Jurnal Empowerment Volume 7 Nomor 2, September 2018 e-ISSN : 2580-7692 p-ISSN : 2252-4738 179 EVALUATING THE DOORMAT CREATING LIFE SKILL PROGRAM IN THE CAHAYA KAHURIPAN BANGSA COMMUNITY LEARNING CENTRE LEMBANG 1Lince Sari Dianawati Leatemia, 2Aldian Hudaya 1 Cahaya Bintang Playgroup Lembang, Indonesia2 Sociology Education Department, Faculty of Social Science Education, UniversitasPendidikan Indonesia, Indonesia1 lincesaridiana@yahoo.com, 2 oichidan@student.upi.edu ABSTRACTNon-formal education involves the Paket program, which the CahayaKahuripan Bangsa Community Learning Centre deems insufficient insupporting their learning community’s needs and the demands of the society.For that purpose, the community learning centre conducts a lifeskill trainingprogram in creating doormats. This study aims to evaluate the said programusing Stufflebem’s CIPP model, gathering data from interviews, literarystudies and observations. While generally showing that each aspect falls intothe good category, the results also showed several factors that support andhinder the program. Among those are the participants’ motivation, supportfrom the business world, and managerial-related issues. In general, thisprogram has been performing as it intends itself to do. Keywords : Life Skill, Life, Skill, Training, Doormat INTRODUCTIONThe Cahaya Kahuripan Bangsa Community Learning Centre (further referred to as CKBCLC) sees non-formal education as an inseparable part of community education. Whilealready performing years of experience of conducting the Paket program, CKB CLC seesthat the Paket program alone is not sufficient for their learning community. To help thecommunity in performing well as they live in the society, CKB CLC establishes a lifeskilltraining program. The doormat creating lifeskill training program is one among many.Lifeskill programs, while commonly prepared for adolescents, are also available forearly-age children to participate. In the research’s context, the project is deemedeffective, despite follow-up studies regarding the permanence of the skills taught arestill due (Akfirat & Kezer, 2016). One considerable achievement of the program is thedevelopment of a training program usable for later studies. It enables furtherreinforcements of the skills once the children grow up to adolescents. In spite of this,some studies reported insignificant effects of the study (Gazioğlu & Canel, 2015). Thisaspect alone is worth the consideration, for lifeskill programs are not a successguarantee.There is a communal need to include lifeskill acquisition programs in all adult training.Lifeskill training may enhance adults’ social function roles irrespective of age, gender,marital status or qualification (Taute, 2007). For instance, employees with healthymental state and balanced physical condition tend to display enhanced workperformance. Lifeskill programs may prepare such employees, particularly their Jurnal Empowerment Volume 7 Nomor 2, September 2018 e-ISSN : 2580-7692 p-ISSN : 2252-4738 180 physical, emotional, cognitive, and social level. Their need is high (Hasbi, 2006), shownby how the community highly participates in lifeskill programs.This research aims to evaluate the performance of the program held in CKB CLC. Usingthe CIPP model, we aim to discover four aspects. The first, context, involves thecommunity participation in the program, the location of the program, and thecommunity knowledge of doormat creating. The second, input, involves the motivationand characteristics of the participants, experts, fundings, and infrastructures. The third, process, involves the participants’ activities during the program, the learning strategyand their interpersonal relationships. The fourth, product, involves the product and theprogram’s impact on the society.By evaluating the program, we hope to seek what factors that support the program’sperformance and what factors that hinder the program’s performance to achieve what itexpects. In addition, we expect to conclude whether the program performs as it expects,or whether there are significant issues that hinder it from being optimal. Similar PapersWe have considered a number of relevant resources that may serve as a supportingbackground as to the reason we conduct this research. These resources performsimilarly in different researches, yet they still have a considerable value that we shouldconsider in studying the issue.The implementation of a specific evaluation model is not the only factor that determinesthe successfulness of an evaluation process (Muryadi, 2017). There are a number ofother factors as well. Such factors may be different in every evaluation attempt, butmost of them come from external, unexpected sources that are out of the organizers’power.The CIPP model has also seen its usage in evaluating an entrepreneurship programdeveloped and ran by CLC Tunas Bangsa Tugu, Semarang. The results include(Pamungkas & Fauziah, 2014):a) finding a correspondence between the participants’ needs. participations and theirworkshop knowledge,b) categorising the participants’ motivation and characteristics, the tutors’characteristics, funding, and infrastructure into the good category,c) categorising the participants’ activities during the training, their learning strategy,and their interpersonal relationship into the good category,d) concluding that the workshop entrepreneurship program is well implemented, ande) discovering factors including high motivation and infrastructure availability assupporting factors and vacancy sources and workshop equipment loss as inhibitingfactors.While this research comprises methods similar to what Pamungkas and Fauziah used intheir research, the context of this research, as well as the subject, are entirely different.Their program is an entrepreneurship program, which comprises a mechanicalworkshop. Participants were most likely men—this is subject to further research due tolack of information in their research paper. This research studies about doormat making Jurnal Empowerment Volume 7 Nomor 2, September 2018 e-ISSN : 2580-7692 p-ISSN : 2252-4738 181 program. While lacking the word ‘entrepreneurship’ in its title, on its implementation,entrepreneurship values were intensively taught and practised throughout theprogram. Participants were not limited to only either men or women, and in fact, werenot only limited to individuals who were participating in CKB CLC’s Paket program.Another research studies lifeskill programs in terms of its roles in reducing povertylevels. Its conclusion is that the participants may not display their competency in theskills being taught in workplace scenarios (Suryono & Tohani, n.d.). This is because theorganizer still has limited access and relationships with other instances, limiting thepossibilities of the program’s participants to practice their skills in a workplace or real-life scenarios.A research done by Koswara (2014) studies the management of lifeskill programs in pesantren (Islamic boarding schools) scenarios. Its results show that the managementperformed not as the program expects. The proofs are incomplete program plans andlack of documentation and notes. In addition, program evaluation was hindered by thelack of assessment instruments. Nonetheless, the program execution was well withoutother noteworthy issues.Siregar (2017) conducted a similar research in a pesantren scenario at KabupatenPandeglang. Its planning comprises setting program goals, identifying needs, andcomposing the program curriculum: academic support, religion, vocational skill andcommunity service. The execution comprises participants’ organising and classmanagement. The evaluation focuses on the participants’ skill practised in transformingreligious values through what they obtained in the program. METHODThe category of this research is program evaluation research. This research evaluatesthe doormat creating lifeskill training program using Stufflebem’s CIPP (Context, Input,Process, and Product) model (citation). This model is appropriate because it evaluatesall aspects that require evaluation in concluding if a program is successful. It iscomplete—in a sense that it evaluates context to assist in formulating objectives,inputting aspects to aid program preparation, processing to direct the enforcement ofthe program, and producting to determine what the program achieves (Warju, 2016).The following figure illustrates the CIPP evaluation model. Jurnal Empowerment Volume 7 Nomor 2, September 2018 e-ISSN : 2580-7692 p-ISSN : 2252-4738 182 Figure 1. The CIPP evaluation modelAs such, this research uses the qualitative approach and the descriptive method. We seethe model, approach, and method being close to the systematic model of communityeducation evaluation, involving components, process, and the purpose of a program(citation). In this research, we focus on the four aspects of CIPP in evaluating theprogram: Context EvaluationContext evaluation evaluates the reason a program is implemented. If the program is alarge-scale program, this evaluation might comprise the program’s objectives, socialpolicies that may support or inhibit the program, social policies that may support orinhibit the vision and/or mission of the organizer, the environment the program takesplace in, identification of needs, opportunities, and other issues that the program maydeal (Warju, 2016). This evaluation may serve to plan decisions that organizers maytake to improve their program. In our context, the context aspect involves theparticipants’ participation and needs, as well as where the training is located and theparticipants’ initial knowledge of the lifeskill trained. Input EvaluationInput evaluation evaluates sources that may be suitable to achieve what a programdesires. This may be used to discover problem-solving strategies, planning programsand design programs (Warju, 2016). The results take many forms, but commonly ittakes the form of budget plans, schedules, proposals and SOPs. In our context, the inputevaluation aspect aims the participants, expert, and the program organizers.Specifically, it will evaluate their motivation, characteristics, fundings, andinfrastructure. Jurnal Empowerment Volume 7 Nomor 2, September 2018 e-ISSN : 2580-7692 p-ISSN : 2252-4738 183 Process EvaluationProcess evaluation results in feedbacks to individuals who partake the activities in aprogram to take responsibilities for what they do in the program. This may take severalforms, including (but not limited to) the monitoring of potential failure sources, thepreparation of initial information to plan decisions, and the explanation of processesthat actually happened (Warju, 2016). Evaluation process asseseses an aspect based ondefined objective standards, then organizers or evaluation partakers take action basedon the results (Djaali & Ramly, 2000). It requires collecting data through instrumentssuch as observation guidelines, assessment scales, and field notes.Worthen and Sanders (in Sawitri, 2007) argued that the process evaluation aims todescribe:a) weaknesses and strengths found during program execution,b) information regarding a taken decision, andc) how organizers preserve their field notes regarding important points theyfound during program execution.In our context, the process evaluation aspect involves evaluating the participants’activities during training, their learning/training strategy and their interpersonalrelations. The evaluated indicators are the learning in a classroom context, involving themethod and approach, additional learning sessions, practice/application sessions, andtime allocation. Product EvaluationProduct evaluation deals with the achievement of program objectives—i.e. what theprogram expects to achieve and what it expects its participants to achieve. This alsodeals with measuring impacts of expected occurences and unexpected occurences. Itenables the evaluation to conduct during and/or after the program. Stufflebeam (inWarju, 2016) argues that this evaluation comprises four aspects: impact (i.e. the impactof the program to its participants and to the community in general), effectiveness(whether the program performs as it expects), sustainability (whether the programpreserves from time to time), and transportability (whether the program is mobile).In our context, product evaluation aspect comprises evaluating the impacts of theprogram. While the other aspects are not examined in-depth, it does not imply that theother aspects are not examined. It simply means that the impacts of the program takehigher priority over the others.Additionally, the subject of this research is the participants, lifeskill training programorganizer (represented by the principal of CKB CLC), and the experts involved. Jurnal Empowerment Volume 7 Nomor 2, September 2018 e-ISSN : 2580-7692 p-ISSN : 2252-4738 184 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Results The context aspectLifeskill education in non-formal education is an effort to improve the skills, knowledge,attitudes and abilities that enable participants to live independently. In itsimplementation, lifeskill education grounds on the Four Pillars of Education. The fourpillars comprises “learning to know” (to learn to acquire knowledge), “learning to learn”(to learn how to learn), “learning to do” (to learn how to ‘perform’ skills related to theknowledge), and “learning to live together” (to learn how to live together). Among allother lifeskills, the CKB CLC trains its learning community to create doormats. Theprogram is learner-oriented, orienting itself to surrounding opportunities.The training takes place at the CKB CLC learning environment, also used by learners of Paket A, B, and C. Its specific address is Ruko Central Lembang, which is the strategicepicentre of Lembang traversed by various public transportations.The organizer aims this program to support the participants with lifeskills. It wouldlater enable them to make doormats on their own and sell it for extra income. The highintensity of doormat needs and the initial high demands of knowledge to makedoormats from the learning community supports the establishment of the program. The input aspectThe participants’ motivation in the early years were high—i.e. they were enthusiastic.This indicator is their punctuality.They joined the program over their own will. After joining, if they feel incompatible theymay quit the program. There is no punishment for such behaviour by the organiser. Theparticipants aside, experts also have a significant role in the program. Such roledemands the expert to have adept skills and proficiency. CKB CLC instructors, alsoplaying the role of ‘experts’ as mentioned, have such adeptness based on their years ofexperience.There are two funding sources to support the program. The principal of CLB CKC stated,“At first, we fund this program on our own. However, at present, we are grateful for thehefty sales profit from Yogya Department Store Group and other instances. It is enoughto support the program. We use the fund to purchase all we need to create doormats:rags, necessary tools, and other operational expenditures.”Infrastructures are also crucial in supporting the program. This includes doormatmoulds, rags, scissors, needles, and yarns. All those are sufficient to fulfil the needs ofthis program. The process aspectThe participants have had good times in their activities during the program. Theirpresence shows their enthusiast. One of the instructors, AD, stated, “They love to come.If they are absent, it must have been because of something urgent. They just love doingactivities in the program so much they rarely absent.” In addition, K, another instructor,stated, “It feels good to be an instructor in this program. I love how disciplined, Jurnal Empowerment Volume 7 Nomor 2, September 2018 e-ISSN : 2580-7692 p-ISSN : 2252-4738 185 committed, and enthusiastic they are. Just looking at them also makes me feel moreenthusiastic.”The usage of doormat making tools also plays a significant role in supporting theprocess. Instructor K strengthens this argument with their statement, “We try to usethings efficiently to make sure the training is not hindered.” No. Name 1st week Activity Time 2nd Week Activity Time 1. GroupA MondayWednesdayFridaySaturday TheoryPractisePractiseMonitoring 10.00–12.0010.00–12.0010.00–12.0010.00–12.00 MondayWednesdayFridaySaturday TheoryPractisePractiseTest/evaluating 10.00–12.0010.00–12.0010.00–12.0010.00–12.00 2. GroupB TuesdayThursdayFridaySaturday TheoryPractisePractiseMonitoring 13.00–15.0013.00–15.0013.00–15.0013.00–15.00 TuesdayThursdayFridaySaturday TheoryPractisePractiseTest/evaluating 13.00–15.0013.00–15.0013.00–15.0013.00–15.00 3. GroupC MondayWednesdayFridaySaturday TheoryPractisePractiseMonitoring 10.00–12.0010.00–12.0010.00– MondayWednesdayFridaySaturday TheoryPractisePractiseTest/evaluating 10.00–12.0010.00–12.0010.00– Jurnal Empowerment Volume 7 Nomor 2, September 2018 e-ISSN : 2580-7692 p-ISSN : 2252-4738 186 No. Name 1st week Activity Time 2nd Week Activity Time12.0010.00–12.00 12.0010.00–12.00 4. GeneralGroup TuesdayThursdayFridaySaturday TheoryPractisePractiseMonitoring 13.00–15.0013.00–15.0013.00–15.0013.00–15.00 TuesdayThursdayFridaySaturday TheoryPractisePractiseTest/evaluating 13.00–15.0013.00–15.0013.00–15.0013.00–15.00 Table 1. ScheduleThe interaction between participants and instructors goes without any gaps betweenthem. There is no tension between them. Communication goes without any issues,making for a more comfortable teaching and learning atmosphere. This prevents themto feel bored during sessions, instead of making them feel relaxed yet serious in doingactivities.The participants, guided by instructors, tailored to their needs, opportunities, andcompletion, implement and design their independent study learning activities. First, 20hours of instruction from two instructors serves to train them the basics of creating adoormat. Theory and practice put together into an immediate trial session. This firststage goes for one day. Afterwards, the participants have direct practice to createdoormats for two weeks.Internal monitoring and evaluation are after one week of practice. This is to find outhow the training goes, finding what lacks and needs attention, and carries out anynecessary fixes possible. The product aspectImplementing a supportive attitude will foster creativity, thus making implementationsmore effective. In addition, adequate resources for each activity—be it the humanresource, funding resources, or other resources involved in the pogram—supports goodcommunication. It is the liaison between the deliveries of messages from thegovernment to the public. Community support power is in a level of sufficientparticipation in program execution. Jurnal Empowerment Volume 7 Nomor 2, September 2018 e-ISSN : 2580-7692 p-ISSN : 2252-4738 187 Of these aspects, the program implementation results in a group of trained individualswith adeptness in creating doormats from available resources. They have gained skillsfrom the training, and thus may help themselves in their daily life after they graduate.Practical skills weigh heavily than theoretical skills, resulting in trainees havingadeptness that is more practical over theory memorization. Additional Findings: FactorsAs additional findings, we have also discovered several factors that influence theprogram. These factors may support or hinder the program from completing itsobjective.Supporting factors include the funding from a backing foundation. This is especially atearly stages, where the funding supports the program in its entirety. In addition,strategic training venue gives advantages for participants. Located in the centre of thetown, this strategic place enables the participants to have fewer difficulties in reachingthe venue. Suppliers of raw materials also gain some advantage—they reach the venueeasily, thus enabling efficient deliveries of materials needed in the practice. Potentialcustomers can also notice the venue easily. They may either sign up for the program orpurchase the doormats created by participants. This helps the program to gain morerecognition from the community.Supports from participants who truly participate in this program may also support thecreation of high-quality homemade doormats. In addition, community support,especially those offered by The Yogya Department Store Group, supports the program.They are willing to purchase the produced doormats with a reasonable price. This laterturns to be one primary source of funding that sustains the program.On the contrary, over the past two years, the number of participants are decaying.According to the organizers, this is most likely due to community attitude—they preferfaster, if not instant, income, whereas creating doormats takes some time, patience,perseverance and thoroughness. In addition, interests in joining the program comemostly from seniors. They have adept persistence, thoroughness, and patience, yet theylack in terms of speed. This often causes production results not meeting desired targets. Discussion ContextNonformal education programmes prioritise efforts to fulfil the needs expressed by thepublic. These centres on the construction and development of entrepreneurship.Referencing the curriculum of equality education (Departemen Pendidikan Nasional,2004), the programmes aim to:(1) form individuals who have religious beliefs, behave appropriately, and haveacceptable characters and behaviours,(2) provide meaningful and productive learning in acceptable standards,(3) provide lifeskills oriented to careers, entrepreneurship, vocation and jobs, and(4) provide necessary requirements to either proceed to higher education and/orto live in the society. Jurnal Empowerment Volume 7 Nomor 2, September 2018 e-ISSN : 2580-7692 p-ISSN : 2252-4738 188 There are eight characteristics suggested by Kindervatter (Kamil, 2009) that is used bycommunity learning centres in their efforts to improve the independence of theirlearning communities. Those are:(a) forming study groups into small groups,(b) training agents as facilitators,(c) training facilitators as participative leaders,(d) slowly transfer responsibilities from agents to learning community members,(e) interacting non-hierarchically and democratically among each other,(f) conducting activities integrating action and reflection,(g) developing self-reliance, and(h) improving social, economic, and/or political independence.This program is one of many other programs to improve the skills of CKB CLC’s learningcommunity members. It is intended to provide skill, knowledge, self-esteem,independence, diligent, action-oriented, work-as-you-study, hard-working, and creativeaspects to help someone improve their life both present and in the future.While initially having good reception and enthusiast, community interest in thisprogram began to decay after the past two years. Nonetheless, this program helps tochange the attitude and behaviour of its participants. They become more confident bothin jobs and in entrepreneurship, while also becoming more independent than they were.Because of this program, some of the participants who were previously unemployedbegan having positive, useful activities that support their life. InputThis program runs will in the presence of high motivation and participation from itsparticipants. This may increase their curiosity over new things, which may also affecttheir learning activities and outcomes.CKB CLC implements several approaches in learning sessions of this program (Komar,2006):(a) self-study by making use of experiences gained from activities to acquireknowledge and skills,(b) mutual learning between participants who have knowledge and skillsbeforehand and beginner participants,(c) learning together with instructors to gain new knowledge and skills,(d) knowledge and skill course under the guidance of learning resources, and(e) internship by learning, working and experiencing the usage of newly acquiredskills and knowledge in real-life situations supervised by someone with adeptskills.Interview results show that the program performs well without issues. Infrastructuresare also sufficient and capable of supporting the participants’ activities. These benefitsthe participants, specifically because of their high motivation, perseverance, andpatience in the program are supported by capable infrastructures and suprastructures. Jurnal Empowerment Volume 7 Nomor 2, September 2018 e-ISSN : 2580-7692 p-ISSN : 2252-4738 189 Different backgrounds of the participants do not hinder the program execution. Most ofthem had no initial experiences in creating doormats. This makes the instructors’ roleoptimal in transferring their knowledge. ProcessThere is a range of choices that instructors may use in processing learning interactionsto achieve specified goals. In choosing them, several factors may worth considering:learning goals, material characteristics, participants, facilitators, time, andinfrastructure supporting power. Several practicable methods include (1) classical, (2)group, (3) demonstration, (4) guided tutorial, (5) inquiry, and (6) learning while doing(Suryono & Sumarno, 2012).This independent-aiming program has similar conditions. Participants design andconduct the learning activities them with the guidance of an instructor, tailored to meettheir needs. This supports building independence among them. They are encouraged totake decisions and act according to their own needs and wishes, among them is to fulfiltheir needs.There are two phases in the strategy implemented in the lifeskill training program: thetheory-learning phase and the direct practice phase. The theory phase spans one day inthe schedule. It is because most of the participants have no prior experiences in creatingdoormats, specifically those made of rags. The theories will discuss what kind of ragthey would need, the size of the mould, and what to do and prepare before creating adecent quality doormat. Afterwards, in the direct practice phase, they try to createdoormats under direct guidance from instructors. An average number of them managedto finish the task in two weeks, note that they practice at their own pace at homediligently.Participants accept this strategy. Their relationship with instructors becomes closerbecause they guide them continuously. The closeness and warmth comfort theparticipants and further their resolute in participating the program.Several methods are used, and among them all, the learning-by-doing plays animportant role. It is the phase where each method’s results, in both theory and practice,can play in a field-like situation tailored to the participants’ needs.The monitoring and evaluation start one week after the program starts. Among allaspects, the noteworthy aspect to monitor and evaluate is the training process,identifying what lacks and what needs improvements. Relationships between theparticipants and instructors are put into consideration, becoming a significant factor indetermining the continuity of the program. Emotional and mental communicationbetween participants are also considered. ProductNon-formal education establishes in neighbourhood communities and institutions. Itserves the needs of the community to learn so they know how and what to learn thatmatch their needs and habits. They may choose skills and perform learning activities, aswell as be able to interact positively with learning resources and the environment. Jurnal Empowerment Volume 7 Nomor 2, September 2018 e-ISSN : 2580-7692 p-ISSN : 2252-4738 190 Kamil (2009) argues that there are three important goals in order of establishment anddevelopment of a community learning centre. First, it must empower communities to beself-sufficient (independent). Second, it must improve the quality of community life bothin social terms as well as economic. Lastly, it must increase awareness of the problemsthat occur in their environment so that they may take part in solving them.In accordance with that understanding, this program will first be in the first match byorganizers. They see the surrounding potential, what the needs of the citizens are. Withthis adjustment, they expected the program to be beneficial to its participants as well asthe surrounding community.In the implementation of life skills training program make a doormat in Light PKBMKahuripan Nation Lembang in line with the above statement, that is, through severalstages to get maximum results. The giving of responsibility to the citizens learned to dowhen its own practices in the home. With the responsibility given to the citizens oflearning, they will be able to work together well with a group or with other groups. Thepractice alone may increase their experience, thus making them more independent,creative, and more initiative especially in taking decisions. Additional Findings Discussion: FactorsA successful program has certain factors both supporting and inhibiting it. This programis no exception. It is based on the training that is not only oriented to its participants butalso to anyone who is willing to follow the training. Participants come from diversebackgrounds. Their motivation and good cooperation are very influential in securing theprogram success. Their motivation shows a much-desired one, according to organizers.Infrastructure is no less important to support the success of a program. Its availability isvery influential throughout the program. Adequate infrastructure would result inparticipants having more control and access to express themselves with what they arelearning. On the other side, infrastructure is not without funding issues. Funds providedby foundations and the corporate world for program sustainability will certainly help.The instructor, a good facilitator, is also one of the supporting factors. It can be seen byexamining conditions before and after the program. After the program, participantslearn to be more independent, confident, having higher learning motivation, emotionalcontrol, capable of start in cooperation among themselves, desiring to achieve verylarge communications, learning and work for the better. In addition, they learn to getadditional income, which would improve their lives.The inhibiting factors, among all insignificant others, is that some of the youngerparticipants participate less seriously compared to the others. This is overcome byempowering them to learn from the seniors, hoping to achieve production targets. Inaddition, several managerial-related issues were present. Jurnal Empowerment Volume 7 Nomor 2, September 2018 e-ISSN : 2580-7692 p-ISSN : 2252-4738 191 CONCLUSIONIn general, the program has been performing desirably and the evaluation of the fouraspects falls this program into the good category. Participants’ motivation, funding, andinfrastructure are performing well. CKB CLC also gains a relationship with the corporateworld, enabling the production to sell in the market world. The learning process hasbeen designed and implemented by participants and has been conducted under theguidance of an experienced instructor. The outcomes of this program, being moreindependent and capable individuals, has been performing well in their lives in thesociety. REFERENCES Akfirat, O. N., & Kezer, F. (2016). A Program Implementation for the Development of LifeSkills of Primary School 4th Grade Students. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(35), 9–16.Ardiwinata, J. S., & Mulyono, D. (2018). Community Education in the development of TheCommunity. Empowerment, 7(1), 25-35.Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. (2004). Pedoman Penyelenggaraan ProgramKecakapan Hidup Pendidikan Nonformal.Djaali, P. M., & Ramly. (2000). Pengukuran dalam bidang pendidikan. Jakarta: PPs UNJ.Gazioğlu, A. E. İ., & Canel, A. C. (2015). A school-based prevention model in the fightaghainst addiction: life skills training. Addicta: The Turkish Journal on Additions, 2(2), 5–44. https://doi.org/10.15805/addicta.2015.2.2.0011Hasbi, M. (2006). Evaluasi Penyelenggaraan Program Pendidikan Kecakapan HidupDalam Bidang Pendidikan Luar Sekolah. Jurnal Ilmiah VISI PTK-PNF, 1(2), 89–95.https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.21009/JIV.0102.13Kamil, M. (2009). Pendidikan nonformal: pengembangan melalui pusat kegiatan belajar mengajar (PKBM) di Indonesia: sebuah pembelajaran dari kominkan di Jepang (Cet.1.). Bandung: Alfabeta.Komar, O. (2006). Filsafat Pendidikan Nonformal. Bandung: Pustaka Setia.Koswara, R. (2014). Manajemen pelatihan life skill dalam upaya pemberdayaan santri dipondok pesantren. Empowerment, 4(1), 38–50.Muryadi, A. D. (2017). Model evaluasi program dalam penelitian evaluasi. Jurnal Ilmiah PENJAS, 3(1), 1–16.Pamungkas, A., & Fauziah, P. Y. (2014). Evaluasi Program Kewirausahaan Bengkel padaKejar Paket B di PKBM Tunas Bangsa Tugu Semarang. Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Pemberdayaan Masyarakat, 1(2), 136–148.Sawitri, S. (2007). Evaluasi Program Pelatihan Ketrampilan Membuat Hiasan Busana dengan Teknik Pemasangan Payet Bagi Pemilik dan Karyawan Modiste di Kecamatan Gunungpati Semarang. Yogyakarta: PPs UNY.Siregar, H. (2017). Pengelolaan pendidikan life skills di pondok pesantren KabupatenPandeglang, 2(2), 198–213.Suryono, Y., & Sumarno. (2012). Pembelajaran Kewirausahaan Masyarakat. Yogyakarta:Aditya Media.Suryono, Y., & Tohani, E. (n.d.). Evaluation of life skills education based nonformal education for proverty reduction in rural. Yogyakarta.Taute, F. M. (2007). An evaluation of the impact of a life skills programme in the Jurnal Empowerment Volume 7 Nomor 2, September 2018 e-ISSN : 2580-7692 p-ISSN : 2252-4738 192 workplace. Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 43(3), 271–282.https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980007382530Warju. (2016). Educational Program Evaluation using CIPP Model. Innovation of Vocational Technology Education, 12(1), 36–42. Retrieved fromhttp://ejournal.upi.edu/index.php/invotec/article/view/4502/3133