A True Test: Toward More Authentic and Equitable Assessment
Abstract
Before we can solve the challenges of assessment, we must agree on what we want students to know and then design tests that will measure their performance.
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?
Authentic assessments enable learners to address realistic tasks, ambiguity, or actual intellectual challenges to judge, clarify, and take purposeful action toward mastery in a learning situation.
“Authentic assessments enable learners to address realistic tasks, ambiguity, or actual intellectual challenges to judge, clarify, and take purposeful action toward mastery in a learning situation [31].”
From Using Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools to Explain and Enhance Experiential Learning for Authentic Assessment (2024) · cites this paper as [31]
Authentic assessment allows for more sophisticated and effective ways to use knowledge, for instance, in contextualized problem-solving and decision-making situations to develop complex and critical thinking.
“Consequently, in this view, authentic assessment allows for more sophisticated and effective ways to use knowledge, for instance, in contextualized problem-solving and decision-making situations to develop complex and critical thinking [17,31].”
From Using Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools to Explain and Enhance Experiential Learning for Authentic Assessment (2024) · cites this paper as [31]
Authentic assessments use authentic performance standards inherent to successful performance, including multifaceted scoring systems disaggregated for judging learning achievements rather than relying on scoring tests.
“Additionally, authentic assessments use authentic performance standards that are inherent to successful performance (of what students can do), including multifaceted scoring systems disaggregated for judging learning achievements rather than relying on scoring tests [17,31].”
From Using Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools to Explain and Enhance Experiential Learning for Authentic Assessment (2024) · cites this paper as [31]
Cites
Ryle, G. (2006) · Rowman & Littlefield Publishers eBooks · doi:10.5040/9798216413257.ch-2 · Cited by 6,804 · see citing works
Keeping Track: How Schools Structure Inequality.
Oromaner, M. J., & Oakes, J. (1986) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2070941 · Cited by 3,425 · see citing works
The One Best System: A History of American Urban Education
Larrabee, H. A., & TYACK, D. B. (1976) · The New England Quarterly · doi:10.2307/364577 · Cited by 1,324 · see citing works
Horace's Compromise: The Dilemma of the American High School
Rothman, P., & Sizer, T. R. (1984) · The Antioch Review · doi:10.2307/4611424 · Cited by 1,248 · see citing works
Diagnostic Models for Procedural Bugs in Basic Mathematical Skills*
Brown, J. S., & Burton, R. R. (1978) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1207/s15516709cog0202_4 · Cited by 1,115 · see citing works
The One Best System: A History of American Urban Education
TYACK, D. B. (1974) · doi:10.2307/j.ctv136c61j · Cited by 1,070 · see citing works
Education and the Cult of Efficiency
Fink, R. (1963) · Studies in Philosophy and Education · doi:10.1007/bf00372938 · Cited by 723 · see citing works
The real test bias: Influences of testing on teaching and learning.
Frederiksen, N. (1984) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.39.3.193 · Cited by 536 · see citing works
Naive beliefs in “sophisticated” subjects: misconceptions about trajectories of objects
Caramazza, A., McCloskey, M. E., & Green, B. (1981) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/0010-0277(81)90007-x · Cited by 321 · see citing works
Evaluation to Improve Learning
Bloom, B. S., Madaus, G. F., & Hastings, J. T. (1981) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 310 · see citing works
Standards, Curriculum, and Performance: A Historical and Comparative Perspective
Resnick, D. P., & Resnick, L. Β. (1985) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x014004005 · Cited by 130 · see citing works
Teaching for Proficiency, the Organizing Principle
Medley, F. W. (1984) · Modern Language Journal · doi:10.2307/328187 · Cited by 119 · see citing works
Teaching Proficiency, the Organizing Principle
Otto, K. F., & Higgs, T. V. (1985) · Die Unterrichtspraxis/Teaching German · doi:10.2307/3530490 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
ACTFL Provisional Proficiency Guidelines.
Hiple, D. V. (1982) · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Butterworth, B. L., & Varma, S. (2013) · Educational Neuroscience · doi:10.1002/9781394259588.ch8 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Up Against the Wall: Psychometrics Meets Praxis
LeMahieu, P. G., & Wallace, R. C. (1986) · Educational Measurement Issues and Practice · doi:10.1111/j.1745-3992.1986.tb00464.x · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Role of Assessment in a Learning Culture
Shepard, L. A. (2000) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x029007004 · Cited by 2,161 · see citing works
Classroom Applications of Research on Self-Regulated Learning
Paris, S. G., & Paris, A. H. (2001) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3602_4 · Cited by 1,343 · see citing works
The interplay of evidence and consequences in the validation of performance assessments
Messick, S. (1994) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x023002013 · Cited by 1,315 · see citing works
Challenges and Opportunities of Generative AI for Higher Education as Explained by ChatGPT
Michel-Villarreal, R., Vilalta-Perdomo, E., Salinas-Navarro, D. E., Thierry-Aguilera, R., & Gerardou, F. S. (2023) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci13090856 · Cited by 877 · see citing works
“ChatGPT might also be used to enrich a reflective teaching practice by testing existing assessment methods to validate their scope, design, and capabilities beyond the possible use of GenAI, challenging academics to develop AI-proof assessments as a result and contributing to the authentic assessment of students’ lear…”
BackgroundThe Case for Authentic Assessment
Wiggins, G. (1990) · University of Massachusetts Amherst · doi:10.7275/ffb1-mm19 · Cited by 493 · see citing works
Self-citationContextualising Authentic Assessment
JOY CUMMING, J., & MAXWELL, G. S. (1999) · Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice · doi:10.1080/09695949992865 · Cited by 197 · see citing works
Salinas-Navarro, D. E., Vilalta-Perdomo, E., Michel-Villarreal, R., & Montesinos, L. (2024) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci14010083 · Cited by 193 · see citing works
“Additionally, authentic assessments use authentic performance standards that are inherent to successful performance (of what students can do), including multifaceted scoring systems disaggregated for judging learning achievements rather than relying on scoring tests [17,31].”
BackgroundVlachopoulos, D., & Makri, A. (2024) · Studies in Educational Evaluation · doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2024.101425 · Cited by 144 · see citing works
Comas-Forgas, R., Lancaster, T., Calvo-Sastre, A., & Sureda-Negre, J. (2021) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e08233 · Cited by 100 · see citing works
Salinas-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
Orland-Barak, L. (2010) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-0582-6 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
- Authors
- Wiggins, G.
- Corresponding author
- Wiggins, Grant
- Venue
- Phi Delta Kappan
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2011-04
- Volume
- 92
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 81-93
- ISSN
- 0031-7217 (ISSN-L)
- 1940-6487
- OpenAlex
- W1993854686
- Cited by
- 820
- References
- 16
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 21
- FWCI
- 143.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Phi Delta Kappan (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Assessment and Pedagogy
- Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Assessments
- Keywords
- authentic assessment, equitable assessment, test design, learning outcomes, assessment validity, educational testing
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
