The implementation of constructive alignment at the teachers education institute using rasch analysis

Abstract

The implementation of constructive alignment was introduced at the Teacher Education Institute (TEI) since 2015. The curriculum goals are to enhance through a Summary of Course Information (SCI) which encompasses the aspects of Program Education Objectives (PEOs), Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs), the calculation of Student Learning Time (SLT), Technology Pedagogy Content Knowledge (TPCK) and soft skills. However, the extent to which lecturers practised the implementation of constructive alignment through SCI to ensure the quality of teaching in the content of Malaysia Education Blueprint is still a question mark. This study aims to examine how far the lecturers of the TEI Campus practices the constructive alignment of learning outcomes, the teaching activities and the assessments in the classroom. The quantitative approach with a survey using questionnaires of 4 Likert scales applied. The questionnaire was used to obtain information on the constructive alignment practices implemented by the lecturers through the evaluation of students. This study was conducted in TEI A with 142 respondents by stratified random sampling technique and data analysis was using the Rasch Measurement Model. The findings showed that the construct of teaching activities was at the high practice levels (logit mean = -0.26), but the logit mean for the item of constructive activity was 0.64. This value indicates that constructive activities were less implemented in TEI A. Furthermore the Wright Map showed that only 30% of respondents agreed to the item, it means lecturers have delivered knowledge through given lecture rather than implementing active learning. Another notable result showed that learning outcome practice was less implemented (logit mean 0.79), while the assessment towards constructive alignment shows good practice in TEI A (logit mean -0.45). The overall logit means the value was 0.02, indicating that the constructive alignment practice at the TEI was still less implemented. These findings provided resource information to the Malaysian Institute of Teachers Education that can be used for an effort to improve the implementation of constructive alignment among TEI lecturers as well as enhancing quality of teaching and learning to achieve the 1st shift of PPPM in produce holistic, entrepreneurial and balanced graduates.