policy & reform
campusreview.com.au
A SHARED UNDERSTANDING
Authentic assessment
What does it mean, and do we
need it in higher education?
By Ryan Jopp
T
here are many buzz words in the
higher education sphere. Most
recently the terms ‘authentic learning’
and ‘authentic assessment’ have been
spruiked as essential to good pedagogy. But
what is authentic assessment and do we
need it in higher education?
The short answer is yes. However, it is
more complex than it first appears.
Authentic assessment aims to provide
students with the replication of tasks they
will complete in ‘industry’, which in itself is
a broad term. Does this mean the tourism
industry, auto industry, fashion industry, or
some other yet to be defined industry for
Gen Z graduates?
In addition, given the relatively new
focus on authentic assessment, does
this mean that what we have previously
provided students was inherently inauthentic
assessment? Hopefully not.
Yet, while providing a real-world context
for assessment appears logical, the
continued dominance of essays and exams
across many disciplines suggests we have a
way to go in terms of ‘authenticity’.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT
In addition to forging stronger industry
knowledge, authentic assessment is
heralded as the answer to dwindling student
engagement in higher education, especially
for on-campus learners. Indeed, attendance
at most universities has dropped significantly
as technology provides students with the
flexibility of studying from home, on the train
or even at the beach or pub.
Authentic assessment is the application
of ‘real world’ tasks that enable students
to demonstrate the attainment of new
knowledge and skills within an educational
context. There is growing evidence that
authentic assessment can enhance student
engagement and learning outcomes. This
assessment can come in a variety of forms,
including simulation of a discipline-relevant
task, conducting field research, or pitching an
idea to industry, academics or peers.
THE ROLE OF ‘INDUSTRY’
Most definitions of authentic assessment
claim that having links to industry, and even
co-creation of assessment, enables more
authentic assessment. Yet, this in itself creates
issues in terms of quality, academic rigour
and compliance, as employers are usually
unaware of tertiary education standards or
the importance of curriculum mapping. It is
arguable that most industry training is better
suited to the vocational education sector
rather than higher education, where more
lofty aims are postulated.
This said, there can be little argument
that tomorrow’s workforce will be more
volatile and complex than today’s, signifying
the importance of strengthening industry
engagement. It is argued that more active
involvement with industry provides students
with a taste of the future that awaits them
outside of university, and therefore better
prepares them for the future world of work.
THE ‘CURE’ FOR CHEATING?
Despite earlier claims by some that
implementing authentic assessment means
cheating will be non-existent, we now
understand this is not entirely true. Authentic
assessment can help reduce the likelihood of
plagiarism and contract cheating; however, it
does not provide a silver bullet.
Although authentic assessment is widely
recognised as an important feature of good
assessment design, even the most authentic
and personalised assessment task can still
be outsourced. As previous scholars have
suggested, what is important is that the
motivation and opportunity to cheat is
minimised. The best thing academics can
do to reduce student cheating is to design
engaging, and perhaps even fun, assessment
tasks where the inherent value in completing
that task is obvious to the student.
Authentic assessment has the potential
to benefit all parties, including students,
teachers, administrators and ultimately
employers. However, a clear understanding
of what authentic assessment is, and how
to successfully implement it throughout a
degree, is needed.
Importantly, this involves a recognition
that authentic assessment occurs on a
continuum and that there are degrees of
authenticity. Indeed, not all assessment
tasks must involve working directly on an
outcomes-based project for an industry
partner. Not only would this be a logistical
nightmare, given the number of units in
a degree, but it would also be difficult to
accomplish given the number of students in
some units. It is also unfair to expect first-year
students to be able to produce work that is of
an acceptable standard for industry.
Instead, other forms of authentic
assessment such as case studies using real-
world data, analysis of recent media articles,
or the development of role-play scenarios,
may be more appropriate. To embrace
authentic learning, teachers need to better
understand the opportunities and limitations
of authentic assessment and be prepared
to move away from the comfort of more
traditional assessment tasks. Universities and
administrators need to support teachers
who want to create innovative and authentic
assessment tasks that motivate and engage
students. This means providing time,
technical support services, professional
development opportunities and potentially
even financial support to staff.
At the same time, industry needs to
understand the broader objectives of higher
education, around skills development,
communication, problem-solving, etc,
and work within the existing regulatory
frameworks that govern the quality of higher
education courses. Students, too, need to
understand the benefits of more authentic
assessment, and realise that not every
assessment will be an exact replication of
what they will (hopefully) be doing upon
graduation. Some tasks will help to develop
more generic skills, such as communication
and teamwork.
If all stakeholders understand and commit
to their role of engaging with authentic
assessment, then the potential benefits for all
parties, including society, will be realised. ■
Dr Ryan Jopp is academic director at
Swinburne University.
15