Authentic assessment: from panacea to criticality
Open accessAbstract
Authentic assessment is often positioned as an educational panacea, invoked in response to a broad range of complex problems. This paper considers authentic assessment in relation to three key challenges: preparing graduates for the future, cheating, and inclusion. Despite literature supporting its potential benefits, there is limited evidence on the relationship between authentic assessment and these challenges. Through an uncritical blending of authenticity with broader educational goals, the label ‘authentic assessment’ risks becoming a distraction or a thought-terminating cliché, impeding deeper conversation and interrogation. We argue that authenticity should be considered as a set of aspirational principles within a broader pedagogical framework. Authenticity in assessment requires thoughtful and contextualised design, and the negotiation of trade-offs with other educational goals. The concept of authenticity, if used judiciously, can foster critical conversations and meaningful interrogation of educational practices, rather than serving as an oversimplified solution to complex problems.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Assessment methods aligned with professional practice can enhance student engagement and learning outcomes.
“These findings support the authentic assessment literature suggesting that assessment methods aligned with professional practice can enhance student engagement and learning outcomes (Ashford-rowe, Herrington, and Brown 2014;Fawns et al. 2025).”
From Utilising one-on-one interactive oral assessments as the major final assessment within a bioscience course (2025) · cites this paper as Fawns et al. 2025
Authenticity or policy alone cannot guarantee integrity.
“Because authenticity or policy alone cannot guarantee integrity (Ellis et al., 2020;Fawns et al., 2025)”
From OTE Reconstructing the Assessment System of the Undergraduate Course “Plant Physiology” in the AI Era: A Framework for Authentic and AI-Resilient Task Design (2026) · cites this paper as Fawns et al., 2025
Oral and authentic assessments are not automatically inclusive.
“Oral and authentic assessments are not automatically inclusive (Fawns et al., 2025;McArthur, 2023).”
From OTE Reconstructing the Assessment System of the Undergraduate Course “Plant Physiology” in the AI Era: A Framework for Authentic and AI-Resilient Task Design (2026) · cites this paper as Fawns et al., 2025
Cites
Assessing professional competence: from methods to programmes
Van Der Vleuten, C. P. M., & Schuwirth, L. W. T. (2005) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02094.x · Cited by 1,268 · see citing works
Authentic assessment: creating a blueprint for course design
Villarroel, V., Bloxham, S., Bruna, D., Bruna, C., & Herrera-Seda, C. (2018) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2017.1412396 · Cited by 560 · see citing works
The Case for Authentic Assessment
Wiggins, G. (1990) · University of Massachusetts Amherst · doi:10.7275/ffb1-mm19 · Cited by 493 · see citing works
Developing evaluative judgement for a time of generative artificial intelligence
Bearman, M., Tai, J., Dawson, P., Boud, D., & Ajjawi, R. (2024) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2024.2335321 · Cited by 312 · cited 1× · see citing works
“From a more nuanced position, authentic assessment should, in theory, contend with the opportunities, risks and ethical implications of technological practices, including the need to develop evaluative judgement when using Ai (Bearman et al. 2024).”
Self-citationSotiriadou, P., Logan, D., Daly, A., & Guest, R. (2020) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2019.1582015 · Cited by 265 · see citing works
Dawson, P. (2020) · doi:10.4324/9780429324178 · Cited by 191 · see citing works
Self-citationAssessment for Inclusion: rethinking inclusive assessment in higher education
Nieminen, J. H. (2024) · Teaching in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/13562517.2021.2021395 · Cited by 164 · see citing works
Self-citationSalinas-Navarro, D. E., Vilalta-Perdomo, E., Michel-Villarreal, R., & Montesinos, L. (2024) · Interactive Technology and Smart Education · doi:10.1108/itse-12-2023-0236 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Beyond Detection: Redesigning Authentic Assessment in an AI-Mediated World
Kickbusch, S., Ashford-Rowe, K., Kemp, A., Boreland, J., & Huijser, H. (2025) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci15111537 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Self-citationDavey, S. K., Birbeck, D., Nallaya, S., Sallows, G., & Della Vedova, C. B. (2025) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2025.2502577 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
“These findings support the authentic assessment literature suggesting that assessment methods aligned with professional practice can enhance student engagement and learning outcomes (Ashford-rowe, Herrington, and Brown 2014; Fawns et al. 2025).”
Peng, J. (2026) · World Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.22158/wjer.v13n2p127
- Authors
- Fawns, T., Bearman, M., Dawson, P., Nieminen, J. H., Ashford-Rowe, K., Willey, K., Jensen, L. X., Damşa, C., & Press, N.
- Affiliations
- Monash University (AU)
- Deakin University (AU)
- Ontario Tech University (CA)
- Queensland University of Technology (AU)
- University of Technology Sydney (AU)
- University of Copenhagen (DK)
- University of Oslo (NO)
- Corresponding author
- Fawns, Tim
- ORCID
- Venue
- Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2024-09-27
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 396-408
- ISSN
- 0260-2938 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-297X
- OpenAlex
- W4402918453
- Cited by
- 49
- References
- 8
- Citations by year
- 2026: 33 · 2025: 16
- FWCI
- 61.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Monash University Research Portal (Monash University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Assessment and Pedagogy
- Social Sciences › Education › Problem and Project Based Learning
- Keywords
- authentic assessment, assessment design, graduate preparedness, academic dishonesty, inclusion, educational goals, higher education 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
