Skip to content

Authentic Assessment after Generative AI, Australian Evidence

The integration of generative artificial intelligence into higher education necessitates a structural redesign of evaluative practices toward contextual and process-driven authentic assessment. Evidence from Australian and international institutional environments demonstrates that combining character development with AI-augmented tasks safeguards academic integrity while fostering critical intellectual agency. Realigning pedagogical frameworks enables tertiary educators to balance technological affordances with rigorous disciplinary outcomes.

Document Preview

Review the formatting and introduction. The full version will refine the structure for the selected document standard.

Literature Review

Degree:
Authentic Assessment after Generative AI, Australian Evidence

Author:

Group

First M. Last

Advisor:

Dr. First Last

City, 2026

Contents

Introduction
Theoretical Foundations of Authentic Assessment in an AI-Augmented Era
Conceptualising Authenticity and Character in Academic Integrity
Methodological Approaches to Evaluating AI Susceptibility Across Assessment Formats
Australian Higher Education Responses and Institutional Adaptations
Disciplinary Vulnerabilities and Applied Contextual Reasoning
Pedagogical Strategies for AI-Augmented Assessment Design
Conclusion
Bibliography

Introduction

Higher education institutions globally, and across Australia in particular, confront an unprecedented paradigm shift following the widespread deployment of generative artificial intelligence tools such as ChatGPT. The rapid emergence of these large language models challenges traditional assessment formats, undermining conventional notions of authenticity and academic integrity while compelling institutions to re-examine evaluative design [1].

While public discourse initially framed generative technologies predominantly as instruments of academic misconduct, evolving pedagogical perspectives increasingly recognise their potential to foster deeper contextual reasoning and authentic student learning when guided by principled institutional leadership [2]. This tension necessitates systematic pedagogical restructuring across diverse disciplines [3].

This paper examines the transformation of authentic assessment design across the Australian tertiary landscape, synthesising current institutional evidence and pedagogical frameworks to delineate how authentic evaluative practices can withstand machine generation while cultivating genuine intellectual capability [1], [4].

Theoretical Foundations of Authentic Assessment in an AI-Augmented Era

Theoretical conceptualisations of authentic assessment after the emergence of generative artificial intelligence diverge significantly in their foundational frameworks and pedagogical objectives across higher education literature. On one side of the academic discourse, institutional adaptation models focus on structural disruption and systemic realignment across international tertiary environments (Sullivan et al., 2023). This analytical perspective conceptualises authenticity primarily as a pragmatic countermeasure to technological vulnerabilities, examining broad institutional debates to argue that universities must restructure evaluative mechanisms while addressing acute academic integrity concerns (Sullivan et al., 2023). Under this operational view, authentic tasks operate as functional tools designed to preserve evaluative validity amid pervasive technological availability. In sharp contrast, virtue-oriented approaches position authenticity not merely as structural assessment mechanics, but as an internalised educational outcome grounded in student character development and academic leadership (Rudolph et al., 2023). Rather than treating conversational chatbots strictly as threats to detection protocols or traditional exams, this conceptual framework contends that authentic assessments function as enablers for learners who have cultivated ethical agency, empowering them to navigate artificial intelligence constructively (Rudolph et al., 2023). Meaningful theoretical differences therefore emerge between structural paradigms that treat authenticity as an institutional defensive apparatus and developmental frameworks that define authenticity through character growth. Ultimately, contemporary theoretical synthesis demonstrates that resilient assessment design requires unifying these divergent perspectives, balancing rigorous task redesign with deliberate moral cultivation in tertiary learning environments.

References

  1. ChatGPT in higher education: Considerations for academic integrity and student learning
    Miriam Sullivan, Andrew Kelly, Paul McLaughlan
    DOI Link
  2. Leadership is needed for ethical ChatGPT: Character, assessment, and learning using artificial intelligence (AI)
    Joseph Crawford, Michael Cowling, Kelly‐Ann Allen
    DOI Link
  3. Prompting Higher Education Towards AI-Augmented Teaching and Learning Practice
    Bronwyn Eager, Ryan Brunton
    DOI Link
  4. Susceptibility of Assessment Types to AI-Generated Content in Digital Health and Health Information Management Education: Quasi-Experimental Pilot Study.
    Tafheem Ahmad Wani, Michael Liem, Natasha Prasad et al.
  5. Generative Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education: Pedagogical Potential and Risks of Using ChatGPT, Gemini, and Yandex Alice
    Anna Printsipalova
  6. The Post-ChatGPT Research Landscape of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education (2023–2026): A Bibliometric Analysis
    Monica Pătruț

Bibliography

Verified SourcesFormatting StandardsHigh UniquenessPro Models
Launch Offer -25%

Referat

APA 7th Edition (Australian Implementation)

$8$10
  • 10-15 pages
  • High originality drafting
  • Export to Word
  • Correct formatting
  • Public Preview
    A preview by another author cannot be made private. Your work will be private and completely unique.
  • Bibliography (8+, APA 7th Edition)
    +$2
  • Add alternative sources (News, .gov, .edu)

Referat

APA 7th Edition (Australian Implementation)