Design and Validation of an Understanding by Design-Based Science Assessment Module for Secondary Schools under Indonesia’s Merdeka Curriculum
DOI: https://doi.org/10.26618/cygjmh69
backward design, merdeka curriculum, module, science assessment, understanding by design
Abstract
Assessment practices in secondary science and physics classrooms often emphasize scoring rather than generating actionable evidence of students’ understanding. This challenge becomes more urgent under the Merdeka Curriculum, which positions assessment as an integral component of learning. To address this need, this study aimed to develop and validate a teacher guide module for UbD (Understanding by Design)-based science assessment for junior and senior secondary levels by operationalizing backward design and the six facets of understanding into practical procedures, templates, and worked examples. Using a research and development approach with the 4D model (Define–Design–Develop–Disseminate), the module was produced through needs analysis, curriculum and literature review, and iterative drafting. Content validation was conducted by three validators using a four-point relevance scale, analyzed with feasibility percentages and Aiken’s V complemented by Score (Wilson) confidence intervals. Practicality was examined through a limited pilot involving three science teachers who applied the module and completed a five-point response questionnaire. The results showed high feasibility across usefulness, practicality, conceptual accuracy, and language/visual design. At the same time, item-level content validity was strong (Aiken’s V = 0.78–1.00) with conservative lower confidence bounds indicating at least moderate validity for all items. Teachers reported uniformly positive perceptions, with perceived usefulness rated highest (M = 4.83), although implementation of the Explanation facet was relatively more challenging (lowest item mean, M = 3.67). This study’s novelty lies in providing a step-by-step, facet-based assessment design guide that explicitly links learning objectives, acceptable evidence, and analytic rubrics within a single teacher-ready resource. In conclusion, the validated module is feasible and practically promising as an evidence-centered tool to strengthen alignment between curriculum outcomes and assessment in secondary science. The module contributes to physics education by supporting teachers to design authentic, rubric-based assessments that better capture students’ scientific reasoning and conceptual understanding.
References
Aiken, L. R. (1985). Three coefficients for analyzing the reliability and validity of ratings. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 45(1), 131–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164485451012
Almanasreh, E., Moles, R., & Chen, T. F. (2019). Evaluation of methods used for estimating content validity. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 15(2), 214–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2018.03.066
Aslam, A., Ahmad, S., Siller, H.-S., & Nasreen, A. (2024). Impact of the Understanding by Design model on the science academic achievement of fifth grade students in Pakistan. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 10(1), 113–153. https://doi.org/10.1163/23641177-bja10078
Badan Standar, Kurikulum, dan Asesmen Pendidikan. (2025). Panduan mata pelajaran Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam (IPA): Fase D dan E. Kementerian Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah Republik Indonesia.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2018). Classroom assessment and pedagogy. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 25(6), 551–575. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2018.1441807
Fradina, R. A., Cahyono, E., & Sumarni, W. (2022). Development of natural and social science learning programme (IPAS) in elementary school with Understanding by Design (UbD) framework to improve concept mastery and problem-solving ability. Journal of Primary Education, 11(3), 399–407. https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/jpe/article/view/77327
Gilbert, G. E., & Prion, S. (2016). Making sense of methods and measurement: Lawshe’s content validity index. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 12(12), 530–531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2016.08.002
Gloria, R. Y., Sudarmin, S., Wiyanto, W., & Indriyanti, D. R. (2018). The effectiveness of formative assessment with Understanding by Design (UbD) stages in forming habits of mind in prospective teachers. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 983, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/983/1/012158
Gregori-Giralt, E., & Menéndez-Varela, J. L. (2021). The content aspect of validity in a rubric-based assessment system for course syllabuses. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 68, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100971
Hadinda, S. T., Rohana, R., & Sayidiman, S. (2025). Analisis efektivitas modul ajar menggunakan pendekatan Understanding by Design (UbD) pada ketercapaian tujuan pembelajaran di sekolah dasar. Pendas: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Dasar, 10(1), 111–120. https://journal.unpas.ac.id/index.php/pendas/article/view/23693
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Mahdiannur, M. A., Martini, M., Astriani, D., Setiawan, B., & Qosyim, A. (2024). Pemberdayaan guru IPA: Integrasi strategi Understanding by Design untuk meningkatkan kompetensi profesional dalam mendesain rencana pembelajaran. ABDIMASY: Jurnal Pengabdian dan Pemberdayaan Masyarakat, 5(2), 136–149. https://doi.org/10.46963/ams.v5i2.2329
Mang, H. M. A., Chu, H. E., Martin, S. N., & Kim, C. J. (2023). Developing an evaluation rubric for planning and assessing SSI-based STEAM programs in science classrooms. Research in Science Education, 53(6), 1119–1144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-023-10123-8
McLure, F. (2022). The thinking frames approach: Improving high school students’ written explanations of phenomena in science. Research in Science Education, 53, 173-191. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-022-10052-y
Mctighe, J., Silver, H., & Perini, M. (2020). Deep Learning is Doable: Five Strategies for Supporting Deep Learning in Virtual Environments. https://jaymctighe.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Deep-Virtual-Learning-article-12.9.10.pdf
Nadia, A. R. U. (2024). Pengembangan modul ajar Kurikulum Merdeka menggunakan pendekatan Understanding by Design pada mata pelajaran IPAS kelas IV di MIN 9 Bandar Lampung. Doctoral Dissertation, UIN Raden Intan Lampung. https://repository.radenintan.ac.id/id/eprint/32676
National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K–12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press. https://knilt.arcc.albany.edu/images/f/f8/A_Framework_for_K-12_Science_Education_A_New_Conceptual_Framework.pdf
Nursafitri, L., Firdaus, T., Sudomo, R. I., & Kurniasih, A. (2023). Development of local content curriculum based on the Merdeka Curriculum for high school in East Kalimantan Province. QALAMUNA: Jurnal Pendidikan, Sosial, dan Agama, 15(2), 695–704. https://doi.org/10.37680/qalamuna.v15i2.2933
OECD. (2018). The future of education and skills: Education 2030. OECD Publishing.
Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, R. (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. National Academies Press.
Penfield, R. D., & Giacobbi, P. R., J. (2004). Applying a score confidence interval to Aiken’s item content-relevance index. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 8(4), 213–225. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327841mpee0804_3
Probosari, R. M., Indriyanti, N. Y., Utami, B., Fakhrudin, I. A., & Khasanah, A. N. (2024). Pemberdayaan guru melalui backward design lesson plan sebagai implementasi Kurikulum Merdeka. Masyarakat Berdaya dan Inovasi, 5(1), 146–151. https://mayadani.org/index.php/MAYADANI/article/view/196
Putra, Z. R. A., Pratama, C. E., Fauziyah, N., & Pramudito, M. S. (2023). Pengembangan modul ajar matematika berdiferensiasi berbasis Understanding by Design (UbD). Postulat: Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan Matematika, 4(1), 128–139. https://doi.org/10.30587/postulat.v4i1.5695
Rahmia, S. H., Mutiani, M., Nuraini, F., Triyono, S., & Syarifuddin, S. (2025). Integration of learning design and evaluation in the implementation of Kurikulum Merdeka: Evidence from public junior high schools in Banjarmasin. The Kalimantan Social Studies Journal, 7(1), 98–116. https://ppjp.ulm.ac.id/journals/index.php/kss/article/view/16735
Retariandalas, R., Ramli, D. P. S., Purnama, I. M., & Simanjuntak, P. (2025). Pelatihan pengembangan modul ajar menggunakan Understanding by Design (UbD) untuk guru matematika MA di Jakarta. BESIRU: Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat, 2(6), 581–587. https://doi.org/10.62335/besiru.v2i6.1365
Sabrina, K. A., Fitri, M. A., Nainggolan, N., & Mulyatna, F. (2024). Understanding by Design: Identifikasi hasil yang diinginkan dan penerapannya dalam pembelajaran matematika. JP3 (Jurnal Pendidikan dan Profesi Pendidik), 10(2), 147–153. https://doi.org/10.26877/jp3.v10i2.22743
Saputra, V. P., Purnamasari, I., & Suyitno, S. (2025). Designing an IPAS lesson plan with Understanding by Design approach for grade V elementary school. Primary: Jurnal Pendidikan Guru Sekolah Dasar, 14(5), 659–670. https://doi.org/10.33578/jpfkip.v14i5.p659-670
Schildkamp, K., van der Kleij, F. M., Heitink, M. C., Kippers, W. B., & Veldkamp, B. P. (2020). Formative assessment: A systematic review of critical teacher prerequisites for classroom practice. International Journal of Educational Research, 103, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101602
Sumarni, W., Supardi, K. I., & Widiarti, N. (2019). Development of assessment instruments to measure critical thinking skills. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 349, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/349/1/012066
Terwee, C. B., Prinsen, C. A. C., Chiarotto, A., Westerman, M. J., Patrick, D. L., Alonso, J., Bouter, L. M., de Vet, H. C. W., & Mokkink, L. B. (2018). COSMIN methodology for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures: A Delphi study. Quality of Life Research, 27(5), 1159–1170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1829-0
Thiagarajan, S., Semmel, D. S., & Semmel, M. I. (1974). Instructional development for training teachers of exceptional children: A sourcebook. Indiana University.
Tomlinson, C. A., & McTighe, J. (2006). Integrating differentiated instruction and Understanding by Design: Connecting content and kids. ASCD.
Wisniewski, B., Zierer, K., & Hattie, J. (2019). The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(3087), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03087
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Zulhelmi, Riza Andriani, Dina Syaflita
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright:
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2. 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 acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
3. 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.
Licence:
Authors are free to:
1. Share: Copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
2. Adapt: Remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as the authors follow the license terms, which include the following:
1. Attribution: You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
2. ShareAlike: If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
3. No additional restrictions: You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
