Authentic assessment has been a ubiquitous feature of higher education for more than a decade. By and large, authentic assessment refers to student engagement in everyday experiences that align with the discipline-based standards of the profession or workforce into which the students will be inducted. Authentic approaches to teaching and learning require students to “use the same competencies, or combinations of knowledge, skills, and attitudes that they need to apply in professional life” (Gulikers, Bastiaens & Kirschner, 2004:69). A growing body of research attests to the affordances of authentic assessment for application of real world knowledge and skills within (not merely at the completion of) an academic program (cf. Gulikers, Bastiaen & Kirschner, 2004; Perkins & Wajrak, 2005; Poikela, 2004; Smith & Koshy, 2005). The early work of Wiggins (1989) contributed to foundational understandings of authentic assessment (cf. Herrington & Herrington, 1998) that have come to underpin contemporary practice. Sadler (2005:185) argues that authentic assessment, along with peer assessment and self-assessment, provides an “instrumental resource” for helping students to learn and to evaluate their learning. In turn, it is seen to afford both students and academic staff opportunities to be authentic, each having a stake in the development and execution of assessment, and each participating, in a timely way, in the feedback cycle. Higher education systems, in many countries, now feature authentic assessment in the caché of pedagogical and curricula practices for which they wish to be known. South Africa’s Council of Higher Education (Benvenuti, 2010), for example, has drawn upon empirical research conducted within the Finland-South Africa Cooperation Agreement (2005-2008) to highlight authentic approaches, particularly with respect to large class teaching (cf. Scholtz, 2007). So too, a review of higher education research in Australia and New Zealand affirms the importance of assessment in and for real world learning, particularly for university students in their first year of study (Nelson, Clarke, Kift & Creagh, 2011). This research considered a case of authentic assessment conducted within a four-year early childhood pre-service teacher education program in an Australian university. Pre-service teachers (students) engaged with real world challenges within in a first-year foundation unit (known elsewhere as a subject or course) devoted to early childhood teachers working with children and families who had experienced transnational migration as refugees or asylum seekers.

Benevenuti, S 2010. ‘Towards a More Authentic Approach to Assessment: An Innovative Response to Large Class Assessment in Teaching and Learning Beyond Formal Access. Assessment Through the Looking Glass (1-21). Pretoria: Council of Higher Education. Gulikers, J Bastiaens, T & Kirschner, P 2004. ‘A five-dimensional framework for authentic assessment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52 (3), 67-85. Herrington, J & Herrington, A 1998. ‘Authentic Assessment and Multimedia: How University Students Respond to a Model of Authentic Assessment’ in Higher Education Research and Development Vol 17 No 3 (305-322). Nelson, K Clarke, J Kift, S & Creagh, T 2011. ‘Trends in Policies, Programs and Practices in the Australasian First Year Experience Literature 2000-2010’ in First Year in Higher Education Research Series on Evidence-Based Practice No 1. Brisbane: Queensland University of Technology. Perkins, T & Wajrak, M 2005. Authentic Assessment: Mission Possible or Mission Impossible. Edith Cowan University, Australia. Paper presented at The First International Conference on Enhancing Teaching and Learning Through Assessment, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong SAR, China, June 2005.