1. Distinction and definition of concepts [EN] SM3

AUTHENTIC VS TRADITIONAL ASSESSMENTS

Authentic assessment is a method of evaluation where participants complete tasks that provide a clear understanding of their knowledge, skills, and abilities applied to the real world. This type of assessment can include projects, presentations, fieldwork, professional internships, and other activities both in and out of the classroom.

Authentic Assessment

Definition

Traditional Assessment

Authentic Assessment

What are the differences between authentic assessment and traditional assessment?

• Artificial: “textbook” cases or “cookbook” methods
• Limited response: students choose from alternatives offered
• The goal is to get the “correct answer”
• Involves simple or step-by-step problems
• Emphasizes recognition and memory
• The assessment is only done at predetermined times
• Feedback can be limited
• It is difficult for students to learn to self-evaluate
• The connection to real-world issues is not always clear.

• Realistic (i.e. genuine)
• Open
• There is no “correct answer”
• It involves complex problems
• Generates critical and creative thinking
• Instructor continuously evaluates progress and gives feedback
• Students learn to self-evaluate
• Students see the importance and relationship of their learning to real-world problems

How can authentic assessment be distinguished from traditional assessment?

Page 1 of 4

In this section, we will examine some concepts and principles related to authentic assessment. For this, a distinction will be made between this type of assessment and traditional assessment, for which a series of criteria and authenticity indicators will be proposed. The role that different axes of pedagogical alignment may have on students' perception of the value of authentic assessment will also be presented.

Traditional assessment mainly uses exams and tests to verify students' attainment of knowledge, either by restoring or reproducing it. Authentic assessment is used to verify the ability to solve complex problems or situations through the use of knowledge in an efficient, relevant, and contextualized manner. (Gulikers, Bastiaens and Kirschner, 2004).

Task: Design a bridge for a specific geographic location. Although situation B is genuine, the problem to be solved is complex due to the amount of variables to be considered in order to propose an appropriate solution. The answer in this situation is not immediately known, and there could be more than one suitable solution. With regard to the desired outcome in situation B, it is immediately known: we want a bridge that does not collapse. However, for situation A, the desired outcome (the answer) could not be known in advance.

Situation B: Design a bridge

Task: considering the function f(x), determine the domain and range of the function, and its maximum and minimum points.

For situation A, the problem to be solved is fragmented. That is, it is taken from the real world context and a single answer is expected. Additionally, the student doesn't know the desired outcome beforehand.

Situation A: Determine an equation

Unknown

Known

Desired outcome

Solution

Authentic or complex

Non genuine or fragmented

Unknown

Known

DISTINCTION AND DEFINITION OF CONCEPTS

Therefore, the situation or problem to be solved is considered fragmented for academic situations, but authentic or complex for the real world. The solution (how to solve the problem or situation) is known in the academic world, but not so much in the real world. On the other hand, the desired outcome (or answer) is unknown in the academic world but known in the real world. To illustrate these differences, consider the following two problem situations.

Situation or problem to be solved

Real world

Academic

The following table shows the differences between the real world and academic situations (Wiggins and McTighe, 2005):

• Offering complex tasks that represent daily and professional reality (Frey, Shmitt and Allen, 2012).
• Asking students to perform in a situation that shows their ability to significantly apply their knowledge and skills (Murphy, Fox, Freeman and Hughes, 2017).
• Being realistic and promoting reflection, creativity, and sometimes—innovation.
• Being able to simulate the context of a work or real world situation, which facilitates consultation, feedback, and improvement (Wiggins, 2011).

Authentic assessment is characterized by:

Page 2 of 4

The second dimension requires the assessment task to represent a cognitive challenge for the student that achieves a production or performance (Ashford-Rowe, Herrington and Brown, 2013). In this way, it is necessary for a student to use their judgement in order to solve problems, make decisions, and apply their knowledge. This contributes to the development of cognitive and metacognitive skills, and also mobilizes their autonomy (Belland et al., 2017). In this sense, authentic assessment causes students to establish connections between their prior knowledge and new notions—as well as between theoretical concepts and the real world—and learn to judge the relevance of theoretical arguments in their practical application (Villarroel et al., 2018).

Cognitive Challenge

This first dimension requires students to complete tasks that reflect professional practice or emulate a social context from the real world (Swan and Hofer, 2013). In this way, learnings are used to help understand and solve real problems. When such conditions are not possible, one can return to written assessments that simulate the real world, such as case studies (Bédard, Dell'Aniello and Desbiens, 1991), problem solving (Bixler and Land, 2010), concept mapping (Bai, 2013) or essay writing.

Along with the criteria mentioned above, various authors add three dimensions of authenticity that are related to the assessment:

Three dimensions of authenticity

Authenticity can refer to resource availability, the presence of collaborators, or the duration or margin of negotiation allowed to perform the work (James and Casidy, 2018). These authenticity aspects fit into the conceptual framework developed by Bosco and Fern (2014, as cited in James and Casidy, 2018) for the academic context in which four criteria of authenticity are included:

• Contextualized engagement on the part of the student
• Higher level cognitive engagement
• A reflection to evaluate performance
• Involvement from the professional community in the evaluation process

Definition

The situations and tasks are of great importance, as the assessment can only be considered through their completion. They can also be used to strengthen other skills depending on the delivery format (for example, a report or a video), or if they require the approval or opinion of an end user, i.e., the person who will benefit from the work (client, patient, consumer, etc.), or its purpose.

AUTHENTICITY INDICATORS

Real World Tasks

Page 3 of 4

Cognitive Domain

1. Memorize

2. Understand

3. Apply

4. Analyze

5. Assess

6. Create

Multi-axis pedagogical alignment

The taxonomic model developed by Bloom and collaborators (1956) organizes learning intentions into three domains (cognitive, affective, and psychomotor) and situates them on a scale of increasing complexity. As an example, the learning intentions in the cognitive domain are as follows:

The third dimension helps encourage reflection that is related with both the professional future of the students and the quality of work performed (Tai et al., 2018). Authentic assessment helps them to project themselves further than just their role as a student, to anticipate the demands of the labor market and take the necessary steps to be successful (Nisula and Metso, 2019). By having immediate access to the assessment criteria, students can better gauge the quality of their work and adjust it as needed (Bruijn‐Smolders et al., 2016). Moreover, some claim that formative assessment, in a real situation context, should be part of teachers' assessment practices (Boud, 2010; Daly et al., 2010; Dixon et al., 2016; Gikandi, Morrow and Davis, 2011), as it gives the students the opportunity to identify mistakes and improve their quality of judgement of their work and their performance.

Reflexivity

From a didactic point of view, the pedagogical alignment of the Biggs and Tang (2007) model insists on a congruent teaching-learning approach between training intentions, the choice of activities organized by the teacher, and the method of learning assessment. Alignment can be at course or program level, so that the activities offered help to meet educational objectives.

Definition

AUTHENTIC INDICATORS

The value that students give to the tasks they are assigned determines the perceived value of their learning.

Important

Page 4 of 4