This is an open access article under the CC-BY-SA license. REiD (Research and Evaluation in Education), 6(2), 2020, 150-159 Available online at: http://journal.uny.ac.id/index.php/reid Evaluation of education and training programs in Solo Technopark Central Java in Indonesia *1 Sudiyatno; 2 Iswahyuni Wulandari 1 Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta Jl. Colombo No. 1, Karangmalang, Depok, Sleman, Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia 2 SMK Negeri 1 Gelumbang Jl. Raya Prabumulih Km. 50, Gelumbang, Muara Enim, Sumatera Selatan 31171, Indonesia *Corresponding Author. E-mail: sudiyatno@uny.ac.id Submitted: 21 December 2020 | Revised: 31 December 2020 | Accepted: 31 December 2020 Abstract This study aims to evaluate the implementation of a training program for youth in Solo Technopark, Cen- tral Java, Indonesia, and get important feedback and recommendations to increase its effectiveness. The evaluation method used is based on four levels of the Kirkpatrick model to assess: (1) participants' re- action to the training program (to the contents, facilitators, and facilities); (2) training participants' learning (knowledge and basic skills); (3) change of participant behaviors; and (4) succeed of the training partici- pants based on competence skills and rate of graduate employability and employer’s satisfaction. Research respondents were 47 training participants from four optional courses at the reaction and learning level. There were 59 alumni, three training instructors, and one employer as the respondents at the behavior and results level. Data were collected using questionnaires, interviews, documentation, and an observation checklist. The data were analyzed using the quantitative descriptive analysis method. The study shows that: (1) at the reaction level, most training participants are satisfied with the training program, instructors, and facilities; (2) at the learning level, most participants have a good category in knowledge and basic skills; (3) at the behavior level, participants can implement the attitudes and major skills at a good level; (4) at the re- sults level, alumni have high skills at workplaces; they have been employed in various industries, and the alumni's employability rate is less than 50%. To increase the low rate of employability in the labor market, Solo Technopark needs to improve alumni networking and collaboration with industries and employers. Keywords: education and training, evaluation program, Kirkpatrick model, Solo technopark How to cite: Sudiyatno, S., & Wulandari, I. (2020). Evaluation of education and training programs in Solo Technopark Central Java in Indonesia. REiD (Research and Evaluation in Education), 6(2), 150-159. doi:https://doi.org/10.21831/reid.v6i2.36794. Introduction Indonesia has a golden opportunity to improve the welfare of its population through optimizing demographic bonus in the form of a larger percentage of the population of pro- ductive age (15 to 64 years). The Population and Family Planning Agency estimates that Indonesia will have a population of 305.65 million or even more in the year 2035. The composition of growth in the population of productive age in 2035 will reach 207.5 mil- lion people or as much as 67.9% of the popu- lation (Central Bureau of Statistics, 2013). Therefore, the government must educate and train them to become a skilled workforce. Conversely, if the government fails to educate them into a skilled workforce and there are not enough jobs available, then the opposite thing will happen. Unemployment rate will in- crease sharply so that it can result in an in- crease in various kinds of social crimes, such as theft, burglary and robbery. https://doi.org/10.21831/reid.v6i2.36794 doi:https://doi.org/10.21831/reid.v6i2.36794 Sudiyatno & Iswahyuni Wulandari Copyright © 2020, REiD (Research and Evaluation in Education), 6(2), 2020 - 151 ISSN: 2460-6995 (Online) The Central Bureau of Statistics stated that the educational background of workers in Indonesia in August 2019 was dominated by elementary aand junior high school graduates (45%), vocational and high school graduates as much as 38% and college and uviersities graduates as much as 17%. In February 2020 the number of workforce was 137.91 millions and the number of open unemployed was 6.88 millions (Central Bureau of Statistics, 2020). On the other hand, vocational schools (sekolah menengah kejuruan or SMK) which is expected to be able to produce skilled work- ers turned out to have the highest unemploy- ment rate compared to other groups, 8.49% in the early 2020 (Suprayitna, 2020). With the large number of workers with low education, and the number of unemployed SMK gradu- ates, in the future the government needs to: (1) prioritize the development of labor-inten- sive industries so that they can accommodate a large number of workers; and (2) provide alternative education and non-formal training in order to rapidly increase the competence of prospective workers. The government through the Minister of Industry has identified several labor-inten- sive industries, such as textiles, footwear and garments that are capable of absorbing a workforce of 225 thousand people per year or 56% of the absorption of 400 thousand work- ers per year (Putra, 2019). Therefore, the gov- ernment has encouraged investors to build labor-intensive industries, not capital-inten- sive industries, especially in provincies, so that they can reduce the rate of urbanization and simultaneously increase economic output and also labor absorption (Winardi, Priyarsono, Siregar, & Kustanto, 2019). For example, fur- niture industry that uses rattan and wood as a base material was developed in Palu, Central Sulawesi and in Kendal, Central Java which was also supported by the construction of the Furniture Industry Polytechnic to increase the competence of its human resources. The de- velopment of the furniture industry, based on data from Central Bureau of Statistics in 2017, there were 1,918 business units in the medium and large scale, capable of absorbing up to 200 thousand workers (Ministry of Industry of the Republic of Indonesia, 2019) The government, through the Depart- ment of Manpower, has organized several forms of non-formal education and training in the regions, including training organized by the Work Training Agency. Currently, there are 305 work training agencies that are able to accommodate as many as 275 thousand par- ticipants, mostly primary school, junior high school, and senior high school/vocational high school graduates in various vocational fields, such as business and management, tourism, electronic engineering and others, which was served online via the official page, https:/kemnaker.go.id/training. Besides, the government also organizes non-formal educa- tion and training programs through the devel- opment of a science techno park (STP) in sev- eral regions. In 2019, 22 STPs spread across several provicincies. Solo Techno Park in Solo, Central Java, developed since 2009, is an integrated tech- nology area, as a development center for mi- cro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs), vocational training skills and innovations that combines elements of science and technology development, market, industry and business needs to strengthen the regional competitive- ness. Solo Techno Park provides four training fields, namely manufacturing mechanics, man- ufacturing welding, manufacturing automation and manufacturing design. The government needs to assess the ex- tent to which the level of effectiveness of the training programs at Techno Park as one of the education and training institutions that is relied on in supporting the availability of skilled labor, how does the level suit the needs of the labor market, and the level of user absorption of graduates. Several studies that have been conducted have not specifically fo- cused on the performance of the graduates. For example, Ramadhani (2015) evaluated the implementation process of the business and technology incubator program at Solo Techno Park. Mukhlish (2018) examined the model of collaboration between government, industry and universities developed in several institu- tions including Solo Teckno Park. In addition, Muhammad, et al. (2017) conducted a survey on the quality of a number of tecknopark em- bryos in Indonesia. Rahayu and Nurharjadmo doi:https://doi.org/10.21831/reid.v6i2.36794 Sudiyatno & Iswahyuni Wulandari 152 - Copyright © 2020, REiD (Research and Evaluation in Education), 6(2), 2020 ISSN: 2460-6995 (Online) (2017) generally evaluated the implementation of the technopark solo development program. Pitaloka and Humaedi (2020) in their research explained that Science Technology Park can habituate the culture of science and technol- ogy in the community and reveal STP devel- opment phenomena in the regional context in Indonesia. This research explains something differ- ent from the previous studies because it more specifically explains the evaluation results of training outcomes based on the opinions of participants, alumni and employers. The eval- uation model of Kirkpatrick’s four level is chosen because the model provides one tech- nique for appraisal of the evidence for any re- ported training program and could be used to evaluate whether a training program is likely to meet the needs and requirements of both the organization implementing the training and the staff who will participate in it (Smidt, Balandin, Sigafoos, & Reed, 2009). Thus, the results become valuable inputs in improving the performance of non-formal education and training programs, especially at Solo Techno Park. Method This research was conducted at Solo Technopark in July to September 2019. The subjects of this study were the training partici- pants, training alumni, and industrial employ- ers of the alumni. The selection of respon- dents method was purposive sampling. The evaluation model used in this study was the Kirkpatrick model. This model consists of four levels: reaction, learning, behaviour, and results. Data were collected through inter- view, observation, questionnaires, and docu- mentation. The respondents of the training program were 47 training participants for re- action and learning levels and 59 alumni for behaviour and results level. The scores col- lected from the questionnaires were graded in five categories based on the ideal mean and standard deviation, there were very low; low; intermediate; high; and very high, and the data were analyzed quantitively. Meanwhile, the data collected from observations and inter- views were analyzed by using qualitative tech- nique. Indicators measured in the reaction as- pect were training participants' motivation and satisfaction to the subject contents, the instructors and the facilities. Indicators meas- ured in the learning aspects were understand- ing of the theories and the degree of practical skills. Indicators measured in the behaviour aspects are changes in the behaviour of train- ing participants related to skills, attitude and changes in the behaviour of participants re- lated to the skills after completing the pro- gram. Indicators measured in result aspect were the impact after attending the training program, the degree of absorption of gradu- ates, and the impact of alumni in the work place. Findings and Discussion Evaluation of a training program using Kirkpatrick's four level model focuses on the development of training outcomes in training participants which includes: reaction, learning, behavor, and results. The evaluation of reac- tion is how the participant felt about the train- ing or the learning experience. The evaluation of learning is the measurement of the increase in knowledge of the participants during the training activities. The evaluation of behavior is the extent of applied learning back on the work where the participant does their jobs. The evaluation of results is the effect on the business or environment by the participant. The reaction and learning criteria are consi- dered internal, because they focus on what occurs within the training program. More- over, the behavioral and results criteria focus on changes that occur outside (and typically after) the program, and are thus seen as ex- ternal criteria (Praslova, 2010). Furthermore, Grohmann and Kauffeld (2013) stated that all of the four levels are important for training evaluation, because organizations can use the reaction level as an indicator of customer satisfaction, and the learning level is assumed to be a requirement for behavior change. Be- havior level results can demonstrate how the training contents are actually applied to the job, so that it is organizationally usable, while the results level shows how the training con- tributes to organizational success. doi:https://doi.org/10.21831/reid.v6i2.36794 Sudiyatno & Iswahyuni Wulandari Copyright © 2020, REiD (Research and Evaluation in Education), 6(2), 2020 - 153 ISSN: 2460-6995 (Online) Level 1: Reaction The objective for the reaction measure- ment is to evaluate how each participant re- acts to the training program. Questions were developed to figure out if the trainees enjoyed their experience and if they found the subject contents and facilities used in the program useful for their work. Aspects measured of the trainee reaction were: (1) motivation of at- tending the program; (2) response to the sub- ject contents, to the facilitators/instructors and to the equipment and facilities provided in the training program. In the Solo Technopark training pro- gram, according the trainees, motivation to participate the training was obtained that par- ticipants had a very high level of motivation that is equal to 48.90%. Participants who had a high motivation level were 44.70% and those who had moderate motivation were 6.40%. Distribution of respondents’ answers to statements in the training participants' mo- tivation questionnaire obtained the highest av- erage percentage value on the statement that said “I feel happy in participating in training”, as many as 20 respondents expressed very sa- tisfied and 27 respondents said they were sa- tisfied with the statement. Meanwhile, the re- spondent's answer with the lowest average percentage on the statement that says “ask if you have difficulty”, as many as eight respon- dents said they were very satisfied, 38 respon- dents said they were satisfied, and one re- spondent said they were not satisfied. Based on these data, the participants’ reactions were satisfied with the motivation to take part in the training, but it was necessary to be given the opportunity to ask questions if partici- pants experienced difficulties. The satisfaction of the participants to the subject matters in the training was in a very high level of satisfaction (63.8%). Partici- pants who had a high level of satisfaction with the training material were 34.0% and those with moderate interest were 2.1%. Distribu- tion of respondents' answers to statements in the questionnaire related to participant satis- faction with training material obtained the highest average percentage value is in the statement “The training subjcts provided are very useful for dealing with competition in the work place”, 36 respondents stated very satis- fied and 11 respondents said they were satis- fied in the statement. Meanwhile, the respon- dent's answer with the lowest average per- centage value on the statement that reads “material is well mastered”, as many as seven respondents said they were very satisfied, 39 respondents said they were satisfied, and one respondent said they were not satisfied. Based on these data the participants’ reactions were satisfied with the training material. However, seen from the lowest mean of the answers of respondents not all material is well mastered. This must be taken more seriously. Participants’ satisfaction with the train- ing instructor results in the participant having a high level of satisfaction with the training instructor at 66.00%. Participants who had a high level of satisfaction with training instruc- tors were 29.80% and those who had moder- ate satisfaction were 4.3%. Distribution of re- spondents' answers to statements in the ques- tionnaire related to the participant satisfaction with training instructors obtained the highest average percentage value is in the statement “Instructor gives motivation to participants”, 24 respondents stated very satisfied and as many as 22 respondents expressed satisfac- tion, and as many as one respondent states are in the statement. Meanwhile, the respondents’ answers with the lowest average percentage value on the statement that said “question and answer time” show that eight respondents ex- pressed very satisfied, 34 respondents said they were satisfied, and five respondents said they were not satisfied. Degree of participants’ satisfaction with education and training facilities gives the re- sult that participants have a very high level of satisfaction with education and training facil- ities that is equal to 87.20%. Participants who had a high level of satisfaction with education and training facilities were 12.80%. Distribu- tion of respondents’ answers to statements in the questionnaire related to participant satis- faction with education and training facilities obtained the largest average value percentage was in the statement “all material available practical tools”, 25 respondents said they were very satisfied and 22 respondents said they were satisfied with the statement. Meanwhile, doi:https://doi.org/10.21831/reid.v6i2.36794 Sudiyatno & Iswahyuni Wulandari 154 - Copyright © 2020, REiD (Research and Evaluation in Education), 6(2), 2020 ISSN: 2460-6995 (Online) the respondent’s answer with the lowest aver- age percentage value on the statement “lunch time available”, as many as eight respondents said they were very satisfied, 23 respondents said they were satisfied, 12 respondents said they were not satisfied, and four respondents said they were very dissatisfied. Based on these data, the participants' reactions were sa- tisfied with the education and training facil- ities. It is found that the satisfaction of parti- cipants in the training program have a direct impact on motivation and enthusiasm for learning. Chang and Chang (2012) also men- tioned that the level of learning motivation directly affects learning satisfaction. Based on the results, it is concluded that the satisfaction of the participants in the motivation to take part in the training is included in both catego- ries. It means that the training participants have motivation and enthusiasm for learning. Level 2: Learning The objective for the degree of the par- ticipant has been learning in the aspects of knowledge and basic skills. In this program, learning aspects are assessed based on the level of mastery of the subject contents and basic skills. Results of the measurement are shown in Figure 1. Understanding of theore- tical training material provides the results of participants having a high level of understand- ing of theoretical material that is equal to 59.60%. Participants who had a very high lev- el of understanding of theoretical material were 27.7% and participants who had moder- ate understanding of theoretical material were 12.80%. Distribution of respondents’ answers to the statements in the questionnaire related to participants’ understanding of learning theory obtained the largest percentage of average val- ues in the statement “I understand the mate- rial kinds of bench work equipment well”, in which as many as 13 respondents stated very understanding, 33 the respondents said they understood, and one respondent did not un- derstand the material. Meanwhile, the respon- dents’ answers with the lowest average per- centage value on the statement “I understand the basic theory of electrical welding”, 12 re- spondents said they understood very well, 21 respondents said they understood, 14 respon- dents said they did not understand. Based on these data, participants understand the knowl- edge/learning of training theory. However, judging from the lowest answer average, there needs to be an increase in the basic material of electrical welding. Mastery level of basic skills is shown in Figure 1. It is seen that most participants had a high level of understanding of the overall practice material that is equal to 68.10%. Par- ticipants who have a very high level of under- standing of practice material are 19.10% and participants who have a moderate understand- ing of practice material are 12.80%. The detail degree of participants’ understanding of the practical subject contents in the training pro- gram is explained as follows. Practice of Bench Work The participants’ understanding of the bench work skills resulted in 25.5% being highly skilled in bench work skills, 58.6% skilled in bench work skills, and 14.9% having moderate skills in bench work skills. Distribu- tion of respondents’ answers to statements in a questionnaire related to participants' under- standing of bench work skills obtained the largest percentage of the average value is in the statement “conducting a scroll using a tap” procedure, in which as many as 15 re- spondents expressed very understanding, and 32 respondents expressed understanding of the statement. Meanwhile, the respondent’s answer with the lowest average percentage value on the statement “flow filing proce- dure” shows that six respondents said they understood very well, 25 respondents said they understood, and 12 respondents said that they did not understand. Practice of the Grinding Tool The participants’ understanding of the tool grinding operation skills gave 17.0% re- sults of very skilled participant in the tool grinding operation skills, 66.0% were skilled in the tool grinding operation skills, 10.6% had moderate skills on the tool grinding oper- ation skills, and three respondents had the skills low in grinding tool operation skills. doi:https://doi.org/10.21831/reid.v6i2.36794 Sudiyatno & Iswahyuni Wulandari Copyright © 2020, REiD (Research and Evaluation in Education), 6(2), 2020 - 155 ISSN: 2460-6995 (Online) Distribution of respondents’ answers to statements in the questionnaire submitted by researchers related to their understanding of the grinding tool operation skills obtained the highest average percentage value was in the statement “carrying out the hand chiseling procedure”, eight respondents said they really understood, 33 respondents stated they un- derstood, and five respondents said they did not understand the material. Meanwhile, the respondent’s answer with the lowest average percentage value on the statement “drill bit sharpening procedures” are ten respondents said they understood very well, 22 respon- dents said they understood, 13 respondents said they did not understand, and two people stated they did not understand the material. Practice of Turning The participants’ understanding of turn- ing lathes using level categorization yielded 29.8% highly skilled in turning lathes, 59.6% were skilled in turning lathes, and 10.6% had moderate skills. grinding tool operation skills. Distribution of respondents’ answers to statements in the questionnaire submitted by researchers related to the participants’ under- standing of turning operation skills (lathe) ob- tained the largest percentage of the average value is in the statement “I can do the average turning procedure well”, in which as many as 20 respondents expressed very understanding, 26 respondents expressed their understand- ing, and one respondent did not understand the material. Meanwhile, the respondent’s an- swer with the lowest average percentage value on the statement “lathe cartel procedure”, is that as many as ten respondents said they un- derstood very well, 23 respondents said they understood, ten respondents said they did not understand, and four respondents said they did not understand the material. Practice of Technical Drawing Participants’ understanding of technical drawing skills using level categorization results in 12.8% highly skilled in technical drawing skills, 70.2% skilled in technical drawing skills, 8.5% have moderate skills in technical draw- ing skills, and 8.5% have low skills in technical drawing skills. Distribution of respondents’ answers to the statements in the questionnaire submitted by researchers related to participants’ under- standing of technical drawing skills obtained the largest percentage of the average value in the statement “applying equipment and stan- dardization of images”, where nine respon- dents expressed very understanding, 33 re- spondents expressed understanding, and five respondents said they did not understand the material. Besides, respondent’s answer with the lowest average percentage value on the statement “procedure of drawing a size on a workpiece” shows six respondents expressed very understanding, 26 respondents stated they understood, 14 respondents stated did not understand, and one respondent stated really did not understand the material. Practice of Basic Electrical Welding Figure 1 shows that participants' under- standing of basic electrical welding skills using level categorization results in 23.4% highly skilled in basic electrical welding skills, 29.8% skilled in basic electrical welding skills, 12.8% have moderate skills in basic electrical welding skills, and 34.0% have low skills in basic elec- trical welding skills. Frequency distribution of respondent’s answers to statements in ques- tionnaire related to participants’ understand- ing of the subject matters and basic electrical welding skills obtained the largest percentage of the average value is in the statement “weld plate 8 mm with a horizontal position/1F” and “weld plate 8mm with a horizontal posi- tion-Horizontal/2F”, where 14 respondents stated they understood very well, 17 respon- dents said they understood, and 16 respon- dents stated they had moderate skills in the statement. Besides, respondent’s answer with the lowest average percentage value on the statement “weld plate 8 mm in a vertical posi- tion/3F”, shows ten respondents said they understood very well, 14 respondents said they understood, 21 respondents said they did not understand, and two respondents stated really did not understand the material. Thus, the training participants are skilled in prac- tical learning. However, seen from the lowest average answer, there are some matters that are not yet understood by the respondents. doi:https://doi.org/10.21831/reid.v6i2.36794 Sudiyatno & Iswahyuni Wulandari 156 - Copyright © 2020, REiD (Research and Evaluation in Education), 6(2), 2020 ISSN: 2460-6995 (Online) Figure 1. Percentage of Mastery of Basic Skills Kirkpatrick (2006) explained there were three things taught in the education and train- ing program: knowledge, skills, and behavioral attitudes. Gough (2018) agreed that TVET fo- cuses on the process of gaining knowldge and skills for the world of work through coopera- tive relationships. Thus, it is concluded that the training participants understood the theo- retical material and also the skills/practices. It means that participants are said to have learn- ed if they have experienced an increase in knowledge, skills, and attitude changes in themselves. Without those three things men- tioned in the training participants, then the training program can be said to be a failure. Level 3: Behaviour Change in behavior is an improvement of knowledge, attitude and practical skills of the alumni in their workplaces as a result of the training program. It is measured after the participant complete the program. There were 59 respondents doing internship program as- sessed in attitude and practical skills. The re- spondents are from four different courses: 25 respondents from manufacturing mechanics, seven respondents from welding, 15 respon- dents from automation mechanics, and 12 re- spondents from manufacturing design. The behavior changes in attitude skills shown by the participants after attending the training courses are as follow. Most participants have a very high level of skill is 27.1% and at mo- derate level in 72.9%. According to the alumni responses, the distribution percentage of the alumni practical skills is shown in Figure 2. Participants’ mas- tery of mechanical manufacturing skills were found that the majority of alumni has a high level of skill (64.0%). Almuni who have a very high skill level were 24.0%, participants who have moderate skill levels are 8.0%, and alum- ni who have a low skill level are 4.0%. In this course, it is found that there are several weak- ness of alumni’s skills of basic subjects, such as in electric, pneumatic, and hydrolic Behavior of alumni after the training of welding skills are as follow: alumni who have very high skill levels were 28.6%, a high level of skills is equal to 42.9%, alumni with mo- derate skills were 14.3% and alumni with low skills levels were 14.3%. The frequency distri- bution of the respondents’ answers related to alumni understanding of skills in the direction of welding obtained the largest percentage of average values in the statement “understand- ing argon gas welding equipment (TIG Weld- ing)” are three respondents stated very skilled, three respondents said skilled, and one re- spondent said not skilled in these skills. Mean- while, the respondent's answer with the low- est average percentage value on the statement “skills to weld soft steel plates with argon gas welding (TIG Welding)” shows one respon- dent stated they were very skilled, three re- spondents stated skilled, two respondents said they were unskilled, and one respondent said not very skilled in these skills. doi:https://doi.org/10.21831/reid.v6i2.36794 Sudiyatno & Iswahyuni Wulandari Copyright © 2020, REiD (Research and Evaluation in Education), 6(2), 2020 - 157 ISSN: 2460-6995 (Online) Figure 2. Degree of Participant’s Behavior In term of the behavior of alumni after the training related to the mastery of automa- tion skills, it is obtained that the majority of participants have a high level of skills after the automation training, which was 46.7%. Alum- ni who had very high skill levels are 20.0%, participants who ave moderate skills levels are 26.7%, and participants who have low skill levels are 6.7%. Distribution of respondents’ answers to the statements related to partici- pants’ skills in the department of automation obtained the largest percentage of the average value is in the statement “I master the use with one cylinder”, as many as five respon- dents stated very skilled, nine respondents stated that they have moderte skill, and one respondent stated that he has medium skills on the statement. Further, the respondent's answer with the lowest average percentage value on the statement “hardware program- ming skills” shows that one respondent stated very skilled, six respondents stated skilled, and eight respondents stated unskilled in these skills. In term of the behavior of alumni after the training of manufacturing design skills, it is obtained that the majority of participants have a high level of skill (66.7%). Alumni who have a very high skill level are 25.0%, and participants who had moderate skills lev- els after the training are 8.3%. It is found that the largest percentage of the average value is in the statement “drawing a picture of pieces with Auto-Cad”, “drawing 2D & 3D images with Auto-Cad”, and “mastering the basics of Autodesk-Inventor/Solid Work program”, as many as four alumni said they were very skilled, and eight respondents said they were skilled. Meanwhile, the respondent's answer with the lowest average percentage value on the statement “drawing assembled kinematic simulations in CATs” shows that two respon- dents stated that they were very skilled, three respondents said they were skilled, and seven respondents stated that they were not skilled in these skills. Based on these data, partici- pants are skilled in majors skills. However, there are skills that need to be improved, such as skill in drawing cavity and kinematic assem- bling in CATIA. Level 4: Results Assessment of results is a measurement of the primary goal of a program. Level four determines the overall success of the training model by measuring factors such as lowered spending, higher returns on investments, im- proved quality of products, less accidents in the workplace, the more efficient production time, and a higher quantity of sales. In this research, results of the program were meas- ured in two aspects: impact of the alumni at the workplace, and employability rate of alumni. Based on the results of interviews with the employers and study of productivity documents, it can be concluded that accord- ing to the employers, the alumni of the Solo doi:https://doi.org/10.21831/reid.v6i2.36794 Sudiyatno & Iswahyuni Wulandari 158 - Copyright © 2020, REiD (Research and Evaluation in Education), 6(2), 2020 ISSN: 2460-6995 (Online) Technopark training program have high quality knowledge and skills, are able to learn new skills and adapt to new environments quickly. This alumni’s capability increases in the quality and quantity of products as well as product completion time according to the tar- get so the cost production can be reduced. Data of the employability rate is based on review to the alumni document collected in Solo Technopark office. There were 949 alumni listed in the document since 2016. There are 61 participants known resigned, 457 alumni are employed in 60 differents work places, 60 alumni are taking other courses, and two alumni are studying in universities. As much as 429 alumni have not been known where they are employed. The data show that the employablity rate of the alumni is less than 50% (457 out of 949) alumni in 2019. Conclusion Based on the results and discussion about the evaluation of training programs in Solo Technopark using four level Kirkpatric model, it can be concluded that according to respondents, the Solo Technopark training participants’ level of satisfaction to the sub- jects contents, instructors, and training facil- ities is mostly moderate. Most participants of the training progam at the level of learning master the knowledge and basic skills well. At the level of behavior, most participants of the program have mastered high knowledge, atti- tude, and skills. At the results aspect, accord- ing to the employers, the alumni have high quality knowledge and skills, and are able to learn new skills and adapt to new environ- ments quickly. Besides, based on the alumni document, it is known that the employability rate of the alumni is less than 50%. Therefore, Solo Technopark should have a better tracer study to improve the data quality of alumni by improving the networking of alumni and col- laboration with many more industries and em- ployers. Acknowledgment This paper and the research behind it would not have been possible without the exceptional support of our collegue in Solo Technopark, Sutrisno Kusuma. His enthusi- asm, knowledge, and exacting attention to de- tail have been an inspiration and kept our work on the track. Furthermore, this work was fully supported by the Postgraduate Pro- gram of Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta. References Central Bureau of Statistics. (2013). Prediksi penduduk Indonesia 2010-2035. Central Bureau of Statistics of the Republic of Indonesia. Retrieved December 3, 2020, from https://www.bappenas.go.id/files /5413/9148/4109/Proyeksi_Penduduk _Indonesia_2010-2035.pdf Central Bureau of Statistics. (2020). Keadaan pekerja di Indonesia Agustus 2020. Central Bureau of Statistics of the Republic of Indonesia. Retrieved December 4, 2020, from https://www.bps.go.id/publicati on/2020/11/30/351ae49ac1ea9d5f2e4 2c0da/keadaan-pekerja-di-indonesia- agustus-2020.html Chang, I. -Y. & Chang, W. -Y. (2012). The effect of student learning motivation on learning satisfaction. International Journal of Organizational Innovation, 4(3), 281– 305. Gough, S. (2018). Technical and vocational education and training. MPG Books Group. Grohmann, A., & Kauffeld, S. (2013). Evaluating training programs: Development and correlates of the questionnaire for professional training evaluation. International Journal of Training and Development, 17(2), 135–155. Kirkpatrick. (2006). Evaluating training program. Berrett-Koehler. Ministry of Industry of the Republic of Indonesia. (2019). Berbasis padat karya dan orientasi ekspor, pemerintah pacu industri furnitur. Retrieved December 5, 2020, from https://kemenperin.go. id/artikel/20405/ Muhammad, N. A., Muhyiddin, M., Faisal, A., & Anindito, I. A. (2017). Studi pembangunan Science and Technopark doi:https://doi.org/10.21831/reid.v6i2.36794 Sudiyatno & Iswahyuni Wulandari Copyright © 2020, REiD (Research and Evaluation in Education), 6(2), 2020 - 159 ISSN: 2460-6995 (Online) (STP) di Indonesia. Jurnal Perencanaan Dan Pembangunan, 1(1), 14–31. https:// doi.org/10.36574/jpp.v1i1.6 Mukhlish, B. M. (2018). Kolaborasi antara universitas, industri dan pemerintah dalam meningkatkan inovasi dan kesejahteraan masyarakat: Konsep, implementasi dan tantangan. Jurnal Administrasi Bisnis Terapan, 1(1), 31–43. https://doi.org/10.7454/jabt.v1i1.27 Pitaloka, A. A., & Humaedi, M. A. (2020). Science and Technology Park (STP): Transformation to Quadruple Helix approach for habituation of science and technology in Indonesia Science Technology Park (STP). Jurnal Sosioteknologi, 19(1), 201–217. https:// doi.org/10.5614%2Fsostek.itbj.2020.19. 1.14 Praslova, L. (2010). Adaptation of Kirkpatrick’s four level model of training criteria to assessment of learning outcomes and program evaluation in higher education. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 22(3), 215–225. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s11092-010-9098-7 Putra, E. P. (2019). Menjawab persoalan kebutuhan tenaga kerja terampil. Republika. Retrieved October 4, 2019, from https://republika.co.id Rahayu, A. T., & Nurharjadmo, W. (2017). Evaluasi implementasi program pengembangan Solo Technopark. Jurnal Waca Publik, 1(6), 48–57. Ramadhani, A. D. P. (2015). Evaluasi proses pelaksanaan program inkubator bisnis dan teknologi Solo Technopark di Kota Surakarta. Thesis, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta. Smidt, A., Balandin, S., Sigafoos, J., & Reed, V. A. (2009). The Kirkpatrick model: A useful tool for evaluating training outcomes. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 34(3), 266–274. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668250903 093125 Suprayitna, I. (2020). 6,88 Juta pengangguran di Indonesia paling banyak lulusan SMK. Suara.Com. Retrieved on May 5, 2020, from https://suara.com/bisnis/ Winardi, W., Priyarsono, D., Siregar, H., & Kustanto, H. (2019). Peranan kawasan industri dalam mengatasi gejala deindustrialisasi. Jurnal Ekonomi Dan Pembangunan Indonesia, 19(1), 84–95. https://doi.org/10.21002/jepi.v19i1.83 4 https://doi.org/10.21002/jepi.v19i1.834 https://doi.org/10.21002/jepi.v19i1.834