The Quality of Pre-Service Teachers’ Instructional Module Projects: Constructive Alignment Principles
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33394/jo-elt.v13i1.19689Keywords:
Constructive alignment, Instructional design, Instructional modules, Project-based learningAbstract
Instructional modules developed by pre-service teachers are expected to demonstrate coherent alignment among learning outcomes, instructional activities, and assessment tasks. However, previous studies suggest that student-generated instructional products often prioritize structural completeness over pedagogical coherence, resulting in weak integration of key instructional components. This study aimed to evaluate the pedagogical quality of pre-service teachers’ instructional modules through the lens of constructive alignment and to identify recurring patterns of alignment and misalignment. Employing a qualitative document analysis with a rubric-based evaluative approach, the study analyzed eighteen instructional modules developed by fifth-semester students in an English Language Education program at a private university in Surabaya, Indonesia. The analytical rubric examined the alignment among Intended Learning Outcomes (ILOs), Teaching and Learning Activities (TLAs), Assessment Tasks (ATs), cognitive levels based on Bloom’s Taxonomy, instructional models, and the integration of the Pancasila Student Profile. The findings showed that 77.8% of the modules demonstrated high alignment, 16.7% showed partial alignment, and 5.5% exhibited low alignment. Highly aligned modules displayed coherent relationships among learning objectives, instructional activities, and authentic assessment practices, particularly through student-centered approaches such as Project-Based Learning and Discovery Learning. Nevertheless, recurring weaknesses were identified in the formulation of measurable objectives, explicit cognitive-level mapping, and the development of analytic assessment rubrics. The study highlights the value of constructive alignment not only as a design principle but also as an evaluative framework for assessing pedagogical coherence in student-generated instructional products. The findings further underscore the need for practice-oriented scaffolding and assessment literacy training to strengthen pre-service teachers’ instructional design competence.
References
Abuhassna, H., & Alnawajha, S. (2023). Instructional design made easy! Instructional design models, categories, frameworks, educational context, and recommendations for future work. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education, 13(4), 715–735. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe13040054
Ait-Hroch, A., El Gazi, S., & Ibrahimi, A. (2025). The constructive alignment of objectives, tasks, and assessment in hybrid language training. World Journal of Advanced Engineering Technology and Sciences, 15(3), 2606–2627. https://doi.org/10.30574/wjaets.2025.15.3.1182
Alqassab, M., Strijbos, J. W., & Panadero, E. (2023). A systematic review of peer assessment design elements. Educational Psychology Review, 35(2). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09723-7
Alsaleh, N. J. (2020). The effectiveness of an instructional design training program to enhance teachers’ perceived skills in solving educational problems. Educational Research and Reviews, 15(12), 751–763. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2020.4082
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
Arochman, T., & Fortinasari, P. B. (2024). Implementation of technology-based learning by preservice teachers during teaching practice program. Premise: Journal of English Education, 13(1), 126–145. https://doi.org/10.24127/pj.v13i1.8988
Basu, R. (2018). Instructional design models: Benefits and challenges. International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts, 6(1), 31–36.
Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32(3), 347–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138871
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university (4th ed.). Open University Press.
Buckley, J., Seery, N., Gumaelius, L., Canty, D., Doyle, A., & Pears, A. (2021). Framing the constructive alignment of design within technology subjects in general education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 31(5), 867–883. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09585-y
Bull, D. A. (2025). Impact of curriculum misalignment and assessment practices on student learning outcomes in higher education: A PRISMA-guided qualitative content synthesis. International Journal of Interdisciplinary Research and Innovations, 13(3), 65–87. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16262451
Chotimah, U., Hiltrimartin, C., & Karunia, R. R. (2025). Evaluation of Pancasila student profile strengthening in junior high schools using the CIPP model. Al-Ishlah: Jurnal Pendidikan, 17(1), 1411–1423. https://doi.org/10.35445/alishlah.v17i1.6259
Dahl, J. E., & Mørch, A. (2025). A theoretical and empirical analysis of tensions between learning objects and constructivism. Education and Information Technologies, 30(15), 22101–22150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13636-z
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute.
de Koning, B. B., Fiorella, L., & Paas, F. (2021). Five strategies for optimizing instructional materials: Instructor- and learner-managed cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 33(4), 1379–1407. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09606-9
Elizabeth, A. K., Ahmad, A. B., & Pairan, R. B. (2024). Development of effective instructional teaching module in TVET: A comparative review of ADDIE and Nedham’s 5 phases instructional design model. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 13(4), 334–354. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v13-i4/22946
Guaya, D., Romero-Benavides, J. C., Fierro, N., & Jiménez, L. (2025). Integrating project-based and community learning for cross-disciplinary competency development in nutrient recovery. Sustainability, 17(19), Article 8820. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17198820
Hailikari, T., Virtanen, V., Vesalainen, M., & Postareff, L. (2022). Student perspectives on how different elements of constructive alignment support active learning. Active Learning in Higher Education, 23(3), 217–231. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787421989160
Hamdoun, W. M. A. (2023). Constructive alignment approach: Enhancing learning and teaching. British Journal of Multidisciplinary and Advanced Studies: Education, Learning, Training & Development, 4(2), 162–170. https://doi.org/10.37745/bjmas.2022.0173
Hattie, J. (2025). The evolving definition of quality: How teacher experience and subject domain shape perceptions of instructional materials. Frontiers in Education, 10, Article 1671376. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1671376
Holland, R. O. (2023). Modeling constructive alignment, integration and differentiation in science modules: A blended learning tool in a flexible educational landscape. American Journal of Educational Research, 11(6), 381–388. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-11-6-6
Islamiah, S. N., Setyawati, A., & Astuti, S. (2024). The implementation of Pancasila principles on the development of the independent curriculum in the execution of the P5 program: A perspective from educational philosophy. Didaktika: Jurnal Kependidikan, 13(3), 3293–3302. https://doi.org/10.58230/27454312.423
Karthik, B. S. S., Chandrasekhar, B. B., David, R., & Kumar, A. K. (2019). Identification of instructional design strategies for an effective e-learning experience. The Online Journal of Distance Education and e-Learning, 7(2), 153–155.
Khan, H. F., Qayyum, S., Beenish, H., Khan, R. A., & Iltaf, S. (2025). Determining the alignment of assessment items with curriculum goals through document analysis by addressing identified item flaws. BMC Medical Education, 25, Article 436. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-06736-4
Lawrence, J. E. (2023). The application of constructive alignment theory in designing a curriculum unit in information systems. Education Reform, 7(4), 471–482. https://doi.org/10.26855/er.2023.04.015
Levy-Feldman, I. (2025). The role of assessment in improving education and promoting educational equity. Education Sciences, 15(2), Article 224. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15020224
Lindvall, J., & Ryve, A. (2019). Coherence and the positioning of teachers in professional development programs: A systematic review. Educational Research Review, 27, 140–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.03.005
Logan, R. M., Johnson, C. E., & Worsham, J. W. (2021). Development of an e-learning module to facilitate student learning and outcomes. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 16(2), 139–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teln.2020.10.008
Maria, P., Wahyuningrum, E., Angi, A., & Winei, D. (2025). Beyond the visible classroom: How Indonesia’s Pancasila student profile strengthening project program as hidden curriculum enhances students’ collaboration, character formation, and creativity. Scaffolding: Jurnal Pendidikan Islam dan Multikulturalisme, 7(3), 804–818. https://doi.org/10.37680/scaffolding.v7i3.8231
Meng, S. (2023). Enhancing teaching and learning: Aligning instructional practices with education quality standards. Research and Advances in Education, 2(7), 17–31. https://doi.org/10.56397/RAE.2023.07.04
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Sage.
Munna, A. S., & Kalam, A. (2021). Teaching and learning process to enhance teaching effectiveness: A literature review. International Journal of Humanities and Innovation, 4(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.33750/ijhi.v4i1.102
Oo, T. Z., Kadyirov, T., & Kadyjrova, L. (2024). Design-based learning in higher education: Its effects on students’ motivation, creativity and design skills. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 53, 101621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101621
O’Sullivan, M., & Bjørndal, C. T. (2024). Reconceptualising constructive alignment within the epistemological distinction of ways of knowing in a higher education coach development course module. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/17408989.2024.2439969
Pingil, N. P. M. (2017). Development and validation of instructional modules in enhancing the study and thinking skills of learners [Research report]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7011370
Ribosa, J., & Duran, D. (2022). Do students learn what they teach when generating teaching materials for others? A meta-analysis through the lens of learning by teaching. Educational Research Review, 37, 100475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100475
Senadheera, V. V., Rupasinghe, T. P., & Ediriweera, D. S. (2024). Connective alignment as the educational approach for higher education in the digital age. Journal of Learning for Development, 11(1), 172–180. https://doi.org/10.56059/jl4d.v11i1.970
Stamov Roßnagel, C., Lo Baido, K., & Fitzallen, N. (2021). Revisiting the relationship between constructive alignment and learning approaches: A perceived alignment perspective. PLoS ONE, 16(8), e0253949. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253949
Valtonen, T., Leppänen, U., Hyypiä, M., & Sointu, E. (2020). Fresh perspectives on TPACK: Pre-service teachers’ own appraisal of their challenging and confident TPACK areas. Education and Information Technologies, 25(4), 2823–2842. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10092-4
Wah, L. L., & Hashim, H. (2021). Determining pre-service teachers’ intention of using technology for teaching English as a second language (ESL). Sustainability, 13(14), Article 7568. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13147568
Yongco, J. O., & Del Valle, J. M. (2022). Development and evaluation of instructional module for special program in journalism. International Journal of Educational Management and Development Studies, 3(4), 97–117. https://doi.org/10.53378/352948
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Endang Mastuti Rahayu, Armelia Nungki Nurbani, Nico Irawan, Komm Pechinthorn
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
License and Publishing Agreement
In submitting the manuscript to the journal, the authors certify that:
- They are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
- The work described has not been formally published before, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, thesis, or overlay journal.
- That it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere,
- That its publication has been approved by all the author(s) and by the responsible authorities “tacitly or explicitly“ of the institutes where the work has been carried out.
- They secure the right to reproduce any material that has already been published or copyrighted elsewhere.
- They agree to the following license and publishing agreement.
Copyright
Authors who publish with Jo-ELT (Journal of English Language Teaching) Fakultas Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris IKIP agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
Licensing for Data Publication
Jo-ELT (Journal of English Language Teaching) Fakultas Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris IKIP use a variety of waivers and licenses, that are specifically designed for and appropriate for the treatment of data:
- Open Data Commons Attribution License, http://www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/
Other data publishing licenses may be allowed as exceptions (subject to approval by the editor on a case-by-case basis) and should be justified with a written statement from the author, which will be published with the article.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
1.jpg)
