Digital technologies present new possibilities for the ways in which students undertake and submit assessment tasks, the way in which feedback is provided and the kinds of learner activities that can be assessed. Authentic assessment tasks which require students to demonstrate practices of the target profession can be provisioned in ways that scaffold students and ensure professional and practice-based learning outcomes. This element supports enhanced learner-content and learner-learner engagement.

Watch the video for an overview of the element.


Digital technologies present new possibilities for the ways in which students undertake and submit assessment tasks, the ways in which feedback is provided and returned, and the kinds of learner activities that can be assessed. In particular, digital technologies can enable new kinds of authentic assessment tasks which assess students on their ability to undertake practices and produce artefacts aligned to the artefacts and practices of the target profession, and which scaffold students in the achievement of professional and practice-based learning outcomes.

Assessment design and delivery are identified as key aspects of enhanced learner-content engagement. In professional courses the learning benefits of authentic assessment activities modelled on the kinds of activities undertaken by practicing professionals are well established.

Online learning technologies can afford new approaches to assessment including the use of rich media to capture student practice in their own context and the use of communication technologies to allow collaborative assessment tasks. A wide range of e-assessment strategies have been explored in the research literature, including: diagnostic testing, rubrics, authentic project based learning, WebQuests, simulations and e-portfolios (Buzetto-More & Alade, 2006), multiple choice, single correct response tasks and cloze exercises using simulations, Java applets, web-based applications, spreadsheets and personal response systems (Crisp, 2009), Web 2.0 technologies, namely Twitter, Wiki and Moodle (Megele, 2014), audio files and the social media platform Flickr (Pachler, Daly, Mor, & Mellar, 2010), and interactive computer-marked assignments (Jordan & Mitchell, 2009). These investigations covered a wide range of disciplines identifying many applications for e-assessment in higher education while noting a range of issues to be considered.

Constructive alignment between intended learning outcomes, learning activities and assessment is an essential element of contemporary learning design in a university context. At the most pragmatic level such alignment is essential to ensure that all students engage with the learning activities provided and consequently achieve the intended outcomes. A corollary of the principle of constructive alignment is that providing students with authentic learning activities aligned with professional outcomes but assessing them using traditional paper-based exams or written essays is unlikely to lead to deep learner engagement. Consistent with this argument, a key plank within this element of the model is the eventual replacement of paper-based exams with computer-based exams undertaken either within on-campus examination centres or within students’ homes or workplaces using remote online invigilation.

Some have questioned whether a computer-based exam is any more authentic than a paper-based exam. We would agree that just translating a paper-based exam to an electronic format only marginally increases the authenticity of the assessment practice. However, once we have the infrastructure and processes in place to offer computer-based exams this opens up the opportunity for a wider range of tasks to be assessed under examination conditions. This can embrace tasks requiring the use of specialist software like Computer Assisted Design tools, computer programming environments, accounting packages and spreadsheets and also include tasks where students are expected to search for and synthesise information from online sources.


The e-Assessment element is exemplified by:

The TOL Learning Experience Framework, while encouraging designers to draw upon the OLM in a way which best meets the learning needs of the particular cohort, also recommends specific strategies to enact the eAssessment element, as follows:


Boud, D. (1992). The use of self-assessment schedules in negotiated learning. Studies in Higher Education, 17, 185-200. doi:10.1080/03075079212331382657

Boud, D. (2010). Assessment 2020: Seven propositions for assessment reform in higher education. Sydney, Australia: Australian Learning and Teaching Council. Available from https://www.uts.edu.au/sites/default/files/Assessment-2020_propositions_final.pdf

Boud, D., & Falchikov, N. (2005). Redesigning assessment for learning beyond higher education. In A. Brew & C. Asmar (Eds.), Research and Development in Higher Education 28 (pp. 34–41). Sydney: HERDSA, Sydney.

Buzetto-More, N. A., & Alade, A. J. (2006). Best practices in e-Assessment. Journal of Information Technology Education, 5, 251-269.

Cochrane, T. D. (2014). Critical success factors for transforming pedagogy with mobile Web 2.0. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(1), 65-82. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01384.x

Crisp, G. (2009). Interactive e-Assessment: moving beyond multiple-choice questions. In J. Khon Kaen University) & Adams, K & Alvaro, F & Alwi, A & Armstrong, L et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the EDU-COM 2006 International Conference: Engagement and Empowerment: New Opportunities for Growth in Higher Education. Edith Cowan University, Perth Western Australia, 22-24 November 2006. Retrieved from http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ceducom/71/

Dochy, F., Segers, M., & Sluijsmans, D. (2006). The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in Higher Education, 24(3), 331-350. doi:10.1080/03075079912331379935

Fontanillas, T. R., Carbonell, M. R., & Catasús, M. G. (2016). E-assessment process: giving a voice to online learners. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 13(20), 1-14. doi:10.1186/s41239-016-0019-9

Guàrdia, L., Crisp, G., & Alsina, I. (2016). Trends and challenges of e-assessment to enhance student learning in Higher Education. In E. Cano, & G. Ion (Eds.), Innovative Practices for Higher Education Assessment and Measurement (Chapter 3, pp. 36-56). Hershey PA, USA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-0531-0.guilch003

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. doi:10.1007/BF02504676

Hepplestone, S. Holden, G., Irwin, B., Parkin H. J., & Thorpe, L. (2011). Using technology to encourage student engagement with feedback: A literature review. Research in Learning Technology, 19(2), 117–127. doi:10.1080/21567069.2011.586677

Herrington, J., Reeves, T. C., & Oliver, R. (2009). A practical guide to authentic e-learning. Taylor & Francis, e-Library.

Hillier, M., & Fluck, A. (2015). A pedagogical end game for exams: a look 10 years into the future of high stakes assessment. In T. Reiners, B.R. von Konsky, D. Gibson, V. Chang, L. Irving, & K. Clarke (Eds.), Globally connected, digitally enabled. Proceedings ascilite 2015 in Perth (pp. 465-470). Retrieved from http://www.2015conference.ascilite.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/ascilite-2015-proceedings.pdf

James, R. (2016). Tertiary student attitudes to invigilated, online summative examinations. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 13(9), 1-13. doi:10.1186/s41239-016-0015-0

Jordan, S., & Mitchell, T. (2009). e-Assessment for learning? The potential of short-answer free-text questions with tailored feedback. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2), 371-385. doi:10.1111/j.467-8535.2008.00928.x

Longhurst, N., & Norton, L. S. (1997). Self-assessment in coursework essays. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 23(4), 319-330. doi:10.1016/S0191-491X(97)86213-X

Megele, C. (2014). eABLE: embedding social media in academic curriculum as a learning and assessment strategy to enhance students learning and e-professionalism. Innovations in Education an**d Teaching International, 52(4), 414-425.

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. doi:10.1080/03075070600572090

Pachler, N., Daly, C., Mor, Y., & Mellar, H. (2010). Formative e-assessment: Practitioner cases. Computers & Education, 54(3), 715-721. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.032

Ridgway, J., McCusker, S., & Pead, D. (2004). Literature review of e-assessment. Bristol: Futurelab.

Rust, C., Price, M., & O’Donovan, B. (2003). Improving students’ learning by developing their understanding of assessment criteria and processes. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(2), 147–164.

Scott, G. (2016). OLTF Powerful Assessment Exemplars 2016. Accessed online November 2016. http://flipcurric.edu.au/sites/flipcurric/media/105.pdf

Sheriden, L., Kotevski, S., & Dean, B.A. (2014). Learner perspectives on online assessments as a mechanism to engage in reflective practice. Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 15(4), 335-345. Retrieved from http://www.apjce.org/files/APJCE_15_4_335_345.pdf