The particular dialect or language that a person chooses to use on any occasion is called a code 806 Copyright © 2025 The Author IDEAS is licensed under CC-BY-SA 4.0 License Issued by English study program of IAIN Palopo IDEAS Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) Volume 13, Number 1, June 2025 pp.806 - 822 Contextualizing the Multimodal Assessment Framework for Junior High School EFL Learners Alan Jaelani1, Ninuk Lustyantie2, Fathiaty Murtadho3 1English Education Department, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Ibn Khaldun Bogor, Indonesia 2,3Applied Linguistics, Postgraduate, Universitas Negeri Jakarta, Indonesia E-mail: alan.jaelani@uika-bogor.ac.id Received: 2025-05-13 Accepted: 2025-05-25 DOI: 10.24256/ideas. v13i1.6623 Abstract This study investigates the implementation of the Multimodal Assessment Framework (MAF) proposed by Ross et al. (2020) within a junior high school English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classroom. In response to the growing emphasis on multimodal literacy in 21st-century education, the research explores how assessment practices can be reimagined to align with students' diverse meaning-making capacities across visual, verbal, aural, and spatial modes. Using a qualitative case study design, the study involved classroom observations, semi-structured interviews, and the analysis of student-created multimodal artefacts. The sample consisted of a teacher and 28 students. A rubric adapted from the MAF, focusing on four key dimensions: criticality, cultivating creativity, holism, and valuing multimodality, was used to evaluate student performance. The MAF was adapted by modifying its components to suit the junior high school context, taking into account the age and proficiency level of the learners. Findings reveal that the framework enhanced student engagement and creativity, encouraged purposeful use of multimodal resources, and supported inclusive assessment practices. Challenges such as limited teacher familiarity, curriculum constraints, and unequal access to technology emerged. The study reveals the potential of multimodal assessment to foster equitable and meaningful learning in secondary EFL contexts. The results contribute to the growing body of literature on multimodal assessment and offer practical implications for pedagogy and policy in resource-constrained, multilingual educational environments, particularly for younger EFL learners. The study emphasizes the need for more robust MAF in EFL classrooms that offers valuable insights for both theory and practice. Keywords: Multimodal Assessment frameworks; EFL assessment; Assessment rubric; Multimodal literacy; Secondary education; Student-Centered Learning http://u.lipi.go.id/1457703302 mailto:alan.jaelani@uika-bogor.ac.id IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 1, June 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 807 Introduction In the landscape of 21st-century education, the ability to critically engage with multiple forms of media and represent knowledge through varied semiotic resources has become increasingly essential. As societies become more digitally mediated, traditional literacy centered predominantly on linguistic competence is being redefined to include multimodal literacy, which encompasses the interpretation and production of meaning across a range of modes including visual, spatial, gestural, and aural (Hafner & Ho, 2020; Hoffmeyer et al., 2020; Wang & Li, 2023). In light of these developments, educators are compelled to reconceptualize assessment practices that historically relied on monomodal, text-based outputs and instead move towards more inclusive and representative frameworks of learning evaluation. This is particularly relevant for language education, where learners now engage with language not only through print but also through digital platforms, audiovisual narratives, and interactive environments (Soares Barbosa, 2023; Xiong et al., 2022). The paradigm shift towards multimodal learning, however, has not been equally matched by innovations in assessment, especially at the secondary education level. In many junior high schools around the world, including in Indonesia, assessment practices remain dominated by written exams and rote memorization (Jon et al., 2021; Rozi, 2023). This mismatch between learning modalities and assessment practices risks narrowing the scope of students' creative and critical potentials. As scholars have argued, there is a pressing need for assessment approaches that recognize students' meaning-making practices beyond linguistic expression and encompass the full spectrum of their communicative repertoires (Choi & Park, 2024; Luconi et al., 2022) Within this broader context, Ross et al. (2020) have proposed MAF that is particularly timely. Their framework, developed through research in higher education contexts in the UK and Australia, offers four guiding dimensions i.e., criticality, cultivating creativity, holism, and valuing multimodality which together form a robust structure for evaluating students' multimodal work. They argue that assessing multimodal compositions requires more than attention to technical or aesthetic aspects; it requires critical engagement with how form and content interact to construct meaning. Their framework supports educators in fostering students’ evaluative judgment and creative agency by situating multimodal assessment within dialogic, holistic, and equitable pedagogies (Ross et al., 2020). Though originally designed for higher education, this framework has significant potential for adaptation in junior high school settings, particularly in EFL (English as a Foreign Language) classrooms where students increasingly encounter and produce content in multimodal forms. However, empirical research on implementing such frameworks at the lower secondary level remains limited. This is a significant oversight given the growing recognition of the importance of Alan Jaelani, Ninuk Lustyantie, Fathiaty Murtadho Contextualizing the Multimodal Assessment Framework for Junior High School EFL Learners 808 multimodal literacies for student engagement and deeper learning (Bassachs et al., 2022; Chai & Wang, 2022; Emerson et al., 2020). In Indonesia, curriculum reforms under Kurikulum Merdeka advocate for learner-centered, competence-based education, yet the alignment between pedagogy and assessment practices continues to present practical challenges (Muliardi, 2023; Wulandari et al., 2023; Yuli et al., 2023). Despite increasing interest in multimodal learning, a critical gap persists in understanding how such assessment frameworks are operationalized in junior secondary classrooms. Prior studies have focused on designing multimodal tasks or documenting student-produced multimodal texts (e.g., digital storytelling, posters, videos), but very few have addressed the systematic evaluation of these outputs through robust assessment frameworks (Smith et al., 2019). Moreover, teachers often face challenges in assessing multimodal work, including limited assessment literacy, lack of standardized rubrics, and institutional pressures to conform to traditional grading systems (Beavis, 2013; Soares Barbosa, 2023; Weninger, 2020; Xiong et al., 2022). As Ross et al. (2020) emphasize, the implementation of multimodal assessment is inherently complex, requiring not only shifts in pedagogical design but also in educator mindset. They argue that meaningful multimodal assessment must be inclusive, dialogic, and critical, enabling students to make deliberate, purposeful choices in their compositions and to reflect on the meaning-making potential of each mode. Consequently, this study explores how the MAF of (Ross et al., 2020) can be contextualized and applied in a junior high school EFL classroom in Indonesia. This research investigates how students engage with multimodal tasks, how teachers interpret and apply assessment criteria, and what affordances and constraints emerge in practice. The study builds on the growing body of scholarship that supports contextualized, process-oriented assessment approaches and responds to the call for more empirical investigations in multilingual, resource-constrained learning environments. This study seeks to operationalize this vision in the context of Indonesian EFL education, where issues of linguistic proficiency, digital access, and cultural expectations intersect to shape students’ experiences of learning and assessment. To address these concerns, the study aims to answer the following research questions: (1) How is the MAF developed by Ross et al. (2020) implemented in a junior high school setting? (2) How are students' multimodal products evaluated across the four assessment dimensions? (3) What are the challenges and opportunities in implementing multimodal assessment at the junior high school level? By empirically applying and adapting the MAF of Ross et al. (2020) in a real classroom environment, this research addresses a critical gap between theory and practice. It offers insights into how a theoretically grounded framework, originally developed for higher education, can be recontextualized for adolescent learners, IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 1, June 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 809 many of whom are navigating the dual challenges of language acquisition and digital literacy. This study highlights the practical strategies, pedagogical shifts, and evaluative tools required to implement multimodal assessment meaningfully, especially in settings where traditional, monomodal assessment still dominates. By documenting the process of local adaptation and the responses of both teacher and students, this study provides a model for inclusive, student-centered assessment practices that acknowledge diverse ways of knowing and communicating. Method This study employed a qualitative case study approach to investigate the implementation of the MAF developed by Ross et al. (2020) in a junior high school EFL classroom. The qualitative approach was chosen to allow for an in-depth exploration of the pedagogical, social, and contextual dimensions surrounding multimodal assessment in a real classroom setting. As this study aimed to describe and interpret rather than to quantify or generalize, a single-case design was most appropriate for exploring the phenomena in a bounded, authentic context (Johnson & Stake, 1996) The research was conducted at a public junior high school in Bogor, West Java, Indonesia. The participants consisted of one EFL teacher and 28 eighth-grade students (aged 13–14 years). This particular classroom was selected purposively due to the teacher’s expressed interest in adopting innovative, student-centered assessment practices, as well as the school's readiness to incorporate digital tools into English instruction. The selected setting reflects typical characteristics of public junior secondary schools in the region and serves as a practical and relevant case for examining the applicability of multimodal assessment in Indonesian EFL context. Data collection occurred over six weeks and utilized multiple qualitative methods to ensure triangulation and data richness i.e., non-participant classroom observations, semi-structured interviews, and document analysis of student- created artefacts. Observations were conducted during eight English class sessions covering the project launch, development phase, and final presentations. Field notes focused on teacher-student interactions, instructional strategies, and students’ engagement with multimodal tasks. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with the EFL teacher and six students selected through purposeful sampling to ensure variation in performance levels and engagement styles in exploring participants’ understanding of the multimodal assignment, their design processes, experiences with the rubric, and reflections on feedback. Students were assigned to create multimodal projects (e.g., digital posters using Canva, videos using Capcut, or slideshows) on selected functional-based-text topics, integrating various modes such as visuals, audio, spoken language, and text. To evaluate the student work and operationalize the framework, a rubric was Alan Jaelani, Ninuk Lustyantie, Fathiaty Murtadho Contextualizing the Multimodal Assessment Framework for Junior High School EFL Learners 810 collaboratively developed by the researchers and the classroom teacher. This rubric reflected the four key dimensions of Ross et al (2020)’s framework i.e., Criticality, Cultivating Creativity, Holism, and Valuing Multimodality while also incorporating two context-specific dimensions: Language Use (to address EFL proficiency) and Collaboration (to capture group dynamics). Table 1 below shows the structure of the rubric. Table 1. The developed rubric from the MAF of Ross et al. (2020) Dimension Excellent (4) Good (3) Developing (2) Needs Improvement (1) Criticality Insightful, purposeful choices; clear message and reflection on topic/audience. Relevant choices with some reflection. Basic connections between content and design. Minimal reflection; unclear message or purpose. Cultivating Creativity Highly original; engaging use of modes; strong voice and risk- taking. Some originality; effort evident. Common ideas; limited exploration. Lacks originality; minimal effort. Holism Modes are fully integrated; cohesive and meaningful. Mostly cohesive; minor inconsistencies. Partial integration; some disconnection. Disjointed elements; unclear or fragmented message. Valuing Multimodality Strategic, intentional use of multiple modes to enhance meaning. Effective use of modes with clear purpose. Some modes underused or unnecessary. Minimal use or understanding of modes. Language Use (EFL) Fluent, accurate English; fits purpose and audience. Mostly clear; few non- disruptive errors. Frequent errors; sometimes affect understanding. Limited control; errors obscure meaning. Collaboration All members contributed equally; strong teamwork and shared roles. Mostly collaborative with some task- sharing. Uneven participation; dominance or disengagement present. Little evidence of teamwork. IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 1, June 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 811 Rubric scores were used to assess student products and to guide teacher- student feedback sessions. A rubric-based assessment allowed the researcher to examine how each project demonstrated the interaction between form and content, critical engagement, creative expression, and linguistic competence. Data from artefact analysis were interpreted through a thematic coding process, drawing on both deductive categories from the rubric and emergent patterns from student work. Table 2. Scoring Guide Total Score (out of 24) Interpretation 21–24 Excellent 17–20 Good 13–16 Developing 6–12 Needs Improvement Interview transcripts, observation notes, and student artefacts were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis (Miles & Huberman, 1994). This involved open coding followed by axial coding to identify recurring themes and categorize data according to the research questions. To ensure trustworthiness, member checking was conducted by returning summaries of findings to participants for confirmation and clarification. The researcher also engaged in peer debriefing with academic mentors and colleagues to discuss coding consistency and thematic interpretations. Triangulation of data sources and methods was employed to validate key findings and reduce bias. Ethical procedures were followed throughout the study. Informed consent was obtained from both the teacher and the student participants, ensuring they were aware of their voluntary participation and the confidentiality of their responses. Researcher positionality was acknowledged, as the researcher has prior experience in EFL education, which may have influenced the data collection and interpretation process. The researcher remained aware of this potential bias and employed multiple strategies (triangulation, peer debriefing) to mitigate it. Results MAF Implementation in the Junior High School Setting The framework’s core principles (criticality, cultivating creativity, holism, and valuing multimodality) were implemented through a project-based approach over six weeks. The multimodal task was integrated and aligned with local learning objectives in descriptive and procedural texts. The process began with an orientation phase, during which the teacher introduced the concept of multimodality using examples of digital posters, narrated slideshows, and short videos. The teacher also introduced a simplified Alan Jaelani, Ninuk Lustyantie, Fathiaty Murtadho Contextualizing the Multimodal Assessment Framework for Junior High School EFL Learners 812 version of the rubric adapted from Ross et al. (2020) and provided scaffolding in the form of group brainstorming templates and design planning sheets. These materials helped students connect content goals (e.g., describing a process or a place) with design goals (e.g., choosing visual and verbal modes to enhance clarity and appeal). During the production phase, students worked in small groups to design and create their multimodal artefacts. The teacher incorporated formative assessment techniques such as peer feedback sessions and structured teacher check-ins, enabling students to revise their work before final submission. Classroom observations indicated that students actively negotiated mode choices, layout, and language content in their groups. They were encouraged to justify their multimodal choices in response to prompts such as, “Why did you use this image?” or “How does this background music help the audience understand your message?” The final stage was the presentation and assessment phase, where student projects were presented orally in front of the class and assessed using the full rubric. Both teacher and students referred to the six dimensions of the rubric (four from Ross et al., and two additional classroom-specific ones: Language Use and Collaboration). Feedback was delivered using a mix of teacher comments and peer reflections. This approach encouraged metacognitive awareness as students discussed the strengths and weaknesses of each group’s product in relation to the rubric dimensions. Table 3. Implementation of Each Dimension of Ross et al. (2020) Framework Dimension Observed Implementation Strategies Criticality Students were prompted to explain their design decisions and reflect on the social or contextual relevance of their topics (e.g., climate change, food waste). Creativity The task allowed freedom of format, with students using original photos, animations, music, and storytelling structures. Some groups used fictional personas in their videos. Holism Teacher emphasized the coherence between visual, textual, and spoken elements. Students were reminded to keep their message focused and aesthetically unified. Valuing Multimodality Students selected and combined various modes (image, sound, text, and narration) intentionally. Teacher encouraged them to match mode choice with communicative purpose. Language Use Emphasis was placed on clear, purposeful use of English. Students practiced scripts beforehand and received support with vocabulary and pronunciation during rehearsals. IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 1, June 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 813 Collaboration Group tasks required shared planning and production. Teacher monitored group dynamics and encouraged equal participation; peer reflections highlighted individual contributions. Although students initially struggled with abstract aspects such as criticality, the iterative nature of the task, coupled with teacher modeling, enabled gradual improvement. For example, one group revised their digital poster after realizing that their image choice lacked cultural relevance, a moment that demonstrated growth in evaluative judgment. One notable feature of the implementation was the use of the rubric as both a teaching and assessment tool. The teacher used rubric language during instruction (e.g., “Let’s think about how this layout shows creativity”) and encouraged students to self-assess during the process. This aligns with Ross et al. (2020)’s emphasis on fostering evaluative judgment as part of assessment for learning. Moreover, students reported increased engagement due to the visual and collaborative nature of the task. As one student (P3) explained during an interview: "Usually, I just write paragraphs, but now I can show what I mean with pictures and voice. It’s more fun" This finding echoes Ross et al.’s (2020) assertion that multimodal assessment enhances student agency and voice. Evaluation of Student Multimodal Products Across Assessment Dimensions To evaluate students’ multimodal artefacts, the rubric contained six dimensions with two additional dimensions were scored on a four-point scale from 1 (Needs Improvement) to 4 (Excellent). Student projects included digital posters, narrated slideshows, and short videos, and were submitted in groups of three to four students, yielding a total of 10 group projects and 28 individual learners assessed. Evaluation of the student products was based on three data sources: teacher- assigned rubric scores, researcher artefact analysis, and reflective comments from students and the teacher. The analysis focused on how students demonstrated the intended competencies associated with each assessment dimension, with particular attention to how modes were combined and how meaning was conveyed. Alan Jaelani, Ninuk Lustyantie, Fathiaty Murtadho Contextualizing the Multimodal Assessment Framework for Junior High School EFL Learners 814 Table 4. Summary of Student Evaluation Scores (N = 28) Dimension (4) (3) (2) (1) Mean Score Notes Criticality 6 10 9 3 2.75 Most students demonstrated surface-level reflection; deeper critique was limited. Creativity 8 13 6 1 3.00 Projects featured diverse, original designs with creative storytelling. Holism 7 12 7 2 2.89 Integration of modes was generally cohesive; some struggled with consistency. Valuing Multimodality 10 11 6 1 3.07 Students effectively combined visuals, audio, and text with communicative intent. Language Use (EFL) 5 14 7 2 2.82 Language accuracy varied; many students relied on short, rehearsed text. Collaboration 9 11 6 2 2.96 Most students demonstrated fair division of tasks and cooperative planning. Students generally struggled with the abstract concept of criticality which includes demonstrating intentionality, perspective-taking, and socio-cultural awareness. Although some projects incorporated relevant themes (e.g., pollution, healthy lifestyles), only a few groups critically reflected on their audience or questioned mainstream representations. Creativity emerged as one of the strongest dimensions across projects. Students experimented with colors, layout, animation, voiceovers, and even sound effects to enhance the appeal of their work. For instance, one group developed a digital comic strip using original drawings to explain a traditional recipe, while another composed a short video combining narration, upbeat music, and emojis to promote healthy habits. Holistic integration of content and design varied across groups. High-performing teams showed strong internal coherence, with consistent tone, theme, and visual-textual alignment. For example, in one project about endangered animals, the group used calming background music, minimalistic layouts, and factual narration to maintain a unified aesthetic and informative tone. Valuing multimodality was the highest score dimension overall. Students demonstrated a strong intuitive grasp of how to use multiple modes for meaning- making. For example, visuals were used to simplify complex content, while audio narration supported text comprehension for audiences with varying English proficiency. Language accuracy varied depending on students' proficiency levels. IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 1, June 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 815 High-scoring groups produced grammatically sound, fluent, and purposeful language, often supported by teacher-approved scripts and rehearsals. Mid-range performances featured some grammatical inaccuracies but maintained comprehensibility. Lower scores were associated with projects that lacked syntactic control or used automated translation tools without revision. The rubric helped the teacher assess language in terms of function and clarity, rather than penalizing minor errors, thus maintaining the inclusive ethos of multimodal assessment. In group settings, most students demonstrated effective collaboration. Field notes captured equitable role distribution, peer negotiation, and shared responsibility in many groups. However, a few students reported that one or two members dominated the process or contributed minimally. While not all collaboration challenges were fully resolved, the structured group task format and teacher oversight contributed to generally positive interdependence and communication among peers. Challenges and Opportunities in Implementing MAF at the Junior High School Level Several challenges emerged during the implementation of the MAF, particularly regarding teacher preparedness, curriculum demands, and student access to resources. The EFL teacher, though enthusiastic, lacked prior experience with structured multimodal assessment and initially struggled to objectively evaluate visual and audio elements. Time constraints posed another barrier, as the national curriculum (Kurikulum 2013) prioritized content coverage and test preparation, leaving little room for time-intensive, project-based tasks. The teacher had to adjust lesson pacing to accommodate the project, highlighting a tension between innovative pedagogy and systemic demands. Technological disparities further complicated implementation. While many students had access to smartphones or home internet, others faced challenges producing digital artefacts, which led to reliance on group collaboration and shared devices. Assessment of visual and aural components also proved difficult; the teacher initially focused on technical neatness but gradually began to evaluate whether modes served a communicative purpose, signaling a shift toward deeper multimodal awareness. Additionally, students with lower English proficiency often used simplified language or memorized texts in their presentations. Table 5 summarizes the challenges. Alan Jaelani, Ninuk Lustyantie, Fathiaty Murtadho Contextualizing the Multimodal Assessment Framework for Junior High School EFL Learners 816 Table 5. Summary of Challenges and Corresponding Mitigation Strategies Challenge Observed Impact Mitigation Strategy Limited teacher training in multimodal assessment Uncertainty in evaluating non-verbal elements Co-developed rubric; teacher modeling and peer evaluation Time constraints in EFL curriculum Reduced time for other units; rushed reflections Adjusted pacing; integration with core language objectives Unequal access to devices Delayed submissions; group work dependency Group collaboration and flexible deadlines Complexity of assessing visual/audio elements Inconsistent scoring; emphasis on surface features Focused rubric descriptors; formative feedback discussions Language proficiency gaps Hesitancy in presentation; oversimplified language use Encouraged bilingual scaffolds and focus on meaning-making, not perfection Despite the challenges, the implementation of the MAF revealed several promising opportunities for enhancing student engagement, developing essential skills, and enriching assessment practices. One of the most significant outcomes was the increase in student motivation and ownership. Learners reported feeling more connected to the task because it allowed them to express their creativity and personal interests. The shift from conventional paper-based tasks to multimodal projects fostered a sense of pride and enjoyment. As one student (P5) expressed: “I’m happy because my group’s video made my friends laugh and learn at the same time. I felt like a creator.” This sense of agency contributed to higher levels of engagement and intrinsic motivation. The project also facilitated the development of key 21st-century skills such as collaboration, digital literacy, critical thinking, and oral communication. These competencies, emphasized in global education frameworks (Fadel, Charles, Bialik, Maya, and Trilling, 2015), were evident during observations, which showed students actively participating in team discussions, supporting peers with technical tasks, and taking initiative in shaping their group’s output. A student (P6) reflected, “ I learned how to use new apps and also how to explain my ideas better to my group. We helped each other.” These experiences not only supported academic growth but also prepared students for real-world communication and teamwork scenarios. IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 1, June 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 817 The project provided an authentic context for language use. Unlike traditional grammar drills, the multimodal tasks required students to use English for real communicative purposes, narrating, describing, persuading, and informing, based on their chosen topics and media formats. This contextualized language use supported students' communicative competence and genre awareness. One student (P3) noted, “It’s different from usual English tasks. I had to think about how to say things clearly because my video had a message.” This suggests the task promoted meaningful language use aligned with EFL pedagogical goals. The assessment process itself also became more inclusive and differentiated. The rubric allowed students with different strengths of visual, verbal, or collaborative to succeed in various aspects of the task. This flexibility helped reduce anxiety among students with lower English proficiency, as their contributions in non-linguistic areas were equally valued. A student (P5) shared: “I’m not good at English speaking, but I helped design the poster and choose the music. That made me feel important.” Such recognition of multiple literacies (Kalantzis & Cope, 2020) supported a more equitable learning environment. Finally, the process contributed to the teacher’s professional growth and assessment literacy. Through engaging with the rubric and observing student progress, the teacher gained a more nuanced understanding of multimodal composition and the role of formative assessment. Reflecting on the experience, the teacher said, “Now I see assessment not just as a score, but as a way to guide and celebrate learning.” This shift in perspective underscores the potential of multimodal projects not only to enrich student learning, but also to transform teaching practices. Discussion The findings of this study indicate that students were largely successful in engaging with multimodal tasks, particularly in the areas of creativity, collaboration, and purposeful integration of multiple modes of communication. These outcomes confirm prior claims by Ross et al. (2020) and more recent studies such as Xu & Shi (2023), which argue that multimodal assessment enhances Alan Jaelani, Ninuk Lustyantie, Fathiaty Murtadho Contextualizing the Multimodal Assessment Framework for Junior High School EFL Learners 818 learner agency by enabling students to express knowledge in varied, often more accessible ways. Most students responded positively to the multimodal format, displaying increased motivation and a greater sense of ownership over their learning compared to traditional written tasks. Their enthusiasm was particularly visible in how they selected and blended semiotic resources such as images, narration, text, and music to communicate their intended messages. The strong performance in the valuing multimodality dimension suggests that even younger EFL learners can make informed, purposeful multimodal choices when scaffolded appropriately. Criticality posed significant challenges. While students engaged with socially relevant topics, their reflections often remained superficial. This outcome echoes findings that students at the secondary level frequently struggle with abstract evaluative tasks unless these are explicitly modeled and consistently practiced (Kim et al., 2021; Walkoe et al., 2023; Wang & Li, 2023). In this case, although the rubric provided a useful reference, students needed additional instructional support to deeply reflect on audience, purpose, and representation. This insight suggests that nurturing criticality in multimodal tasks may require the right tools and iterative classroom dialogue, teacher exemplification, and a safe space for students to question and revise their choices. Interestingly, the teacher’s evolving approach to using the rubric which initially focused on visual neatness but gradually shifting to communicative intent points to the central role of assessment literacy in enabling meaningful multimodal evaluation. This aligns with Tan et al. (2023) assertion that teacher development is essential when introducing innovative assessment models. The adapted rubric, which incorporated two additional context-specific dimensions (language use and collaboration), proved especially beneficial in making the assessment more inclusive and relevant to the Indonesian EFL context. Language use allowed the teacher to evaluate not just grammatical accuracy but communicative effectiveness. The collaboration dimension similarly made space for valuing social and interpersonal contributions; an area often overlooked in conventional assessment. These findings carry broader pedagogical implications. It implies that multimodal assessment when implemented thoughtfully can support the development of key 21st-century skills such as digital literacy, teamwork, creativity, and metacognition. Students learn how to navigate, produce digital content, and engage in peer dialogue, self-assessment, and reflective thinking throughout the process. Such outcomes reflect calls for more integrated, skill- based learning that prepares students for the demands of modern communication. Despite these benefits, several structural and contextual challenges were encountered. Limited teacher experience with multimodal assessment, time constraints within the national curriculum, and unequal access to technology all affected the implementation. The teacher’s initial discomfort with assessing design IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 1, June 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 819 and audio components, for instance, implies the need for targeted professional development. Integrating a six-week project into an exam-focused curriculum required adjustments in pacing and prioritization. Technological disparities among students meant that collaboration was pedagogical and logistical in which many students relied on peers for access to digital tools. These challenges mirror broader systemic issues noted by Fitriana & Wirza, (2021); Kardika et al. (2023) who argue that while Indonesian curriculum reforms promote competence-based education, assessment practices have not yet caught up, particularly in under-resourced schools. The findings in this study highpoint the transformative potential of multimodal assessment in junior high school EFL classrooms. While implementation requires thoughtful adaptation, teacher support, and contextual sensitivity, the results suggest that students are capable of producing complex, meaningful work that reflects their full communicative repertoires. By shifting the focus from standardized correctness to purposeful expression, multimodal assessment empowers learners to become creators of knowledge, not just consumers. As education systems worldwide move toward embracing digital and multiliterate competencies, frameworks like Ross et al.’s MAF offer practical, theoretically grounded tools for assessment that align with the realities of 21st- century learning. Conclusion The findings indicate that when supported with clear rubrics and instructional scaffolding, students engaged meaningfully with multimodal tasks by demonstrating creativity, collaboration, and effective use of diverse modes. However, critical reflection and holistic design were more difficult for students, pointing to the need for stronger support in building design literacy and critical thinking. The adapted rubric, which incorporated additional dimensions of language use and collaboration, proved essential in guiding both teacher assessment and student understanding. While this study confirms prior research on the motivational and inclusive value of multimodal assessment, it also reveals structural limitations such as time constraints, uneven digital access, and limited teacher experience. Despite these challenges, the study provides convincing evidence that multimodal assessment can be effectively implemented in junior secondary settings when tailored to the local context. Moreover, it raises important considerations for professional development and curriculum reform to align assessment with 21st-century literacies. As digital communication continues to shape how knowledge is produced and shared, schools must evolve to recognize students’ full communicative repertoires. By foregrounding learner voice, purpose, and multimodal meaning-making, this Alan Jaelani, Ninuk Lustyantie, Fathiaty Murtadho Contextualizing the Multimodal Assessment Framework for Junior High School EFL Learners 820 approach has the potential to transform classroom assessment into a more authentic and empowering experience. References Bassachs, M., Serra, T., Bubnys, R., Can abate, D., & Colomer, J. (2022). Multimodal Approaches to Math and Physical Education within Cooperative Learning to Enhance Social Attitudes. Sustainability (Switzerland), 14(24). https://doi.org/10.3390/su142416961 Bani, M., & Masruddin, M. (2021). Development of Android-based harmonic oscillation pocket book for senior high school students. JOTSE: Journal of Technology and Science Education, 11(1), 93-103. Beavis, C. (2013). Literary English and the Challenge of Multimodality. Changing English: Studies in Culture and Education, 20(3). https://doi.org/10.1080/1358684X.2013.816527 Chai, W., & Wang, G. (2022). Deep Vision Multimodal Learning: Methodology, Benchmark, and Trend. In Applied Sciences (Switzerland) (Vol. 12, Issue 13). https://doi.org/10.3390/app12136588 Choi, H. J., & Park, J. H. (2024). Research Trends in Learning Needs Assessment: A Review of Publications in Selected Journals from 1997 to 2023. In Sustainability (Switzerland) (Vol. 16, Issue 1). https://doi.org/10.3390/su16010382 Emerson, A., Cloude, E. B., Azevedo, R., & Lester, J. (2020). Multimodal learning analytics for game-based learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(5). https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12992 Fadel, Charles, Bialik, Maya, and Trilling, B. (2015). Four-Dimensional Education: The Competencies Learners Need to Succeed. In Center for Curriculum Redesign. Fitriana, W., & Wirza, Y. (2021). An Analysis of Multimodal Text in EFL Textbook of Secondary School in Indonesia in Assisting Students’ Text Understanding. Proceedings of the Thirteenth Conference on Applied Linguistics (CONAPLIN 2020), 546. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210427.095 Hafner, C. A., & Ho, W. Y. J. (2020). Assessing digital multimodal composing in second language writing: Towards a process-based model. Journal of Second Language Writing, 47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100710 Hoffmeyer, M. B., Jensen, J. J., & Olsen, M. V. (2020). Supporting the Legitimacy of Quality Criteria for Multimodal Production in School. Designs for Learning, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.16993/dfl.119 Johnson, K. E., & Stake, R. E. (1996). The Art of Case Study Research. The Modern Language Journal, 80(4). https://doi.org/10.2307/329758 Jon, R. B., Embong, R., Purnama, B., & Wadi, A. S. (2021). The challenges of English Language Teaching in Indonesia the English Language Teaching for education in Indonesia. IJEAL (International Journal of English and Applied IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 1, June 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 821 Linguistics), 1(3). Kardika, R. W., Rokhman, F., & Pristiwati, R. (2023). Penggunaan Media Digital terhadap Kemampuan Literasi Multimodal dalam Pembelajaran Bahasa Indonesia. JIIP - Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Pendidikan, 6(9). https://doi.org/10.54371/jiip.v6i9.2307 Kim, D., Yatsu, D. K., & Li, Y. (2021). A multimodal model for analyzing middle school English language learners’ digital stories. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2021.100067 Luconi, F., Montoro, R., Lalla, L., & Teferra, M. (2022). An Innovative Needs Assessment Approach to Develop Relevant Continuing Professional Development for Psychiatrists. Academic Psychiatry, 46(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40596-021-01564-2 Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: a sourcebook of new methods / Qualitative data analysis: a sourcebook of new methods. Beverly Hills; Sage Publications. Muliardi, M. (2023). Mengembangkan kreativitas dan karakter bangsa melalui Kurikulum Merdeka di Madrasah. Takuana: Jurnal Pendidikan, Sains, Dan Humaniora, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.56113/takuana.v2i1.68 Masruddin, M., Amir, F., Langaji, A., & Rusdiansyah, R. (2023). Conceptualizing linguistic politeness in light of age. International Journal of Society, Culture & Language, 11(3), 41-55. Masruddin, Hartina, S., Arifin, M. A., & Langaji, A. (2024). Flipped learning: facilitating student engagement through repeated instruction and direct feedback. Cogent Education, 11(1), 2412500. Ross, J., Curwood, J. S., & Bell, A. (2020). A multimodal assessment framework for higher education. E-Learning and Digital Media, 17(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/2042753020927201 Rozi, N. F. (2023). English Language Teaching in Indonesia: Monolingual and Multilingual Practices. Kata, 25(00). https://doi.org/10.9744/kata.25.00.88- 95 Smith, A., Leeman-Munk, S., Shelton, A., Mott, B., Wiebe, E., & Lester, J. (2019). A Multimodal Assessment Framework for Integrating Student Writing and Drawing in Elementary Science Learning. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2018.2799871 Soares Barbosa, V. (2023). Book Review: Multimodality in English Language Learning. Multimodality & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/26349795231176811 Tan, L., Thomson, R., Koh, J. H. L., & Chik, A. (2023). Teaching Multimodal Literacies with Digital Technologies and Augmented Reality: A Cluster Analysis of Australian Teachers’ TPACK. Sustainability (Switzerland), Alan Jaelani, Ninuk Lustyantie, Fathiaty Murtadho Contextualizing the Multimodal Assessment Framework for Junior High School EFL Learners 822 15(13). https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310190 Walkoe, J., Caroline, W. P., Flood, V. J., & Walton, M. (2023). Toward Professional Development for Multimodal Teacher Noticing. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 54(4). https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc- 2020-0326 Wang, D., & Li, D. (2023). Integrating Digital Multimodal Composition (DMC) into Chinese Language Teaching. In Chinese Language Learning Sciences: Vol. Part F1831. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-6376-8_7 Weninger, C. (2020). Multimodality in critical language textbook analysis. Language, Culture and Curriculum. https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2020.1797083 Wulandari, W., Wulan Sari, D., Isa Anshori, M., & Nur Baiti Rohmah, A. (2023). Merdeka Belajar Curriculum Development Design K-13 Revision on PAI in Elementary Education. JMSP (Jurnal Manajemen Dan Supervisi Pendidikan), 7(2). https://doi.org/10.17977/um025v7i22023p56 Xiong, T., Feng, D., & Hu, G. (2022). Researching Cultural Knowledge and Values in English Language Teaching Textbooks: Representation, Multimodality, and Stakeholders. In Cultural Knowledge and Values in English Language Teaching Materials: (Multimodal) Representations and Stakeholders. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-1935-0_1 Xu, W., & Shi, X. (2023). Comparing the Multimodality of Chinese and US Corporate Homepages: The Importance of Understanding Local Cultures. Technical Communication, 70(2). https://doi.org/10.55177/tc262737 Yuli, R. R., Munandar, K., & Salma, I. M. (2023). Keselarasan Implementasi Pembelajaran Berdiferensiasi dengan Visi Pedagogis Ki Hajar Dewantara dalam Mewujudkan Merdeka Belajar. Jurnal Teknologi Pendidikan, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.47134/jtp.v1i2.80 Yahya, A., Husnaini, H., & Putri, N. I. W. (2024). Developing Common Expressions Book in Indonesian Traditional Market in Three Languages (English- Indonesian-Mandarin). Language Circle: Journal of Language and Literature, 18(2), 288-295.