Conference Agenda

This paper will re-examine the widely used term of ‘authentic assessment’ and argue that certain notions and assumptions about it might usefully be re-considered in view of shifting expectations and priorities in higher education. The paper links to the theme of the conference in suggesting that our conceptions of authentic assessment, and applications of it to pedagogic practice, need to shift to account for broader changes, most pointedly social, economic and environmental issues categorised under the heading of sustainability and ESD (education for sustainable development). The paper seeks to offer some new perspectives in response to the following questions:

1. How is authentic assessment understood and used in contemporary higher education?
2. Would there be greater value in re-pivoting our use of authentic assessment, so that it reflects current societal and educational pressures and priorities, such as sustainability, diversity and partnership?

Whilst authentic assessment is a valuable term in that it provides a tool for educating about assessment, it has also become one that is somewhat generalised. It is often used as an explanatory mechanism to promote better practice in assessment; similarly, it is often tied to employability agendas, with the assumption that assessment should focus on preparing learners for the world of work.

But should authentic assessment be about more than these things? In this re-conceptualisation, I will opine that, during their assessment journeys and over the duration of their studies, students should be exposed to wider issues by way of their assessment experiences, through alternative, contemporary lenses. These lenses include:

Authenticity as sustainability - Higher education needs to engage more deeply and urgently with sustainability. Students should graduate as ‘sustainable beings’, which means that environmental and social aspects of sustainability should be embedded in curricula, teaching and assessment. These points are supported in student-based research – see, for example work by ‘Students Organising for Sustainability’ (sos.org.uk).

Authenticity as student-staff partnership and student experience - Students should have the be actively involved in their assessment process as a normal practice. We need to collaborate with students, to provide a more student-centred student experience in assessment.

Authenticity as equality, diversity and inclusion - Assessment cannot be authentic if some learners are disadvantaged. Authentic assessment is that which is fair to all, inclusive of all, and takes steps to mitigate against unconscious bias.

Whilst other factors also need to be addressed in our efforts to develop authenticity, such as the rise and influence of Artificial Intelligence (AI), the above three will be focused on here. Further, given the recognised ‘urgency of sustainability’ the paper will concentrate especially on the first of the above.

The paper will draw on a range of contemporary literature, including that on assessment design (Sambell, 2013; Brown and Sambell, 2020), authentic assessment (and feedback) (Navé Wald and Harland, 2017; Carless et al, 2020; McArthur, 2023), education for sustainable development (UNESCO, 2017; Advance HE, 2021; Smith, 2023); equality, inclusivity and unconscious bias (Agarwal, Mercer-Mapstone and Bovill, 2020, Tai et al, 2023; Sway, 2020) and student-staff partnership (Cook-Sather, Bovill and Felten, 2014; Students Organising for Sustainability – SOS – www.sos-uk.org).

Finally, examples will be given of how authentic assessment has been applied in specific contexts using the lenses advocated.

Recently, there has been considerable research on formative assessment, as evidenced by extensive scientific literature and systematic reviews. Particularly relevant are reviews exploring the evolving relationship between formative assessment (FA) and student self-regulated learning (SRL) (Winstone et al., 2017).

However, the process of self-assessment, which involves internalizing standards to regulate learning effectively, remains somewhat opaque (Lui & Andrade, 2022). Thus, there is a pertinent need to investigate the factors influencing this process, the student processes involved in interpreting and applying feedback, and how they contribute to self-regulated learning.

Feedback, understood here as the process through which students make sense of information to improve tasks and learning (Carles & Boud, 2018), requires both student and teacher’s feedback literacy. Our contribution is part of a new project on internal feedback processes of higher education students, which builds upon two main axes: (A) self-regulation and (B) self-assessment toward internal feedback (Nicol, 2020). Student self-regulation involves appropriating assessment criteria, seeking feedback, and engaging in personal reflection (Yan & Brown, 2017). Advanced self-regulation strategies enhance long-term learning prospects and transferability beyond academia. Yet, a lack of evaluative judgment and self-assessment experience may impede desired learning outcomes.

Students’ production and seeking of internal feedback to bridge performance gaps are crucial for engagement and learning efficacy (To & Panadero, 2019). Understanding students’ cognitive and affective responses to feedback, as well as the mechanisms of feedback processing, is essential for effective feedback utilization (Lui & Andrade, 2022).

Research often focuses on formal feedback experiences, neglecting informal feedback's potential for learning. Investigating how students transform external feedback into internalized feedback and their cognitive processes is imperative. This necessitates a shift towards holistic, transformative theoretical frameworks to comprehend feedback phenomena.

In summary, while various factors contributing to more efficient and higher-quality feedback have been identified, such as active student engagement in the learning and assessment process, feedback literacy, anonymous assessment roles, qualitative formats over numerical ones, provision of examples for comparison, and the integration of technology (Carless, 2019; Henderson et al., 2018; Panadero & ​​Alqassab, 2019), the processes underlying feedback mechanisms remain elusive (Lui & Andrade, 2022).

Moreover, while existing research has explored students' perceptions, emotions, and behavioral responses to feedback, understanding students' internal processes as they receive and internal feedback is crucial. This entails investigating the role of various factors in students' decision-making and behavioral responses to feedback, as well as examining additional elements such as interpretations, significance, and evaluative judgment capacity (Yan y Brown, 2017; Winstone et al., 2017).

Furthermore, there is a need to broaden the scope of feedback research beyond comments provided by evaluators to encompass comparisons with other sources, thus unlocking its full potential for learning. This necessitates an exploration of strategies through which students convert natural comparisons into formal, explicit ones, enabling them to articulate and reflect upon these comparisons independently (Nicol, 2020). Overall, advancing our understanding of how students transform external feedback into internalized feedback, along with its implications for self-regulated learning, could inform the design of effective pedagogical practices and foster improvements in students' academic performance and self-regulatory skills.

In this context, the objective of this paper is investigating students' value attribution to different feedback processes and to share our exploration of formal and informal feedback processes utilized by students, identifying mechanisms of information assimilation from external to internal feedback.Student’s personal voices are of utmost importance here, so that our presentation will focus on the process of co-designing the environment and strategy of data collection during natural learning processes.

In the realm of academic pursuit, the quest for effective learning strategies is perpetual. Among the evolving methodologies, study crafting emerges as a novel paradigm, adapted from the concept of job crafting in occupational health psychology (Tims et al., 2010). Defined as the proactive adaptation of study by students to optimize learning experiences, study crafting represents a transformative departure from conventional strategies centered on reactive adjustments to external demands (Körner et al., 2021). By empowering learners to curate their educational journey, study crafting imbues a sense of ownership, fostering personalized and engaging learning trajectories.

The significance of this proactive approach reverberates profoundly in academic circles, with implications spanning beyond mere scholastic achievements. Extant literature underscores its role in cultivating deeper comprehension, enhancing motivation, and fortifying resilience amidst academic challenges and adversities (Körner et al., 2023; Körner et al., 2021; Mülder et al., 2022). However, despite its potential, the conceptualization and empirical investigation of study crafting remain in nascent stages, warranting a comprehensive framework to elucidate its underpinnings.

In this context, the Integrative Needs Model of Crafting (de Bloom et al., 2020) was recently proposed as a theoretical framework that integrates crafting research. Rooted in the understanding that psychological needs play a pivotal role in the crafting process, this model provides a comprehensive lens through which to explore why and how individuals engage in crafting across various life domains. While extensively applied in occupational health research, the integration of this model into educational discourse remains conspicuously absent. Notably, the prevailing study crafting model (Körner et al., 2021) adopts a demands-resources-based approach, departing from the needs-centric perspective espoused by the Integrative Needs Model of Crafting.

Bridging this gap, the aim of this study is to extend the Integrative Needs Model of Crafting to the student context and develop an instrument to assess students’ needs-based study crafting, which we refer to students’ proactive and self-initiated changes in their study in order to achieve psychological needs satisfaction.