Alignment of Assessment with the Intended Learning Competencies: A Systematic Literature Review

Alignment between assessment and Intended learning competencies (ILCs) is crucial to ensure valid evaluation of students’ knowledge, skills, and attitudes. Misalignment sometimes undermines motivation, distorts instructional effectiveness, and limits learning outcomes. This paper sought to examine the extent of alignment between assessment, explore commonly used alignment analysis methods, document challenges and strategies, enumerate consequences of misalignment, and highlight research gaps in the field. The review was performed using the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Related articles were gathered from different databases such as Education Resource Information Center (ERIC), Taylor & Francis, and Google Scholar. Hence, the included articles were considered peer-reviewed and presented at the professional conference, covering the period from 2010 to 2025. Additionally, papers written in English focused on the alignment of assessment with ILCs in educational contexts were also determined. Therefore, sixteen studies met the eligibility criteria, and data were synthesized and analyzed to identify recurring patterns and themes. The reviewed studies encompassed a wide range of educational contexts, spanning countries such as Indonesia, the Philippines, the United States, Vietnam, China, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Pakistan, and those in Sub-Saharan Africa. Across these settings, researchers employed diverse models, including Constructive Alignment, Document Analysis, Porter’s Model, and Categorical Concurrence, to evaluate how well assessments aligned with ILCs. Overall, the studies revealed varying levels of alignment, reflecting differences in curricular design and implementation. Common challenges included limited time, inadequate teacher training, and excessive assessment demands. To address these issues, several strategies were proposed, such as curriculum redesign, peer review, and the use of language demand protocols. Misalignment, however, was consistently associated with student confusion, inconsistencies between teaching and testing, and reduced opportunities for critical thinking. Despite these insights, notable research gaps remain, particularly in disciplinespecific investigations, underrepresented regional contexts, methodological rigor, and longitudinal analyses. Apparently, several limitations were also considered in this review, such as over-reliance on a specific database and limited results due to a lack of studies addressing a particular issue. Overall, the evidence suggests that while constructive alignment frameworks can offer coherence between assessment and ILCs, persistent misalignment continues to exist across educational settings. Limitations of the reviewed studies include country-specific studies and a few education-focused disciplines. ORIGINAL ARTICLE Authors retain copyright. Articles published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY) International License. This license allows this work to be copied, distributed, remixed, transformed, and built upon for any purpose provided that appropriate attribution is given, a link is provided to the license, and changes made were indicated. 389 Therefore, addressing these