Contextual assessment design in the age of generative AI
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi34.1307Keywords:
contextual learning, assessment design, artificial intelligence, generative AIAbstract
Generative AI (GenAI) is transforming higher education. It has already challenged the validity of traditional assessment methods and revealed concerns about the authenticity and reliability of conventional approaches. This opinion piece proposes an expanded theoretical framework for contextual learning, incorporating practical, situational, experiential, interdisciplinary, and ethical dimensions to address the limitations of authentic assessment in the face of GenAI’s rapid advancements. Whilst the framework is primarily theoretical and not yet empirically validated, it offers a new way of thinking about assessment design, providing educators with a vocabulary and conceptual tools to create more resilient and effective assessments. Learning Developers, who often lead initiatives, engage in collaborative efforts, and support both educators and students, are particularly well-positioned to implement and advocate for these strategies. By integrating diverse contexts into assessment design, this framework aims to promote higher-order thinking and real-world applications, making assessments more adaptable to the complexities of modern professional environments. Future research should explore the empirical validation of this framework across disciplines to ensure its broader applicability and impact on student engagement, learning outcomes, and academic integrity.
References
Arnold, L. and Croxford, J. (2024) ‘Is it time to stop talking about authentic assessment?’, Teaching in Higher Education, pp.1–9. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2024.2369143
Bobula, M. (2024) ‘Generative artificial intelligence (AI) in higher education: a comprehensive review of challenges, opportunities, and implications’, Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, 30. Available at: https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi30.1137
Bosco, A.M. and Ferns, S. (2014) ‘Embedding of authentic assessment in work-integrated learning curriculum’, Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 15(4), pp.281–290. Available at: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1113553
Cassidy, C. (2023) ‘Australian universities to return to “pen and paper” exams after students caught using AI to write essays’, Guardian, 10 January. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/jan/10/universities-to-return-to-pen-and-paper-exams-after-students-caught-using-ai-to-write-essays (Accessed: 19 August 2024).
Eager, B. and Brunton, R. (2023) ‘Prompting higher education towards AI-augmented teaching and learning practice’, Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 20(5). Available at: https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.5.02
Financial Times (2025) ‘OpenAI’s Sam Altman vows “better models” as China’s DeepSeek disrupts global race’, Financial Times, 28 January. Available at: https://www.ft.com/content/b98e4903-ac05-4462-8ad1-eda619b6a9c4 (Accessed: 2 February 2025).
Frenkel, M.E. and Emara, H. (2024) ‘ChatGPT‐3.5 and ‐4.0 and mechanical engineering: examining performance on the FE mechanical engineering and undergraduate exams’, Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 32(6). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22781
Gilbert, J.K. (2006) ‘On the nature of “context” in chemical education’, International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), pp.957–976. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600702470
Lang, J.C. (2024) ‘Embracing generative AI for authentic learning’, Creative Education, 15(1), pp.1–20. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2024.151001
Luo, J. (2024) ‘A critical review of GenAI policies in higher education assessment: a call to reconsider the “originality” of students’ work’, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 49(5), pp.1–14. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2024.2309963
Mcalister, A.R., Alhabash, S. and Yang, J. (2023) ‘Artificial intelligence and ChatGPT: exploring current and potential future roles in marketing education’, Journal of Marketing Communications, 30(2), pp.1–22. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2023.2289034
Messick, S. (1989) ‘Validity’, in R.L. Linn (ed.) Educational measurement. 3rd edn. New York: Macmillan/American Council on Education, pp.13–103.
Mills, A., Bali, M. and Eaton, L. (2023) ‘How do we respond to generative AI in education? Open educational practices give us a framework for an ongoing process’, Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(1), pp.16–30. Available at: https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.34
Nikolic, S., Daniel, S., Haque, R., Belkina, M., Hassan, G.M., Grundy, S., Lyden, S., Neal, P. et al. (2023) ‘ChatGPT versus engineering education assessment: a multidisciplinary and multi-institutional benchmarking and analysis of this generative artificial intelligence tool to investigate assessment integrity’, European Journal of Engineering Education, 48(4), pp.559–614. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2023.2213169
Perkins, M., Furze, L., Roe, J. and Macvaugh, J. (2024) ‘The Artificial Intelligence Assessment Scale (AIAS): a framework for ethical integration of generative AI in educational assessment’, Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 21(6). Available at: https://doi.org/10.53761/q3azde36
Simkute, A., Tankelevitch, L., Kewenig, V., Scott, A.E., Sellen, A. and Rintel, S. (2024) ‘Ironies of generative AI: understanding and mitigating productivity loss in human-AI interaction’, International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, pp.1–22. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2405782
Stankov, P. (2024) ‘Are exams authentic assessment? The case of economics’, Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 29(1), pp.1−20. Available at: https://doi.org/10.7275/pare.1984
Thanh, B.N., Vo, D.T.H., Nhat, M.N., Pham, T.T.T., Trung, H.T. and Xuan, S.H. (2023) ‘Race with the machines: assessing the capability of generative AI in solving authentic assessments’, Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), pp.59–81. Available at: https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.8902
Villarroel, V., Bloxham, S., Bruna, D., Bruna, C. and Herrera-Seda, C. (2017) ‘Authentic assessment: creating a blueprint for course design’, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(5), pp.840–854. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1412396
Wiggins, G. (1998) Educative assessment: designing assessments to inform and improve student performance. San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Bass.
Xia, Q., Weng, X., Ouyang, F., Lin, T.J. and Chiu, T.K. (2024) ‘A scoping review on how generative artificial intelligence transforms assessment in higher education’, International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(40). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00468-z
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
