Page 460
www.rsisinternational.org
ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS
Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXII October 2025
Developing a CEFR A1 Arabic Language Teaching Module through
Integrated Instructional Design Models
*1
Fudzla Suraiyya Abdul Raup,
2
Siti Nur Fatimah Md Aminullah,
3
Nik Nur Hidayah Bahari
123
Akademi Pengajian Bahasa, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia
*Corresponding Author
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.922ILEIID0048
Received: 26 September 2025; Accepted: 03 October 2025; Published: 22 October 2025
ABSTRACT
Arabic language education in Malaysia has been implemented through diverse approaches, yet its effectiveness
remains constrained by the lack of integrated modules that align with international standards. Existing modules
are generally generic, insufficiently tailored to learners’ actual proficiency levels, and offer limited instructional
guidance for teachers in planning instructional activities. Accordingly, this paper aims to develop an Arabic
language teaching module at the CEFR A1 level through the integration of three major instructional design
models; Dick and Carey (1978), ADDIE (2009), and the Successive Approximation Model- SAM (2012).
Conceptual analysis is employed to explore the contribution of each model across five phases—analysis, design,
development, implementation, and evaluation. The integration of these models results in a hybrid framework
that ensures alignment among objectives, strategies, and assessment, while incorporating flexibility through
prototyping and iterative refinement. The proposed module is expected to provide teachers with practical
guidance, including clearly defined learning outcomes, theme-based communicative activities, and assessment
instruments aligned with CEFR A1 descriptors. This study underscores a systematic and practical approach to
the development of CEFR A1 Arabic language modules, thereby enhancing teaching and learning effectiveness
while supporting international standards in foreign language education.
Keywords: (Instructional Design- Module - CEFR -Arabic Language)
INTRODUCTION
Foreign language education in Malaysia, particularly Arabic, begins as early as pre-school and continues to be
offered at the university level, either as an elective subject or a supplementary course (Shaharuddin et al., 2024).
Despite this, the teaching of Arabic continues to face significant challenges, especially in the development of
systematic, interactive, and level-appropriate instructional materials (Ateyh, 2024; Samah & Isahak, 2024). The
limited variety in curriculum and instructional strategies has diminished learners’ motivation to study and apply
Arabic in real-life contexts (Aldebsi & Eldesoky, 2023). Furthermore, most available Arabic learning modules
focus primarily on learners, with little emphasis on providing teachers with clear instructional guidance.
Consequently, many teachers are compelled to design their own modules due to the lack of suitable resources
(Ateyh, 2024). However, such teacher-developed modules are often not fully aligned with the CEFR framework,
as many teachers remain insufficiently trained in integrating CEFR principles into instructional module design
(Sahib & Stapa, 2021).
In line with this need, the present concept paper outlines several instructional design models as the foundation
for developing an Arabic language teaching module at the CEFR A1 level.
Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR)
The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) is an international standard developed
by the Council of Europe (2001) to systematically assess foreign language proficiency. It divides language
learning into six levels: A1–A2 (basic), B1–B2 (intermediate), and C1–C2 (advanced), with a strong emphasis
on communicative competence in real-life contexts (Council of Europe, 2001). In the context of Arabic, CEFR
serves as a foundation for the development of interactive, contextual, and learner-centered modules that align
Page 461
www.rsisinternational.org
ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS
Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXII October 2025
with the demands of 21st-century education. Designing teaching and learning modules in accordance with CEFR
is crucial to ensuring that content remains appropriate and relevant to learners’ proficiency levels (Sahib & Stapa,
2021).
Instructional Design Models
Dick & Carey Model (Dick & Carey, 1978)
This model is one of the earliest approaches to module development. It provides a detailed and systematic
sequence of steps for constructing instructional modules and consists of nine distinct phases.
Identifying instructional goals: This phase involves analyzing students’ and teachers’ needs as the foundation for
setting instructional goals. The goals should describe the expected competencies and the instructional tools to be
integrated into the teaching process.
Conducting instructional analysis: Following the establishment of instructional goals, this phase specifies the
essential skills and knowledge to be attained by learners. The analysis is guided by established learning domains,
particularly the cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains as outlined in Bloom’s Taxonomy and related
pedagogical frameworks.
Analyzing learners and context: This phase requires a systematic examination of learners’ proficiency levels and
existing knowledge. Particular attention is directed toward their abilities and skills, prior learning experiences,
academic motivation, and preferred learning styles, as these factors critically influence the design and
effectiveness of instructional strategies.
Writing performance objectives: This phase establishes measurable indicators of student achievement upon
completion of the learning session. The formulation of performance objectives emphasizes three critical
elements: clearly defining the learning situation, applying appropriate theoretical or conceptual frameworks, and
demonstrating mastery through the selected concept or theory (Chaparro et al., 2018).
Developing assessment instruments: Assessment instruments are developed to ensure learners meet prerequisite
skills, monitor progress toward instructional goals, and assess the overall effectiveness of the instructional
process.
Develop instructional strategy: This phase involves selecting appropriate pedagogical approaches for delivering
instructional content, ensuring alignment between goals, delivery methods, and learner engagement.
Developing & selecting instructional materials: This phase involves preparing instructional content for learners,
whether designed for independent learning or facilitated by a teacher. The materials may include structured
guidance, explanatory information, and resources tailored to the chosen mode of delivery.
Designing and conducting formative evaluation: This phase involves continuous assessment during classroom
implementation to ensure ongoing improvement of the instructional materials. The evaluation provides feedback
that supports continuous refinement and enhancement of instructional quality.
Designing and conducting summative evaluation: This phase assesses the effectiveness of the instructional
materials after full implementation. The evaluation measures the achievement of intended instructional goals
and provides evidence of instructional impact.
ADDIE Model (Branch, 2009)
This model is one of the most well-known frameworks in instructional module development. It consists of five
phases:
Analysis: This phase focuses on identifying learners’ needs, competencies, and prior knowledge. This process
establishes a foundation for setting instructional goals that define the expected learning outcomes. An
Page 462
www.rsisinternational.org
ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS
Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXII October 2025
instructional analysis is then developed to break down the learning process into clear and achievable steps,
providing teachers with guidance in addressing learners’ challenges effectively (Aldoobie, 2015).
Design: This phase involves planning the content, structure, and layout of the instructional materials. At this
phase, appropriate delivery methods and instructional strategies are selected to optimize classroom instruction.
Careful design at this stage ensures the instructional material is practical and aligned with the intended learning
objectives.
Development: This phase focuses on production and integration of instructional components such as teacher
guides, learner worksheets, and multimedia support. Instructional materials are constructed in accordance with
the design specifications.
Implement: This phase involves applying the instructional materials in real classroom settings. Teachers use the
instructional materials to deliver lessons, while data are collected to evaluate instructional delivery, learner
engagement, and contextual adaptability.
Evaluation: This phase encompasses both formative and summative assessments to determine the instructional
materials' overall effectiveness (Aldoobie, 2015). Data obtained from learners and teachers provide evidence for
continuous improvement, ensuring alignment with learning objectives.
Successive Approximation Model-SAM (Allen, 2012)
This model is widely used in instructional module development due to its faster and more flexible process. The
strength of SAM lies in its use of prototypes, which can be evaluated and refined continuously throughout the
development cycle, unlike traditional models that require a complete product before evaluation (Jung et al.,
2019). SAM consists of three phases:
Preparation phase: Unlike other models that emphasize formal needs analysis, the Successive Approximation
Model (SAM) emphasizes information gathering as its initial step. This phase involves gathering information on
learners, goals, and content requirements. This is followed by the “Savvy Start,” a structured brainstorming
session designed to identify instructional challenges and propose practical solutions for module development.
Iterative design phase: In this phase, initial prototypes of learning activities and materials are developed based
on ideas generated during the Savvy Start. These prototypes are tested, reviewed, and refined through continuous
feedback, allowing for incremental improvement. Rather than requiring a fully completed module before
evaluation, SAM emphasizes iterative refinement, enabling researchers to design, evaluate, and revise prototypes
in cycles until they are ready for full development (Essel et al., 2016).
Iterative development phase: Following the refinement of prototypes, researchers proceed to the development of
a complete instructional materials or a design proof. The design proof is implemented and evaluated by users,
with subsequent revisions producing successive versions known as alpha, beta, and ultimately, the gold version.
The gold version represents the finalized instructional materials ready for full implementation. This process is
more efficient compared to traditional models, which require the construction of a complete instructional
materials prior to testing and evaluation. By allowing ongoing refinement at different stages, SAM minimizes
the need to restart from earlier phases and ensures a faster, more adaptive development cycle.
Integrated Instructional Design Framework for Arabic Language Teaching Module (CEFR A1)
Analysis: In this phase, both the ADDIE and Dick & Carey models emphasize the identification of learner and
teacher needs. For learners, particular attention is given to prior knowledge, language proficiency, and ability
levels, while for teachers, the focus lies on constraints encountered in instructional practice. The SAM model
contributes through information gathering and the Savvy Start, where researchers engage in brainstorming to
identify problems and potential solutions from the perspectives of learners, teachers, and other stakeholders.
This integrated process ensures that the instructional objectives remain aligned with the CEFR A1 framework,
which emphasizes language learning that is tailored to learners’ specific proficiency levels.
Page 463
www.rsisinternational.org
ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS
Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXII October 2025
Design: The application of the Dick and Carey model in the design phase is particularly important, as it provides
detailed guidance on the alignment of instructional goals, strategies, and assessments. Teachers are provided
with clear course learning outcomes, comprehensive teaching instructions, and suggested classroom activities
such as role-plays, guided dialogues, and listening drills. The ADDIE model complements this process by
supporting the careful organization and structuring of content. Meanwhile, the SAM model facilitates rapid
prototyping, enabling teachers to test instructional materials in the classroom without waiting for the full module
to be completed. This approach aligns with the CEFR A1 framework, which emphasizes not only the
development of modules according to learners’ proficiency levels but also the use of thematic organization (e.g.,
self-introduction, family, food) in structuring instructional content (Abd Rahman et al., 2024).
Development: In the development phase, the ADDIE model provides a linear framework for producing the
module, while SAM introduces iterative refinement through prototype testing. The outputs of this phase include
teacher guides, worksheets, sample lesson plans, audio and video resources, and assessment rubrics. Teachers
are supplied with ready-to-use classroom instructions as well as alternative activities that can be adapted to
learners’ varying proficiency levels. The iterative cycle allows for continuous improvement until the module
reaches a classroom-ready version (Ali et al., 2021). At this stage, it is essential to ensure that the content
developed strictly adheres to the CEFR A1 framework, particularly with respect to thematic organization and
the appropriateness of vocabulary, phrases, and sentence structures for beginner learners.
Implementation: The implementation phase draws primarily from ADDIE’s structured delivery, ensuring that
the module can be systematically applied in real classroom contexts. Teachers follow the provided instructional
steps and integrate recommended activities—such as simulation, pair dialogues and oral questioning—into their
lessons. SAM contributes flexibility, allowing teachers to adapt activities based on learner responses and
classroom dynamics (Ali et al., 2021). This ensures that the module is not only consistent across different
teachers but also adaptable to varying contexts. Furthermore, the activities are mapped to CEFR A1 descriptors,
ensuring that learners engage in tasks relevant to their communicative level. In this way, the implementation
process guarantees that classroom practices remain aligned with the thematic content and proficiency outcomes
expected at CEFR A1.
Evaluation: The evaluation phase integrates ADDIE’s emphasis on both formative and summative assessment
with SAM’s iterative feedback cycle. Teachers conduct ongoing evaluations during lessons through observation,
oral questioning, and worksheet completion, while summative tasks such as short self-introductions and thematic
quizzes assess overall achievement. Feedback from teachers and learners is then used to refine and improve the
module for future application. Importantly, all evaluation instruments are designed in line with CEFR A1
descriptors, ensuring that assessments accurately measure learners’ communicative competence at the beginner
level. This alignment guarantees that learners’ progress is systematically tracked against internationally
recognized proficiency standards.
Figure 1 Integrated Instructional Design Models
Page 464
www.rsisinternational.org
ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS
Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXII October 2025
Potential Challenges in Implementation
Despite the strengths of this integrated framework, several challenges may arise during actual implementation.
Teachers may require specific training to familiarize themselves with CEFR descriptors and the blended use of
multiple instructional design models (C. Alih et al., 2020). Furthermore, institutional constraints such as limited
time allocation, resource availability, and varying levels of administrative support could hinder systematic
adoption (Jamain & Jamaludin, 2023). Addressing these challenges requires targeted professional development
workshops, supportive policy measures, and a gradual piloting process within selected institutions before wider
implementation.
CONCLUSION
This paper has outlined a hybrid instructional design framework for developing an Arabic language teaching
module at the CEFR A1 level, integrating elements from the Dick & Carey, ADDIE, and SAM models. The
framework emphasizes systematic alignment between objectives, strategies, and assessments while maintaining
flexibility through prototyping and iterative refinement. Although developed for the Malaysian context, the
framework has wider applicability due to its alignment with CEFR standards, making it adaptable to other
languages and educational settings. By combining theoretical grounding with practical guidance, this study
contributes to international discussions on instructional design in language education.
As this study is conceptual, future pilot testing and case implementations are essential to validate its practicality.
Empirical data on learner outcomes and teacher experiences will provide stronger evidence of its effectiveness
and guide further refinement.
REFERENCES
1. Abd Rahman, R., Alias, H., Zakaria, M. H. & Razali, N. W. N. (2024). Development and Usability of the Arabic
Language Module “Marhaban” Based on CEFR (A1 & A2) Levels). SIBAWAYH Arabic Language and
Education, 5(2), 60-74. https://doi.org/10.37134/sibawayh.vol5.2.4.2024.20244
2. Aldebsi, A. H. M. H. A & Eldesoky, E. M. A. (2023). Challenges and Obstacles of Teaching and Learning the
Arabic Language in Secondary religious Schools in Malaysia, Suggestion and Solutions. International Journal
of Academic Research in Business & Social Sciences, 13(5). http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v13-i5/17327
3. Aldoobie, N. (2015). ADDIE Model. American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 5(6).
4. Ali, C. A., Acquah, S. & Esia-Donkoh, K. (2021). A comparative study of SAM and ADDIE models in
simulating STEM instruction. African Educational Research Journal, 9(4), 852-859.
5. Allen, M. W. (2012). Leaving ADDIE for SAM: An agile model for developing the best learning experiences.
ASTD Press.
6. Ateyh, N.A. (2024). Theories, practices, and challenges of teaching and learning Arabic as a modern foreign
language at the secondary stage in Dubai. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching Methodology, 3(8), 104-111.
https://doi.org/10.26389/AJSRP.N290324
7. Branch, R. M. (2009). Instructional design: The ADDIE approach. Springer.
8. C. Alih, N. A., Md. Yusoff, M. A. & Abdul Raof, A. H. (2020). Teachers’ Knowledge and Belief on the CEFR
Implementation in Malaysian ESL Classroom. International Journal of Multidisciplinary and Current
Educational Research (IJMCER), 2(5), 126-134.
9. Council of Europe. (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching,
assessment. Cambridge University Press.
10. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1978). The systematic design of instruction. Scott, Foresman.
11. Essel, H. B., Tachie-Menson, A. & Yeboah, A. A. (2016). Adopting Successive Approximation Model for the
Development of Locally-Made Interventionary Manipulatives for the Teaching Ang Learning of Mathematics
in Basic Education Context: The Case of Akrom M/A and Knust Primary Schools. Art and Design Studies, 46.
12. Jamain, S. & Jamaludin, K. (2023). Issues and Challenges in The Implementaion of The Common European
Framework of Reference (CEFR) in Malaysian Primary School. International Journal of Acedemic Research
in Business & Social Sciences, 13(12), 5076-5090. http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v13-i12/20394
13. Jung, H., Kim, Y. R., Lee, H. & Shin, Y. (2019). Advanced Instructional Design for Successive E-Learning:
Based on the Successive Approximation Model (SAM). International JI. On E-Learning, 18(2), 191-204.
Page 465
www.rsisinternational.org
ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS
Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXII October 2025
14. Sahib, F. H., & Stapa, M. (2021). The Impact of Implementing the Common European Framework of Reference
on Language Education: A Critical Review. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social
Sciences, 11(11), 644 – 660. http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v11-i11/11160
15. Samah, R. & Isahak, A. (2024). Cabaran dan Solusi Pembelajaran Bahasa Arab di Malaysia. International
Journal of Islamic Studies (Al-Qanatir), 33(5).
16. Shaharuddin, H. N., Abdul Raup, F. S., Shafri, M. H. & Sanusi, S. S. (2024). Motivational Factors for Learning
Foreign Language at UiTM. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 8(9), 1258-
1273. https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.8090104
