Benefits and Challenges of Alternative Assessment Methods in Higher Education

Original Study

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Benefits and Challenges of Alternative Assessment Methods in Higher Education

Ankita Guha , Binoy Roy

DIP: 18.02.009/20251001

DOI: 10.25215/2455/1001009

Received: February 04, 2025; Revision Received: February 18, 2025; Accepted: February 21, 2025

Abstract

This study explores the use of alternative assessment practices in higher education, examining their potential to enhance learning outcomes and address the limitations of traditional assessment methods. A qualitative research approach is employed, utilizing a literature review of secondary data from academic journals, books, and case studies related to alternative assessment practices. The study aims to identify the benefits and challenges of these practices from the perspectives of university educators and students. The findings highlight those alternative assessments, such as portfolios, project-based tasks, and peer assessments, promote deeper learning by encouraging critical thinking, creativity, and real-world problem-solving skills. These assessments foster student-centered learning, enhance engagement, and accommodate diverse learning styles. However, challenges such as time constraints, resistance to change, and difficulties in ensuring reliability and fairness are also noted. The study proposes several strategies to improve the adoption of alternative assessments, including the provision of clear guidelines, educator training, formative feedback, and the use of technology. By addressing these challenges, alternative assessments can be better integrated into the curriculum, promoting equity, inclusion, and lifelong learning skills among students. This research contributes to the growing body of knowledge on assessment practices in education and offers practical recommendations for educators and policymakers to improve the implementation of alternative assessments in higher education settings.

Keywords

The author(s) appreciates all those who participated in the study and helped to facilitate the research process.

The author(s) declared no conflict of interest.

This is an Open Access Research distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any Medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Responding Author Information

Binoy Roy @ binoyroy375@gmail.com

Benefits and Challenges of Alternative Assessment Methods in Higher Education

Total Download: 2 | Total View: 82

PlumX Matrix

Plum Analytics uses research metrics to help answer the questions and tell the stories about research. Research metrics that immediately measure awareness and interest give us new ways to uncover and tell the stories of research.

Dimensions Matrix

Dimensions is a next-generation linked research information system that makes it easier to find and access the most relevant information, analyze the academic and broader outcomes of research, and gather insights to inform future strategy. (digital science)

Article Overview

ISSN 2348-5396

ISSN 2349-3429

DIP: 18.02.009/20251001

DOI: 10.25215/2455/1001009

Published in

Volume 10, Issue 1, January – March, 2025

2Downloads
0Citations
82Views
1Likes

Navigations
References

Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching. Jossey-Bass.

Andrade, H. (2000). Using rubrics to promote thinking and learning. Educational Leadership, 57(5), 13-18.

Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. McGraw-Hill Education.

Birenbaum, M. (2003). New insights into learning and teaching and their implications for assessment. In M. Segers, F. Dochy, & E. Cascallar (Eds.), Optimising new modes of assessment: In search of qualities and standards (pp. 13-36). Springer.

Boud, D., & Falchikov, N. (2006). Aligning assessment with long‐term learning. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(4), 399-413.

Carless, D. (2015). Excellence in university assessment: Learning from award-winning practice. Routledge.

Elliot, A. J., & McGregor, H. A. (2001). A 2×2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(3), 501-519.

Gikandi, J. W., Morrow, D., & Davis, N. E. (2011). Online formative assessment in higher education: A review of the literature. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2333-2351.

Gulikers, J. T. M., Bastiaens, T. J., & Kirschner, P. A. (2004). A five-dimensional framework for authentic assessment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(3), 67-86.

Jonsson, A., & Svingby, G. (2007). The use of scoring rubrics: Reliability, validity, and educational consequences. Educational Research Review, 2(2), 130-144.

Knight, P. (2002). Summative assessment in higher education: Practices in disarray. Studies in Higher Education, 27(3), 275-286.

Kuh, G. D. (2008). High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter. Association of American Colleges and Universities.

Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218.

O’Farrell, C. (2017). Assessment for learning in higher education: Principles and practice. Routledge.

Sambell, K., McDowell, L., & Montgomery, C. (2013). Assessment for learning in higher education. Routledge.

Topping, K. J. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory into Practice, 48(1), 20-27.

Wiggins, G. (1998). Educative assessment: Designing assessments to inform and improve student performance. Jossey-Bass.

Zeidner, M. (1998). Test anxiety: The state of the art. Springer.