CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 144Student Assessment and FeedbackProblem and Project Based LearningHigher Education Learning Practices

A systematic literature review on authentic assessment in higher education: Best practices for the development of 21st century skills, and policy considerations

Open access
Vlachopoulos, Dimitrios, Makri, Agoritsa·2024·Studies in Educational Evaluation
DOI 10.1016/j.stueduc.2024.101425
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Authentic assessment methods involve the application of real-world tasks to evaluate students’ knowledge, skills, and attitudes in a way that replicates actual situations in which those would be utilized. This paper systematically reviews relevant literature from various disciplines in higher education, focusing on the development of 21st-century skills that can enhance students’ employability. The main objectives are to explore both reported effective implementation strategies of authentic assessment and the implications across different stakeholder groups-students, teaching staff, and policy makers. A sample of 94 articles was identified following the predefined inclusion criteria. Findings indicate that authentic assessment enhances key employability skills; at the same time, challenges have been identified for its effective implementation, including resistance from some stakeholders and the need for adequate training and resources. This study opens avenues for future research, presenting potential directions, as well as practical implications and policy recommendations emerging from a comprehensive thematic analysis. • We conducted a systematic review on how authentic assessment can develop 21stcentury skills. • Findings suggest authentic assessment enhances skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and collaboration. • Key challenges include resistance, training needs, and cross-disciplinary implementation strategies. • There is a growing role of technology in implementing authentic assessments, particularly in online education. • Practical implications and policy considerations have been identified.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.stueduc.2024.101425

Cites

146 of 146 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 148 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Vlachopoulos, D., & Makri, A.
Affiliations
  • Erasmus University Rotterdam (NL)
  • Hellenic Open University (GR)
Corresponding author
Vlachopoulos, Dimitrios
ORCID
Venue
Studies in Educational Evaluation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-12
Volume
83
Pages
101425
ISSN
0191-491X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.stueduc.2024.101425
OpenAlex
W4404791747
Semantic Scholar
23135ce3691fb9007e4e240f2742a7ee167be2db
Cited by
144
References
148
Citations by year
2026: 111 · 2025: 33
FWCI
19.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Studies In Educational Evaluation (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
  • Social Sciences › Education › Problem and Project Based Learning
  • Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Learning Practices
Keywords
authentic assessment, 21st century skills, employability skills, higher education assessment, assessment policy, critical thinking, problem solving, collaboration skills, stakeholder resistance, faculty training, online assessment, technology in assessment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review