Constructive Alignment as a Framework for Enhancing Motivation and Higher-Order Thinking in Science Classrooms: A Systematic Synthesis

Constructive alignment (CA) offers a coherent approach to linking intended learning outcomes, pedagogy and assessment in science education, with potential to strengthen students’ higher-order thinking skills (HOTS), motivation and achievement. This systematic literature review synthesizes research published between 2000 and 2025 in Scopus and Web of Science. Following PRISMA procedures, 42 articles met inclusion criteria and were analysed thematically to map trends in CA application across science education, with particular attention to secondary contexts. Three core themes emerged: (1) pedagogical strategies that align inquiry-based, student-centred and collaborative learning with explicit outcomes; (2) curriculum frameworks that embed HOTS and scientific literacy to ensure outcome–activity coherence; and (3) authentic assessment practices (formative, performance-based and context-rich) that reinforce motivation and meaningful learning. Evidence indicates that CA can reliably bridge curriculum intentions with classroom practices, improving the validity of tasks and the depth of student learning. However, persistent challenges include limited teacher readiness, misalignment between curriculum standards and assessment demands, and a shortage of validated instruments to evaluate alignment quality and its effects. The review recommends sustained professional development in CA design, development and validation of multi-dimensional measurement tools, and integration of CA principles into policy and curriculum reforms. Overall, adopting CA as a guiding framework particularly in secondary science can enhance HOTS, motivation and learning quality within and beyond Malaysia.

constructive alignment; science education; higher-order thinking skills

1. Acut, D. P. (2024). From classroom learning to real-world skills: An autoethnographic account of school field trips and STEM work immersion program management. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 6(1), Article 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-024-00111-x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Abusaidi, I., Badiali, B., & Alkharousi, K. (2021). Examining how biology teachers’ pedagogical beliefs shape the implementation of the Omani reform-oriented curriculum. Athens Journal of Education, 8(1), 73–114. https://doi.org/10.30958/aje.8-1-5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Blatti, J. L., Garcia, J., Cave, D., Monge, F., Cuccinello, A., Portillo, J., Juarez, B., Chan, E., & Schwebel, F. (2019). Systems thinking in science education and outreach toward a sustainable future. Journal of Chemical Education, 96(12), 2852–2862. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00318 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Bockholt, S. M., West, J. P., & Bollenbacher, W. E. (2003). Cancer cell biology: A student-centered instructional module exploring the use of multimedia to enrich interactive, constructivist learning of science. Cell Biology Education, 2(1), 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.02-08-0033 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Costabile, M., Birbeck, D., & Aitchison, C. (2025). Using simulations to meld didactic and constructivist teaching methods in complex second year STEM courses. International Journal of Science Education, 47(2), 173–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2024.2314010 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Cousins, N. J., Barker, M., Dennis, C., Dalrymple, S., & McPherson, L. R. (2012). Tutorials for enhancing skills development in first year students taking biological sciences. Bioscience Education, 20, 68–83. https://doi.org/10.11120/beej.2012.20000068 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Khurma, O. A., & El Zein, F. (2024). Inquiry skills teaching and its relationship with UAE secondary school students’ critical thinking: Systematic review of science teachers’ perspectives. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 20(2), Article em2397. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/14155 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Kim, S. L., & Kim, D. (2024). Empowering diverse learners: Integrating writing-to-learn strategies in a middle school science classroom in the U.S. Education Sciences, 14(9), Article 1031. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14091031 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Lampropoulos, G., Keramopoulos, E., Diamantaras, K., & Evangelidis, G. (2023). Integrating augmented reality, gamification, and serious games in computer science education. Education Sciences, 13(6), Article 618. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13060618 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Lipuma, J., León, C., & Rosendo, J. E. M. (2024). Constructively aligned instructional design for oral presentations [Diseño instruccional alineado constructivamente para presentaciones orales]. Revista De Gestao Social E Ambiental, 18(8), Article 5692. https://doi.org/10.24857/rgsa.v18n8-012 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. López-Fernández, M. D. M., González-García, F., & Franco-Mariscal, A. J. (2022). How can socio-scientific issues help develop critical thinking in chemistry education? A reflection on the problem of plastics. Journal of Chemical Education, 99(10), 3435–3442. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.2c00223 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Lundstedt, L., & Sinander, E. (2020). Enhancing critical thinking in private international law. Law Teacher, 54(3), 400–413. https://doi.org/10.1080/03069400.2019.1708035. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. McBain, B., Yardy, A., Martin, F., Phelan, L., van Altena, I., McKeowen, J., Pemberton, C., Tose, H., Fratus, L., & Bowyer, M. (2020). Teaching science students how to think. International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 28(2), 28–35. https://doi.org/10.30722/IJISME.28.02.003. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Morris, D. L. (2025). Rethinking science education practices: Shifting from investigation-centric to comprehensive inquiry-based instruction. Education Sciences, 15(1), Article 73. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15010073 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Othman, O., Iksan, Z. H., & Yasin, R. M. (2022). Creative teaching STEM module: High school students' perception. European Journal of Educational Research, 11(4), 2127–2137. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.11.4.2127 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Palmer, A. L., & Sarju, J. P. (2022). Inclusive outreach activity targeting negative alternate conceptions of chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 99(5), 1827–1837. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c00400 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Ramaraj, A., & Nagammal, J. (2019). Validating a direction adopted in a basic design studio based on the principles of constructivism. A Z ITU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 16(2), 105–123. https://doi.org/10.5505/itujfa.2019.43760 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Rembach, L., & Dison, L. (2016). Transforming taxonomies into rubrics: Using SOLO in social science and inclusive education. Perspectives in Education, 34(1), 68–83. https://doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v34i1.6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Sajidan, Atmojo, I. R. W., Ardiansyah, R., Saputri, D. Y., Roslan, R. M., & Halim, L. (2024). The effectiveness of the Think-Pair-Project-Share (TP2S) model in facilitating self-directedness of prospective science teachers. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 13(2), 325–338. https://doi.org/10.15294/egpb7z87 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Saunders, M. N. K, Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2019). Research methods for business students (8th ed.). Pearson. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Schmidt, H. G., Wagener, S. L., Smeets, G. A. C. M., Keemink, L. M., & Van Der Molen, H. T. (2015). On the use and misuse of lectures in higher education. Health Professions Education, 1(1), 12–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpe.2015.11.010 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Zhao, Y., Llorente, A. M. P., & Gómez, M. C. S. (2021). Digital competence in higher education research: A systematic literature review. Computers & Education, 168, Article 104212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104212 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study