Standards-Based Assessment for an Era of Increasing Transparency

Part of the The Enabling Power of Assessment book series (EPAS, volume 5)


The macro policy context for assessment in higher education has changed to focus on explicit standards and learning outcomes. While different countries and institutions are at different stages of the process of reorienting assessment to become more directly standards based, the implications for assessment and learning are substantial. Assessment becomes transparent in multiple ways: it is possible to report on what students can actually do, rather than how they stand vis-à-vis others (norm-referenced assessment). Outcomes can be compared across courses, institutions and countries. Students can progressively track their achievement of outcomes when these are explicit. Assessment becomes open to scrutiny as never before as standards-based assessment requires a scaling up of transparency. This chapter explores the new context of assessment and what opportunities it affords. It considers the implications for assessment practice and identifies ways in which the new framework directly conflicts with familiar taken-for-granted assessment practices, such as conventional grading. It concludes by pointing to new opportunities offered and what needs to be done to realize them.


Learning Outcome High Education Institution Assessment Practice Sustainable Assessment Assessment Task 


  1. Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC). (2011). Learning and teaching academic standards project final report. Sydney, Australia: Australian Learning and Teaching Council.Google Scholar
  2. Baik, C., & James, R. (2014). Seven strategic areas for advancing the assessment of learning in higher education. In H. Coates (Ed.), Higher education learning outcomes assessment: International perspectives. Frankfurt, Germany: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  3. Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32, 347–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boud, D., Lawson, R., & Thompson, D. (2013). Does student engagement in self-assessment calibrate their judgment over time? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(8), 941–956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boud, D., & Molloy, E. (2013). Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The challenge of design. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), 698–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boud, D., & Soler, R. (2016). Sustainable assessment revisited. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(3), 400–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Clarke, J., & Boud, D. (submitted for publication). Refocusing portfolio assessment: Curating for feedback and portrayal.Google Scholar
  8. Deneen, C., & Boud, D. (2014). Patterns of resistance in managing assessment change. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(5), 577–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hartog, P., & Rhodes, E. C. (1935). An examination of examinations. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  10. Hartog, P., & Rhodes, E. C. (1936). The marks of examiners. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  11. Higher Education Standards Framework. (2015). Federal register of legislative instruments F2015 L01639. Canberra, Australia: Commonwealth of Australia.Google Scholar
  12. Hughes, G. (2011). Towards a personal best: A case for introducing ipsative assessment in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 36(3), 353–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Oliver, B. (2016). 21C credentials: Curate, credential and carry forward digital learning evidence. Sydney, Australia: Office for Learning and Teaching.Google Scholar
  14. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2016). International assessment of higher education learning outcomes (AHELO) feasibility study. Retrieved from
  15. Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA). (2016). Quality assurance agency subject benchmark statements. Retrieved from
  16. Sadler, D. R. (2009). Grade integrity and the representation of academic achievement. Studies in Higher Education, 34(7), 807–826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sadler, D. R. (2015). Three in-course assessment reforms to improve higher education learning outcomes. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2015.1064858.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Deakin UniversityBurwoodAustralia

Personalised recommendations