Teachers’ PCK and Pedagogical Decisions in English Materials Design at Junior High School Tahfidz Entrepreneur Khairunnas Tuban
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Alfi Az Zuhriyah
Irmayani
Buyun Khulel
Syifa Khuriyatuz Zahro
Abstract
In the context of rapidly evolving educational demands and increasing integration of digital technologies, teachers are required to make informed and adaptive pedagogical decisions in designing effective learning materials. Understanding how these decisions are shaped is essential to improving English language teaching at the junior secondary school level. This study aims to explore and describe teachers’ Pedagogical Decision Making in designing English learning materials through the perspective of Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK). Using a descriptive qualitative approach, the study collected data through in-depth interviews with English teachers, which were further triangulated with students’ perceptions to ensure data validity and richness. The findings reveal that teachers’ pedagogical decisions in material design are not simple tasks but complex processes shaped by their knowledge of learners’ characteristics, curriculum demands, available resources, sociocultural context, and the growing integration of educational technology. Teachers consistently adjust the linguistic complexity of texts, select contextually relevant topics, and apply various scaffolding strategies to support students in overcoming linguistic limitations. In addition, teachers must balance the use of standardized textbooks with the need to modify materials to align with core competencies and students’ profiles. The study also highlights that emotional and motivational factors play an essential role in decision-making, particularly in maintaining students’ engagement and confidence. These results suggest that teachers’ PCK is dynamic and continuously evolving through reflection, teaching experience, and responsiveness to classroom realities. Therefore, the study recommends the implementation of more systematic and sustained professional development programs focusing on material design, PCK enhancement, and digital literacy. Such initiatives are crucial to empower teachers in creating English learning materials that are contextual, innovative, and responsive to the diverse needs of contemporary learners.
Downloads
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Copyright (c) 2026 Alfi Az Zuhriyah, Irmayani, Buyun Khulel, Syifa Khuriyatuz Zahro
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
S. Zein, D. Sukyadi, F. A. Hamied, and N. S. Lengkanawati, “English language education in Indonesia: A review of research (2011–2019),” Lang. Teach., vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 491–523, Oct. 2020, doi: 10.1017/S0261444820000208.
I. Irmayani, A. D. Hapsari, and B. R. B. Paradieshta, “Strengthening Classroom Language to Enhance English Language Exposure in Class: Training Results for Non-Native English Teachers in Lamongan Regency,” Glob. Sustain. Community Engagem., vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 321–327, Oct. 2025, doi: 10.62568/GSCE.V1I4.490.
L. Fatmawati, D. Sofeny, and S. K. Zahro, “IJECA International Journal of Education & Curriculum Application Students’ Attitudes Toward The Transformation of Online to Offline Learning in EFL Classroom,” vol. 4, no. 3, 2021, doi: 10.31764/ijeca.v4i3.5818.
I. Gandana and G. Parr, “Professional identity, curriculum and teaching intercultural communication: An Indonesian case study,” Lang. Cult. Curric., vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 229–246, Nov. 2013, doi: 10.1080/07908318.2013.833620.
A. D. HAPSARI, “Contextual Assessment Models in Islamic Education: A Study of Pre-Service Teacher Projects,” Bliss J. Broadening Linguist. Lit. Educ. Study Learn. Media, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 1–15, Aug. 2025, Accessed: Dec. 01, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://e-jurnal.unisda.ac.id/index.php/BlissJournal/article/view/10677
H. Cahyani, M. de Courcy, and J. Barnett, “Teachers’ code-switching in bilingual classrooms: Exploring pedagogical and sociocultural functions,” Int. J. Biling. Educ. Biling., vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 465–479, May 2018, doi: 10.1080/13670050.2016.1189509.
S. Dardjowidjojo, “Strategies for a successful national language policy: The Indonesian case,” Int. J. Soc. Lang., vol. 130, no. 130, pp. 35–47, 1998, doi: 10.1515/ijsl.1998.130.35.
K. Adaskou, D. Britten, and B. Fahsi, “Design decision on the cultural content of a secondary English course for Morocco,” ELT J., vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 3–10, Jan. 1990, doi: 10.1093/elt/44.1.3.
A. Dewi, “The English(es) to teach after study and life in Australia: A study of Indonesian English language educators,” Asian Englishes, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 128–147, 2017, doi: 10.1080/13488678.2017.1279762.
F. Furaidah, A. Saukah, and U. Widiati, “Washback of English national examination in the Indonesian context,” TEFLIN J., vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 36–58, Sep. 2015, doi: 10.15639/teflinjournal.v26i1/36-58.
Y. G. Butler, “English language education among young learners in East Asia: A review of current research (2004–2014),” Lang. Teach., vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 303–342, Jul. 2015, doi: 10.1017/s0261444815000105.
S. Hawanti, “Implementing Indonesia’s English language teaching policy in primary schools: The role of teachers’ knowledge and beliefs,” Int. J. Pedagog. Learn., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 162–170, 2014, doi: 10.1080/18334105.2014.11082029.
I. N. Hidayati, “Evaluating the role of L1 in teaching receptive skills and grammar in EFL classes,” Indones. J. Appl. Linguist., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 17–32, 2012, doi: 10.17509/ijal.v1i2.82.
K. Huda, “A CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS OF INTERROGATIVE SENTENCES IN ENGLISH AND INDONESIAN LANGUAGE,” Dar el-Ilmi J. Stud. Keagamaan, Pendidik. dan Hum., vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 37–49, Oct. 2018, doi: 10.52166/DAR.
C. S. Santiago Jr, M. P. Leah Ulanday, Z. R. Jane Centeno, M. D. Cristina Bayla, and J. S. Callanta, “Flexible Learning Adaptabilities in the New Normal: E-Learning Resources, Digital Meeting Platforms, Online Learning Systems and Learning Engagement,” Asian J. Distance Educ., vol. 16, no. 2, p. 38, Dec. 2021, Accessed: Dec. 01, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://asianjde.com/ojs/index.php/AsianJDE/article/view/580
L. Fatmawati, D. Sofeny, and S. K. Zahro, “IJECA International Journal of Education & Curriculum Application Students’ Attitudes Toward The Transformation of Online to Offline Learning in EFL Classroom,” vol. 4, no. 3, 2021, doi: 10.31764/ijeca.v4i3.5818.
J. F. Ewing Stephen Austin, G. F. Jeanie Gresham Stephen Austin, and B. F. Dickey Stephen Austin, “Pre-Service Teachers Learning to Engage All Students, Including English Language Learners, in Productive Struggle.,” Issues Undergrad. Math. Prep. Sch. Teach., vol. 2, Feb. 2019, Accessed: Dec. 01, 2025. [Online]. Available: www.k-12prep.math.ttu.edu]
P. J. C. John Scott, Qualitative Approach. London: Sage Publisher, 2011. Accessed: Dec. 01, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://books.google.co.id/books?hl=id&lr=&id=mWlsKkIuFNgC&oi=fnd&pg=PA404&dq=A+qualitative+approach+is+considered+appropriate+because&ots=tSeD4WeX0j&sig=jCYBOZaqvpWDTMmeJgmIOMdbaRU&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=A qualitative approach is considered appropriate because&f=false
H. Kim, J. S. Sefcik, and C. Bradway, “Characteristics of Qualitative Descriptive Studies: A Systematic Review,” Res. Nurs. Heal., vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 23–42, Feb. 2017, doi: 10.1002/NUR.21768;WGROUP:STRING:PUBLICATION.
J. Herrington and R. Oliver, “An instructional design framework for authentic learning environments,” Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2000 483, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 23–48, 2000, doi: 10.1007/BF02319856.
K. Gravemeijer and D. Van Eerde, “Design Research as a Means for Building a Knowledge Base for Teachers and Teaching in Mathematics Education,” https://doi.org/10.1086/596999, vol. 109, no. 5, pp. 510–524, May 2009, doi: 10.1086/596999.
K. S. Von Esch and S. S. Kavanagh, “Preparing Mainstream Classroom Teachers of English Learner Students: Grounding Practice-Based Designs for Teacher Learning in Theories of Adaptive Expertise Development,” J. Teach. Educ., vol. 69, no. 3, pp. 239–251, May 2018, doi: 10.1177/0022487117717467;PAGE:STRING:ARTICLE/CHAPTER.
M. Fasheh, “Reprint: Community Education: To Reclaim and Transform What Has Been Made Invisible,” Harv. Educ. Rev., vol. 95, no. 2, pp. 314–332, Sep. 2025, doi: 10.17763/1943-5045-95.2.314.
J. Loughran, “Pedagogical reasoning: the foundation of the professional knowledge of teaching,” Teach. Teach., vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 523–535, Jul. 2019, doi: 10.1080/13540602.2019.1633294.
J. Krajcik, K. L. McNeill, and B. J. Reiser, “Learning-goals-driven design model: Developing curriculum materials that align with national standards and incorporate project-based pedagogy,” Sci. Educ., vol. 92, no. 1, pp. 1–32, Jan. 2008, doi: 10.1002/SCE.20240;REQUESTEDJOURNAL:JOURNAL:1098237X;WGROUP:STRING:PUBLICATION.
R. Vatrapu, C. Teplovs, N. Fujita, and S. Bull, “Towards visual analytics for teachers’ dynamic diagnostic pedagogical decision-making,” ACM Int. Conf. Proceeding Ser., pp. 93–98, 2011, doi: 10.1145/2090116.2090129;ISSUE:ISSUE:DOI.
S. Malik, H. Qin, and I. Oteir, “Perceived Psychological, Linguistic and Socio-Cultural Obstacles: An Investigation of English Communication Apprehension in EFL Learners.,” Int. J. Instr., vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 733–752, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.29333/iji.2021.14442a.
I. Ahmad, A. Farid, and M. S. Hussain, “Teacher cognition and English as a foreign language context: potential challenges,” Psychol. …, vol. 58, no. 5, pp. 382–395, 2021, [Online]. Available: http://psychologyandeducation.net/pae/index.php/pae/article/view/5249
K. L. McNeill, R. Affolter, and B. J. Reiser, “ANCHORING SCIENCE PROFESSIONAL LEARNING IN CURRICULUM MATERIALS ENACTMENT: Illustrating Theories in Practice to Support Teachers’ Learning,” Teach. Learn. Chang. Context. Perspect. from Learn. Sci., pp. 47–68, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.4324/9781003097112-5/ANCHORING-SCIENCE-PROFESSIONAL-LEARNING-CURRICULUM-MATERIALS-ENACTMENT-KATHERINE-MCNEILL-RENEE-AFFOLTER-BRIAN-REISER.
A. J. Romiszowski, “Designing instructional systems: Decision making in course planning and curriculum design,” Des. Instr. Syst. Decis. Mak. Course Plan. Curric. Des., pp. 1–415, Jan. 2016, doi: 10.4324/9780203063446/DESIGNING-INSTRUCTIONAL-SYSTEMS-ROMISZOWSKI/RIGHTS-AND-PERMISSIONS.
U. Jurnal and B. Khulel, “TEACHING ENGLISH FOR YOUNG LEARNERS IN RUSTIC AREA: TEACHERS’ CHALLENGES,” | Ling. |, vol. 17, no. 2, 2021, doi: 10.34005/lingua.v%vi%i.1558.
K. F. Olivant, “I am not a format: Teachers experiences with fostering creativity in the era of accountability,” J. Res. Child. Educ., vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 115–129, Jan. 2015, doi: 10.1080/02568543.2014.978920;WEBSITE:WEBSITE:TFOPB;PAGEGROUP:STRING:PUBLICATION.
K. Nehrbass, T. Murcray, and E. Morris, “Flexibility Within Structure: Factors contributing to Faculty Perceptions of Autonomy and Standardization in Course Design and Delivery”, doi: 10.59668/378.10316.
B. Harn, D. Parisi, and M. Stoolmiller, “Balancing Fidelity with Flexibility and Fit: What do we Really Know about Fidelity of Implementation in Schools?,” Except. Child., vol. 79, no. 2, pp. 181–193, Apr. 2013, doi: 10.1177/0014402913079002051.
F. Herman and J. Tondeur, “Untangling the sociomateriality of the classroom: biographies of school spaces (c. 1960–2014),” Oxford Rev. Educ., vol. 47, no. 5, pp. 681–695, Sep. 2021, doi: 10.1080/03054985.2021.1924654;WGROUP:STRING:PUBLICATION.
K. Barton, R. Burroughs, A. Hemmings, G. Markle, and H. Meyer, “Chair: Piyush Swami,” 2004.
P. Cordingley et al., “Constructing Teachers’ Professional Identities Education International Research,” 2019.
C. Y. Charalambous and H. C. Hill, “Teacher knowledge, curriculum materials, and quality of instruction: Unpacking a complex relationship,” J. Curric. Stud., vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 443–466, Aug. 2012, doi: 10.1080/00220272.2011.650215;SUBPAGE:STRING:ABSTRACT;WGROUP:STRING:PUBLICATION.
I. A. Mehedi, “Enforced CLT or disguised GTM?: investigating English curriculum implementation in secondary schools in Bangladesh”,” 2019, Accessed: Dec. 01, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://dspace.bracu.ac.bd:8443/xmlui/handle/10361/12391
D. Myhill, “Grammar As a Meaning-Making Resource for Improving Writing,” L1 Educ. Stud. Lang. Lit., vol. 18, no. 2018, pp. 1–21, 2018, doi: 10.17239/L1ESLL-2018.18.04.04.
M. Al-Hor, H. Almahdi, M. Al-Theyab, A. G. Mustafa, M. Seed Ahmed, and S. Zaqout, “Exploring student perceptions on virtual reality in anatomy education: insights on enjoyment, effectiveness, and preferences,” BMC Med. Educ. 2024 241, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 1405-, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.1186/S12909-024-06370-6.
C. Winch, A. Oancea, and J. Orchard, “The contribution of educational research to teachers’ professional learning: philosophical understandings,” Oxford Rev. Educ., vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 202–216, Mar. 2015, doi: 10.1080/03054985.2015.1017406.
V. D. Opfer and D. Pedder, “Conceptualizing teacher professional learning,” Rev. Educ. Res., vol. 81, no. 3, pp. 376–407, 2011, doi: 10.3102/0034654311413609;ISSUE:ISSUE:DOI.
C. Zhang and W. Zeng, “A Forward-Looking Study on the In-Depth Development Planning of Information Technology into Teacher Education,” J. Sensors, vol. 2022, no. 1, p. 4885771, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.1155/2022/4885771.
S. Karppinen, V. Kallunki, and K. Komulainen, “Interdisciplinary craft designing and invention pedagogy in teacher education: student teachers creating smart textiles,” Int. J. Technol. Des. Educ. 2017 291, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 57–74, Dec. 2017, doi: 10.1007/S10798-017-9436-X.
E. Akhter, “AI IN THE CLASSROOM: EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF INTELLIGENT TUTORING SYSTEMS FOR MULTILINGUAL LEARNERS IN SECONDARY EDUCATION,” ASRC Procedia Glob. Perspect. Sci. Scholarsh., vol. 1, no. 01, pp. 532–563, Apr. 2025, doi: 10.63125/GCQ1QR39.
J. L. Sewell, J. L. Bowen, O. Ten Cate, P. S. O’Sullivan, B. Shah, and C. K. Boscardin, “Learning Challenges, Teaching Strategies, and Cognitive Load: Insights From the Experience of Seasoned Endoscopy Teachers,” Acad. Med., vol. 95, no. 5, pp. 794–802, May 2020, doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000002946.
R. M. Schneider and K. Plasman, “Science teacher learning progressions: A review of science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge development,” Rev. Educ. Res., vol. 81, no. 4, pp. 530–565, 2011, doi: 10.3102/0034654311423382;REQUESTEDJOURNAL:JOURNAL:RERA;WEBSITE:WEBSITE:SAGE;ISSUE:ISSUE:DOI.
L. Azhary and S. Fatimah, “The Integration of Local Cultures in English Teaching Materials in Promoting Culturally Responsive Teaching,” AL-ISHLAH J. Pendidik., vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 2045–2056, May 2024, doi: 10.35445/ALISHLAH.V16I2.4998.
S. Tekir and H. Akar, “The Current State of Instructional Materials Education: Aligning Policy, Standards, and Teacher Education Curriculum.,” Educ. Sci. Theory Pract., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 22–40, Feb. 2019, doi: 10.12738/estp.2019.1.043.
E. Babaii and M. Sheikhi, “Traces of neoliberalism in English teaching materials: a critical discourse analysis,” Crit. Discourse Stud., vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 247–264, May 2018, doi: 10.1080/17405904.2017.1398671;CTYPE:STRING:JOURNAL.
J. van de Pol, M. Volman, and J. Beishuizen, “Scaffolding in Teacher–Student Interaction: A Decade of Research,” Educ. Psychol. Rev. 2010 223, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 271–296, Apr. 2010, doi: 10.1007/S10648-010-9127-6.