STUDY OF STAKE EVALUATION MODEL IN THE INTEREST OF PROGRAM EVALUATION

In the field of educational assessment, Stake evaluation states that the quality of the curriculum needs to be evaluated using the Stake model. By carrying out a formative evaluation and to collect various points of view in the process in detail. The research method in this case uses a descriptive qualitative method with reference to the existing literature. The results of the research itself describe various kinds of Stake evaluation models that can be used. This can provide knowledge for the movers involved in becoming executors in a program in the realm of education


INTRODUCTION
In assessing a field of education, Stake provides an expression that as an educator or academic, you must be able to evaluate the curriculum and ensure its quality. To be able to do that we need to carry out an evaluation called formative and collect various perspectives in each process. He was a recipient of the Lazerfeld Prize in 1988 from the American Evaluation Association and an honorary doctorate from Uppsala University in 1994. He received an honorary doctorate from the University of Valladolid in 2009. In 2007 [1] Stake received an award as President's Citation Award from the American Research Association "for outstanding service to a qualitative methodological research, to the theory and practice of evaluation".
Stake's ideas in the field of program evaluation have had a lot of influence on young people or scholars, including the work  Stake (1967), his critical thinking about the evaluation process has had a considerable impact in this field and strengthened a simple but valuable concept for a further development in the field of evaluation. Stake states emphatically that there are two main activities in evaluation, namely Description and Judgment and there are three stages in this program, namely: Antecedents (Context), Transactions (process), Results (Outout). The Description Matrix shows Intention (Goals) and Observations (Effects). Judgment has two aspects, namely Standard and Judgment. There are three evaluation models in Stake Evaluation, including:

Responsive Evaluation Model of Stake
Stake states that when we assess something in an educational program, especially guidance and counseling, we make a relative comparison between one program and another, or an absolute comparison (one program with a standard). The general emphasis or important thing in this model is that the evaluator makes an assessment regarding the program being evaluated. Stake says that the description on the one hand is different from the determination or assessment. In this model there are several things that must be passed: antecedent data (input), transactions (process), and results (outcomes) are compared not only to determine whether there are differences in objectives and actual conditions, but also compared against absolute standards, to assess the benefits of Stake. program. there is no reliable research if it is not assessed.
Responsive evaluation is characterized by the characteristics of qualitative and naturalistic research. Responsive evaluation believes that meaningful evaluation is seeking understanding of the issue from various points of view of all people involved, who are interested, and who have an interest in the program. More data is collected using interview and observation techniques than tests and questionnaires. The existence of this qualitative data makes the analysis and interpretation of the data impressionistic. The form of the evaluation report is a case study or a descriptive description. The main focus of Responsive evaluation is showing the concerns and issues of participants/stakeholders. Communicate with clients, program staff, and audiences 7 identify a program areas 8 Review the activity of a program 9 Find goals and focus on goals 10 Conceptualise issues and problems 11 Identify a need 12 Selecting observations, deciding or administering instruments (if any) The Judgment Model of Stake Evaluation according to the stake statement [2] is an attempt to describe or explain and provide an assessment of the program. This evaluation model not only emphasizes the decisions taken during the evaluation, but also adds another thing, namely description. Stake term decision making as a judgment process (Suharsimi, 1998, defines judgment as a consideration). This model assumes that the activity of an assessment does not only end explanation in this situation, events, events objects, but must arrive at an assessment of good or bad, whether the process is effective or not, and finally the program.
Stake states in an evaluation imperfect if it does not provide an assessment. In providing an assessment, absolute or relative standards or criteria can be used. Stake offers three phases in evaluation, namely antecedents (preliminary or preparation), process in delivering (implementation process) and outcome (output or outcome) which are described in the following table :  Table II. The Judgment Model Phase Phase Description Antecendents its use is to assess a source or input, for example financial personnel, the characteristics of students or the goals to be achieved

Transactionprocess
The point is to assess an activity plan and implementation process, including an activity, time scheduling, social form or communication that occurs, and so on

Outcomes
to assess an effect of the program has been completed

Countenance Evaluation Model of Stake
The program evaluation model introduced by Stake is known as the model; countenance (overall). This model is also called the judgmental evaluation model. In this model, the evaluator considers the program by comparing the conditions resulting from the program evaluation with those occurring in other programs with the same target object and comparing the conditions resulting from program implementation with the standards set by the program [4] . The aim of this model is to provide a work plan to develop curriculum assessment. Stake's fokus utama adalah korelasi antara tujuan penilaian dan suatu keputusan kemudian selanjutnya berdasarkan data yang ada yang telah dikumpulkan. Hal ini karena Taruhan melihat adanya ketidaksesuaian antara keinginan penilaian dan guru.

METHOD
The research method that the researchers used in this study used the literature study research method. According to Nazir [3] defines that literature is research conducted by examining and reviewing various literature studies that are considered important in a study.
The references used as references in this study are relevant literature sources as sources of primary data (research data, research reports, scientific journals, etc.), and secondary data sources and so on. In this case the researcher reviews some of the literature that discusses an evaluation of the Stake model.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The evaluation of this Stake model has to be careful in giving judgment regarding the value of an aspect. Have a great possibility to gain new insights and theories in the field and program to be evaluated. And the evaluator is in control of the evaluation and also decides the most appropriate way to present and describe the results.
Meanwhile, what we need to understand is that the approach taken is too subjective. So that there is a possibility of minimizing the importance of data collection instruments and quantitative evaluation. And the possible cost of implementing this evaluation is too great.

CONCLUSION
In evaluating the Stake model, carefulness is needed from the evaluator. This evaluation model also emphasizing a very important implementation with two main things, namely: description and consideration and distinguishing three program evaluation processes, namely antecedents, transactions, and output.