Evaluation of Sepak Takraw Extracurricular Activities at Elementary Schools in Purworejo Regency

This study aims to analyze the results of context, input, process, and product (CIPP) evaluation of extracurricular activities at Elementary Schools in Purworejo Regency. This qualitative descriptive study uses a quantitative and qualitative approach (mixed method). The subjects of this study were principals, extracurricular coaches, and students at Elementary Schools in Purworejo, including one principal, one extracurricular coach, and several students from each Elementary School in Purworejo Regency who were willing to become samples and filled out questionnaires from researchers. The samples in this study were five school principals, five extracurricular coaches, and 50 students. Quantitative data were analyzed using percentage techniques, while qualitative data were presented through data presentation, reduction, and conclusion drawing. The results showed the evaluation of extracurricular activities in Elementary Schools in Purworejo Regency were in the category of poor. Furthermore, each aspect of the evaluation is explained; (1) Context evaluation was in good categories. The indicators of each aspect were as follows: extracurricular background had a result of 2.64 which means it was in the good category; extracurricular goals had a result of 2.39 which means it was in poor category; and extracurricular programs, with a result of 2.47 which means it was in poor category. Then, from those three indicators in context, it had a result of 2.50 meaning it was in good category. (2) Input evaluation was in poor category. The indicators of each aspect were as follows: student condition had a result of 2.47 which was in poor category, facilities had a result of 2.37 which was in poor category, the extracurricular coaches’ competence had a result of 2.53 which was in good category. Then, from those three indicators, the result was 2.46 which was in poor category. (3) The evaluation process was in poor category. The indicators of each aspect are the implementation of extracurricular activities with a result of 2.29, which was in poor category, the evaluation of the extracurricular program of 2.40 which was in poor category, too. Then, from both of indicators, the result was 2.34 which was in poor category. (4) Product evaluation was in the poor category. The indicators of each aspect were results of extracurricular activities of 2.27 which was in poor category, so from this indicator, it could be concluded that in the process resulted in 2.27 which was in poor category