomes, tutor preparation, staged language-use policies, comparable speaking tasks, portfolios, and evidence-based reporting.

  • How to cite

    [1]
    “Curriculum Alignment, Implementation Fidelity, and Outcome Evidence in a Pesantren-Based Intensive English Course: A Discrepancy Evaluation of the Madani Course Program”, Jor. Eva. Edu, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 730–741, Jul. 2026, doi: 10.37251/jee.v7i3.3428.

    More Citation Formats

  • 24
    Abstract views
    12
    Downloads

    Metrics — Badges

    1. [1] A. C. Y. Bestari, J. Paramboor, D. Faiza, and M. H. Mayekti, “Language policy in Indonesian Islamic boarding schools (pondok pesantren): Implementation, challenges and impacts,” Cakrawala J. Kaji. Manaj. Pendidik. Islam dan Stud. Sos., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 62–81, 2026, doi: 10.33507/cakrawala.v10i1.3780.
    2. [2] F. Y. Damayanti and T. Purwaningtyas, “The use of English in an Islamic boarding school in Indonesia: Students’ perspective,” J. Islam. Educ. El Madani, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 77–84, 2026, doi: 10.55438/jiee.v5i2.214.
    3. [3] T. N. Fitria, “Integrating English language teaching into Islamic boarding schools: A review of strategy and challenges,” J. English Lang. Pedagog., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 64–78, 2023, doi: 10.51826/jelpa.v1i2.772.
    4. [4] Muhaemin and F. R. Muin, “Developing English learning materials for Islamic boarding schools in Indonesia,” Indones. TESOL J., vol. 6, no. 2, 2024, doi: 10.24256/itj.v6i2.8610.
    5. [5] N. A. Putri, M. Anugerahwati, and Y. Febrianti, “English language teaching in Islamic boarding school: Navigating the digital revolution,” ELTALL English Lang. Teaching, Appl. Linguist. Lit., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 24–30, 2025, doi: 10.21154/eltall.v6i1.10827.
    6. [6] D. M. Sari, “English language teaching in pesantren: Challenges and strategies,” Turots J. Pendidik. Islam, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 110–123, 2023, doi: 10.51468/jpi.v5i2.174.
    7. [7] U. Umar, “English language teaching in pesantren in Indonesia: Development and challenges,” JELL (Journal English Lang. Lit. STIBA-IEC Jakarta, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 55–64, 2022, doi: 10.37110/jell.v7i1.143.
    8. [8] W. A. Zahra, “Quality education through pesantren, madrasahs, and Islamic schools in globalization dynamics,” Indones. J. Islam. Stud., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 1–14, 2025, doi: 10.21070/ijis.v13i3.1776.
    9. [9] D. Eliawati, Ngadiso, and K. A. Putra, “The position of English in the linguistic schoolscapes in an Indonesian Islamic boarding school,” Indones. J. EFL Linguist., vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 247–276, 2024, doi: 10.21462/ijefl.v9i1.787.
    10. [10] A. Madkur et al., “Context-responsive pedagogy in English language teaching in Indonesian Islamic boarding schools,” J. Educ. Learn., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 626–638, 2024, doi: 10.11591/edulearn.v18i3.21085.
    11. [11] F. A. Putri and M. S. A. Pranata, “Optimizing the pesantren environment to enhance speaking skills: A case study,” J. English Lang. Educ., vol. 10, no. 4, 2025, doi: 10.31004/jele.v10i4.1208.
    12. [12] R. Riyandani, H. Soepriyanti, K. Apgrianto, and U. Waluyo, “Motivational factors contributing to students’ participation in the English learning programs: A study at MTs Putri Nurul Haramain Islamic Boarding School Narmada,” J. Ilm. Profesi Pendidik., vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 2387–2394, 2024, doi: 10.29303/jipp.v9i4.2645.
    13. [13] O. W. Saputra and S. Fatimah, “Exploring teacher difficulties and strategies in teaching English at Islamic Boarding School of Nurmanisy Hikmatusallam,” J. English Lang. Teach., vol. 13, no. 3, 2024, doi: 10.24036/jelt.v13i3.130834.
    14. [14] U. P. A. Saputra, W. F. N. R. Rusafi, and W. I. M. Rohmana, “Implementing various strategies in teaching English through literature in Islamic boarding school,” J. English Lang. Teaching, Lit. Cult., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 42–48, 2024, doi: 10.53682/jeltec.v3i1.8294.
    15. [15] N. Sholihah, A. W. Ritonga, and A. Desrani, “Environmental and institutional support: A study of English language education in pesantren settings,” JELITA J. English Lang. Teach. Lit., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 33–49, 2024, doi: 10.56185/jelita.v6i1.878.
    16. [16] J. L. Buttram and R. W. Covert, The Discrepancy Evaluation Model: A Systematic Approach for the Evaluation of Career Planning and Placement Programs. Columbus, OH, USA: ERIC, 1977.
    17. [17] M. M. Provus, Discrepancy evaluation: For educational program improvement and assessment. McCutchan Publishing Corporation., 1971.
    18. [18] N. Fadhilah and Asmanah, “Model discrepancy sebagai evaluasi program pendidikan,” Turots J. Pendidik. Islam, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 1108–1117, 2023, doi: 10.51468/jpi.v5i2.404.
    19. [19] P. S. Mustafa, “Model discrepancy sebagai evaluasi program pendidikan,” Palapa, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 182–198, 2021, doi: 10.36088/palapa.v9i1.1067.
    20. [20] C. L. S. Stufflebeam, D.L. & Coryn, Evaluation theory, models, and applications. Jossey-Bass, 2014.
    21. [21] M. Canale and M. Swain, “Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing,” Appl. Linguist., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1–47, 1980, doi: 10.1093/applin/I.1.1.
    22. [22] D. H. Hymes, “On communicative competence,” in Sociolinguistics: Selected Readings, J. B. Pride and J. Holmes, Eds., Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin, 1972, pp. 269–293.
    23. [23] C. C. M. Goh and A. Burns, Teaching Speaking: A Holistic Approach. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
    24. [24] D. Nunan, Task-Based Language Teaching. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
    25. [25] J. Philp and S. Duchesne, “Exploring engagement in tasks in the language classroom,” Annu. Rev. Appl. Linguist., vol. 36, pp. 50–72, 2016, doi: 10.1017/S0267190515000094.
    26. [26] K. Saito and K. Hanzawa, “The role of input in second language oral ability development in foreign language classrooms: A longitudinal study,” Lang. Teach. Res., vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 398–417, 2018, doi: 10.1177/1362168816679030.
    27. [27] M. Sato, “Interaction Mindsets, Interactional Behaviors, and L2 Development: An Affective-Social-Cognitive Model,” Lang. Learn., vol. 67, no. 2, pp. 249–283, 2017, doi: 10.1111/lang.12214.
    28. [28] M. Sato and S. Loewen, “Metacognitive instruction enhances the effectiveness of corrective feedback: Variable effects of feedback types and linguistic targets,” Lang. Learn., vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 507–545, 2018, doi: 10.1111/lang.12283.
    29. [29] M. Abrar, A. Mukminin, A. Habibi, F. Asyrafi, M. Makmur, and L. Marzulina, “‘If our English isn’t a language, what is it?’ Indonesian EFL student teachers’ challenges speaking English,” Qual. Rep., vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 129–145, 2018, doi: 10.46743/2160-3715/2018.3013.
    30. [30] E. Botes, J.-M. Dewaele, and S. Greiff, “The foreign language classroom anxiety scale and academic achievement: An overview of the prevailing literature and a meta-analysis,” J. Psychol. Lang. Learn., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 26–56, 2020, doi: 10.52598/jpll/2/1/3.
    31. [31] C. Boudreau, P. D. MacIntyre, and J.-M. Dewaele, “Enjoyment and anxiety in second language communication: An idiodynamic approach,” Stud. Second Lang. Learn. Teach., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 149–170, 2018, doi: 10.14746/ssllt.2018.8.1.7.
    32. [32] J.-M. Dewaele and L. Dewaele, “Are foreign language learners’ enjoyment and anxiety specific to the teacher? An investigation into the dynamics of learners’ classroom emotions,” Stud. Second Lang. Learn. Teach., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 45–65, 2020, doi: 10.14746/ssllt.2020.10.1.3.
    33. [33] G. H. Khajavy, P. D. MacIntyre, and E. Barabadi, “Role of the emotions and classroom environment in willingness to communicate,” Stud. Second Lang. Acquis., vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 605–624, 2018, doi: 10.1017/S0272263117000304.
    34. [34] P. D. MacIntyre, R. Clément, Z. Dörnyei, and K. A. Noels, “Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation,” Mod. Lang. J., vol. 82, no. 4, pp. 545–562, 1998, doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.1998.tb05543.x.
    35. [35] Y. Teimouri, J. Goetze, and L. Plonsky, “Second language anxiety and achievement: A meta-analysis,” Stud. Second Lang. Acquis., vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 363–387, 2019, doi: 10.1017/S0272263118000311.
    36. [36] P. Black and D. Wiliam, “Classroom assessment and pedagogy,” Assess. Educ. Princ. Policy Pract., vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 551–575, 2018, doi: 10.1080/0969594X.2018.1441807.
    37. [37] H. D. Brown and P. Abeywickrama, Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices, 3rd ed. New York, NY, USA: Pearson, 2019.
    38. [38] D. Carless and D. Boud, “The development of student feedback literacy: enabling uptake of feedback,” Assess. Eval. High. Educ., vol. 43, no. 8, pp. 1315–1325, 2018, doi: 10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354.
    39. [39] M. Henderson et al., “Conditions that enable effective feedback,” High. Educ. Res. Dev., vol. 38, no. 7, pp. 1401–1416, 2019, doi: 10.1080/07294360.2019.1657807.
    40. [40] B. Wisniewski, K. Zierer, and J. Hattie, “The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research,” Front. Psychol., vol. 10, 2020, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03087.
    41. [41] W. N. Hidayah and A. Shofiya, “Students’ perceptions of microlearning for English learning in an Islamic boarding school,” J. English Educ. Progr., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 13–25, 2026, doi: 10.26418/jeep.v7i1.102573.
    42. [42] N. Fitri, S. Kiram, Suwadi, W. Priyanggani, and C. L. Jabil, “Evaluating an Arabic-English bilingual program in an Islamic boarding school through the CIPP model: Strengthening students’ language competence,” Pendas J. Ilm. Pendidik. Dasar, vol. 11, no. 2, 2026, doi: 10.23969/jp.v11i02.52692.
    43. [43] Y. Sari, N. N. Padmadewi, P. Suarcaya, I. G. A. L. P. Utami, and D. P. Ramendra, “The evaluation of integrating English language learning program in Islamic boarding school: The CIPP model,” J. Penelit. dan Eval. Pendidik., vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 210–220, 2024, doi: 10.21831/pep.v28i2.75962.
    44. [44] Z. A. Jamil, Nurhuda, Alfian, S. M. Ulfah, Rasidin, and A. Youssef, “Program evaluation study on Islamic religious education in pesantren: Addressing educational degradation in the digital era,” J. Pendidik. Agama Islam, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 122–139, 2025, doi: 10.14421/jpai.v22i1.11358.
    45. [45] S. Campbell et al., “Purposive sampling: Complex or simple? Research case examples,” J. Res. Nurs., vol. 25, no. 8, pp. 652–661, 2020, doi: 10.1177/1744987120927206.
    46. [46] M. Hennink and B. N. Kaiser, “Sample sizes for saturation in qualitative research: A systematic review of empirical tests,” Soc. Sci. Med., vol. 292, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114523.
    47. [47] K. Malterud, V. D. Siersma, and A. D. Guassora, “Sample size in qualitative interview studies: Guided by information power,” Qual. Health Res., vol. 26, no. 13, pp. 1753–1760, 2016, doi: 10.1177/1049732315617444.
    48. [48] K. Vasileiou, J. Barnett, S. Thorpe, and T. Young, “Characterising and justifying sample size sufficiency in interview-based studies: Systematic analysis of qualitative health research over a 15-year period,” BMC Med. Res. Methodol., vol. 18, 2018, doi: 10.1186/s12874-018-0594-7.
    49. [49] D. Byrne, “A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis,” Qual. Quant., vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 1391–1412, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y.
    50. [50] G. Guest, E. Namey, and M. Chen, “A simple method to assess and report thematic saturation in qualitative research,” PLoS One, vol. 15, no. 5, 2020, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0232076.
    51. [51] M. E. Kiger and L. Varpio, “Thematic analysis of qualitative data: AMEE Guide No. 131,” Med. Teach., vol. 42, no. 8, pp. 846–854, 2020, doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2020.1755030.
    52. [52] L. S. Nowell, J. M. Norris, D. E. White, and N. J. Moules, “Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria,” Int. J. Qual. Methods, vol. 16, pp. 1–13, 2017, doi: 10.1177/1609406917733847.
    53. [53] Y. S. Lincoln and E. G. Guba, Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA, USA: SAGE, 1985.

Categories