4.1 Principles and Implementation of Authentic Assessment

In this chapter, you will be equipped to design and implement effective learning activities and assessments that are authentic, collaborative, and incorporate modern technologies to enhance educational outcomes. Authentic assessment is a learner-centered evaluation methodology that mimics real-world challenges within educational settings. Unlike traditional tests which often emphasize memorization and decontextualized tasks, authentic assessment aims to assess students’ abilities to apply knowledge in practical and complex situations (Gulikers et al., 2004). In online learning environments, where direct observation and traditional testing methods have their limitations, authentic assessment offers a dynamic and insightful approach to understanding and enhancing student learning and performance.

To further understand and visualize the concepts discussed in this chapter, watch the video “Authentic Assessment: Examples & Overview (02:45 mins).”

This video offers an overview of authentic assessments as they relate to educators across classrooms. It discusses why educators should incorporate authentic assessments and provides examples of their use in various subjects to enhance your understanding.

4.1.1 Theoretical Foundations

The concept of authentic assessment is deeply rooted in constructivist learning theories, which assert that learning is most effective when students actively construct their own understanding in contexts that simulate real-world experiences (Jonassen et al., 1999). This educational approach encourages assessments that require students to perform tasks demonstrating meaningful application of essential knowledge and skills. Authentic assessments are characterized by tasks that are complex, engage students in critical thinking, and require them to integrate and apply their knowledge in novel situations (Newmann & Archbald, 1992).

The Five-Dimensional Framework for Authentic Assessment provides a comprehensive guide for designing and implementing effective assessments in online learning environments. This framework includes the following dimensions:

1. Task: The task should be meaningful and reflect real-world challenges. Design tasks that require students to demonstrate their knowledge and skills in practical situations.
2. Physical Context: Use digital tools and platforms that replicate the physical context of real-world tasks. Virtual labs, simulations, and interactive software can provide an immersive experience.
3. Social Context: Encourage collaboration and social interaction. Group projects, peer assessments, and discussion forums can create a dynamic social learning environment.
4. Result/Form: Define clear outcomes and criteria for success. Provide students with detailed rubrics and examples of high-quality work to guide their efforts.
5. Criteria: Ensure transparency and consistency in assessment. Use rubrics and continuous feedback to help students understand their progress and areas for improvement.

Image 4-1: The Five-Dimensional Framework for Authentic Assessment (Gulikers et al., 2004)

4.1.2 Benefits of Authentic Assessment

Authentic assessment offers numerous benefits over traditional assessment methods, particularly in enhancing educational outcomes and student engagement:

Enhanced Engagement and Motivation

By involving students in tasks that have real-world relevance, authentic assessment increases engagement and motivation. Students are more likely to see the value in their work and strive for excellence when they understand the practical applications of their work (Gulikers et al., 2018; Messier, 2022; Stiggins, 2005).

Development of Higher-Order Thinking Skills

These assessments often require critical thinking, problem-solving, and decision-making, mirroring the complexity of real-life tasks (Koh, 2017; Wiggins, 1998). This not only prepares students for professional challenges but also fosters a deeper understanding of the subject matter.

Improved Learning and Retention

Engaging in authentic tasks allows students to connect theoretical knowledge with practical application, leading to better retention and understanding of material (Herrington & Herrington, 2006).

Feedback for Learning

Authentic assessments provide students and instructors with more detailed feedback on educational progress and areas needing improvement, facilitating a more personalized and effective learning experience (Boud & Molloy, 2013).

4.1.3 Implementation of Authentic Assessment in Online Learning Environments

The implementation of authentic assessment in online education requires thoughtful integration of several key components:

Contextualization of Tasks

Align assessment tasks with real-world scenarios that are relevant to the course content and learning outcomes. For instance, business students might be tasked with creating a marketing strategy for an existing company, requiring research and application of contemporary marketing theories (Herrington & Parker, 2013).

Use of Digital Tools

Employ digital tools that mimic professional environments. Technologies such as virtual labs, simulation software, and digital portfolios can replicate the complexities of real-world settings in an online platform (Barrett, 2011).

Clear Criteria and Rubrics

Establish clear, accessible criteria and rubrics that define expectations and standards for assessment tasks. Well-designed rubrics not only guide student effort but also aid in fair and consistent evaluation (Andrade, 2005).

Continuous Feedback and Reflection

Implement a system for ongoing feedback and reflection. Feedback from instructors should be constructive, timely, and specific, encouraging students to reflect on their performances and think critically about improvements (Black & Wiliam, 1998).

Collaborative Opportunities

Facilitate collaborative projects where students can interact, discuss, and solve problems together. This not only simulates many workplace environments where teamwork is essential but also enhances learning through social interaction (Laal & Ghodsi, 2012).

4.2 Creating Diverse and Engaging Learning Activities

Online learning environments present unique opportunities and challenges in the design and implementation of educational activities. Instructors are tasked with creating a dynamic learning experience that caters to diverse learner needs and preferences. By developing a variety of engaging and innovative activities, instructors can enhance student engagement, facilitate deeper understanding, and support varied learning preferences (Means et al., 2014). This section explores comprehensive strategies to design inclusive and effective learning activities across different modalities, leveraging technology, promoting collaboration, and connecting theory to real-world applications.

4.2.1 Designing for Diverse Learning Preferences

To address the diverse learning preferences and needs of students, educators should incorporate varied instructional strategies. While the VARK model (See Image 4-2 below.) has been popular, recent research suggests that strictly adhering to learning styles may not significantly impact learning outcomes (Chick, 2010). Instead, utilizing a variety of instructional methods can enhance student engagement and academic performance (Kharb et al., 2013; Prithishkumar & Michael, 2014).

Image 4-2: VARK model

To address diverse learning preferences effectively:

• Multimodal Content Delivery:
  • Provide course materials in various formats (text, audio, video, interactive elements) to cater to different preferences and reinforce learning.
  • Example: Offer textbook readings, lecture recordings, and interactive simulations for the same topic.
• Flexible Assessment Options:
  • Allow students to choose from different assessment formats that demonstrate their understanding.
  • Example: Let students opt for a written essay, oral presentation, or multimedia project for their final assignment.
• Metacognitive Strategies:
  • Teach students about effective learning strategies and help them identify their own preferences.
  • Encourage self-reflection on learning processes to develop adaptable study skills.
• Varied Instructional Techniques:
  • Incorporate a mix of instructional methods throughout the course.
  • Example: Combine lectures, discussions, hands-on activities, and problem-solving exercises within a single unit.
• Adaptive Content Sequencing:
  • Use adaptive learning technologies to adjust content presentation based on individual student performance and preferences.

By implementing these strategies, educators can create a more inclusive learning environment that supports diverse learner needs without relying on rigid categorizations of learning styles.

4.2.2 Utilizing Technology to Enhance Engagement

Leveraging modern technology can significantly enhance the engagement and effectiveness of learning activities:

• Virtual Reality (VR) and Augmented Reality (AR): VR and AR technologies can create immersive learning experiences that are particularly beneficial for complex subjects. For example, medical students can perform virtual surgeries, offering hands-on experience without the risks associated with real-life procedures (Huang et al., 2019).
• Gamification: Applying game-design elements in learning activities can increase motivation and make learning more enjoyable. This could involve leaderboards, achievement badges, and educational games that reinforce course material. In a business course, students could participate in a competitive market simulation where they manage their virtual businesses (Deterding et al., 2011).
• Adaptive Learning Platforms: Adaptive learning platforms use AI-driven systems to personalize learning paths for each student (Essa, 2016). These platforms can implement real-time feedback and assessment tools, providing immediate insights into student performance and areas needing improvement. They also offer customized content based on individual progress, ensuring that each student receives instruction tailored to their unique learning needs and pace. By adapting to the individual learner, these platforms enhance engagement and support more effective learning outcomes. Research has shown that adaptive learning technologies can significantly improve student achievement and reduce the time needed to master content (VanLehn, 2011; Yarnall et al., 2016).

4.2.3 Collaborative Activities and Peer Learning

Collaboration is a key element in fostering a rich learning environment that encourages interaction and deeper understanding. It enhances the learning experience and develops crucial interpersonal skills:

Online Discussion Boards

Online discussion boards facilitate asynchronous debates on course topics, allowing students to engage in academic discourse, reflect on their learning, and benefit from diverse perspectives (Gao et al., 2013). They encourage peer-to-peer knowledge sharing, where students can learn from each other’s insights and experiences. Assigning roles like moderator or summarizer to students can help structure the discussions and ensure active participation. For example, in a course on ethical philosophy, students could debate moral dilemmas, supporting their arguments with theoretical frameworks discussed in the course.

Virtual Group Projects

Virtual group projects help students develop essential teamwork skills and allow for the integration of diverse skills and perspectives (Cheng & Chau, 2016). Using collaborative tools like shared documents and project management platforms can streamline communication and organization. Assign interdisciplinary projects that require diverse skills to ensure that each group member contributes uniquely to the project. Implement peer evaluation systems to provide accountability and feedback within the group. In a software development course, students could collaborate to design and develop an application, dividing tasks such as coding, testing, and project management among themselves.

Peer Reviews and Feedback

Peer assessment activities help students develop critical evaluation skills by reviewing and providing feedback on each other’s work (Nicol et al., 2014). Setting up anonymous peer review systems for assignments can help ensure unbiased feedback. Train students in constructive feedback techniques to make the reviews beneficial and supportive. Use rubrics to guide peer assessments, ensuring that the feedback is structured and aligns with learning objectives. In a creative writing class, students could critique each other’s stories based on narrative structure and character development guidelines provided by the instructor.

4.2.4 Real-World Application and Problem-Based Learning

Connecting theory to practice enhances relevance and deepens understanding. Incorporating real-world problems into learning activities ensures that students can apply theoretical knowledge practically:

Case Studies

Case studies present real-world scenarios for analysis and problem-solving, allowing students to apply theoretical knowledge to tangible issues (Yadav et al., 2010). Encourage students to research and present their own case studies, fostering deeper engagement and ownership of learning. Utilize multimedia case studies with video interviews and interactive elements to make the scenarios more dynamic and engaging. For example, in a course on environmental science, students might analyze the impact of industrial activities on local ecosystems and propose mitigation strategies.

Simulations

Simulations provide scenario-based learning experiences that replicate real-life tasks and decision-making processes (Sauvé et al., 2007). Implement business simulations for management and economics courses to allow students to experience market dynamics and management challenges. Use role-playing exercises for communication and psychology classes to help students practice interpersonal skills and conflict resolution (Lane & Rollnick, 2007). Create virtual labs for science and engineering subjects to offer hands-on experience without the constraints of physical lab environments (de Jong et al., 2013). A course in business management could include simulations where students must respond to market changes or crisis situations affecting their simulated companies.

Project-Based Learning

Project-based learning involves assigning long-term projects that solve real community issues, promoting student engagement and practical problem-solving skills (Blumenfeld et al., 1991). Collaborate with industry partners to provide students with authentic challenges that reflect current professional practices. Encourage students to create portfolios showcasing their projects, which can serve as a valuable tool for future employment opportunities (Gülbahar & Tinmaz, 2006). For instance, students in a public health course might develop and implement a campaign to address a local health issue.

Flipped Classroom Approach

The flipped classroom approach enhances interactive learning by providing pre-recorded lectures for students to watch before class. This allows synchronous class time to be used for interactive problem-solving and discussions. Implement just-in-time teaching based on student pre-class responses to address specific areas of difficulty and ensure that class time is used effectively (Novak et al., 1999). In a mathematics course, students might watch instructional videos on new concepts at home and then work through problems collaboratively in class.

4.3 Enhancing Collaboration in Online Courses

Collaboration in online courses is essential for simulating real-world interactions and building skills necessary for the modern workforce. Effective collaboration in virtual settings requires both carefully designed strategies and appropriate tools to facilitate interaction and community among students. Enhancing collaboration not only improves learning outcomes but also fosters a sense of belonging and engagement among students (Barkley et al., 2014; Garrison et al., 2010).

4.3.1 Strategies for Enhancing Collaboration

Structured Group Activities

Design activities that require meaningful interaction, such as group projects, peer reviews, or collaborative problem-solving tasks. These activities should have clear roles, responsibilities, and outcomes to ensure active participation from all members (Brindley et al., 2009).  For example, implementing jigsaw activities, where each student becomes an expert on a subtopic and then teaches others, promotes interdependence and individual accountability (Aronson & Bridgeman, 1979). Similarly, utilizing case-based learning allows small groups to analyze and present solutions to real-world scenarios, fostering practical application of knowledge (Yadav et al., 2010).

Community Building

Foster a sense of community and social presence among learners to enhance collaboration. Begin courses with ice-breaking activities that promote personal connections (Martin & Parker, 2014). Regular synchronous sessions help build rapport and maintain engagement (Lowenthal et al., 2017). Encouraging the formation of virtual study groups or learning circles supports peer-to-peer learning and creates a supportive learning environment (Rovai, 2002).

Clear Guidelines and Expectations

Establish clear norms for collaboration to promote a respectful and productive online environment. Develop a collaborative class contract at the beginning of the course to increase student buy-in and adherence to guidelines (Barkley et al., 2014). Providing rubrics for collaborative work that outline expectations for participation, quality of contributions, and teamwork ensures clarity and accountability (Palloff & Pratt, 2010).

Scaffolded Collaboration

Gradually increase the complexity of collaborative tasks throughout the course. Start with simple paired activities and progress to more complex group projects, allowing students to build confidence and competence (Palloff & Pratt, 2010). Provide guidance on effective online collaboration techniques, such as active listening, constructive feedback, and conflict resolution, further supporting students in their collaborative efforts (Brindley et al., 2009).

Reflective Practice

Incorporate regular reflection activities to enhance the quality of collaboration. Implement individual and group reflections on collaborative experiences to encourage students to critically assess their interactions and contributions (Brindley et al., 2009). Use collaborative journals or blogs to document group processes and learning outcomes, providing a continuous record of progress and areas for improvement (Gao et al., 2013).

4.3.2 Tools for Fostering Collaboration

Discussion Forums

Utilize asynchronous forums for in-depth analysis and reflection. Implement structured discussion protocols, such as the “3C and Q” (Compliment, Comment, Connect, and Question), to enhance the quality of online discussions (Barkley et al., 2014). Use topic-based threading to organize conversations and facilitate easier navigation (Gao et al., 2013).

Collaborative Software

Implement tools that allow real-time collaboration and communication. Utilize platforms like Google Workspace or Microsoft Teams for document sharing, simultaneous editing, and project management (Hew & Cheung, 2014). Integrate version control systems to track individual contributions and facilitate group writing projects, ensuring transparency and accountability (Hadjerrouit, 2014).

Social Media and Networking

Leverage social media platforms to foster informal interactions and networking. Create course-specific groups or hashtags on platforms like Twitter or LinkedIn for sharing resources and discussions (Manca & Ranieri, 2016). Use social annotation tools like Hypothes.is for collaborative reading and analysis of online texts (Zhu et al., 2020).

4.4 Integrating Advanced Technologies in Assessment

The integration of advanced technologies in assessment strategies is transforming how student learning is measured in online environments. These technologies offer innovative ways to conduct assessments, providing more accurate and immediate feedback to students. These technologies not only provide innovative ways to conduct assessments but also offer more accurate and immediate feedback to students.

4.4.1 Technological Advancements in Assessment

Digital Credentials

Digital credentials provide a secure and verifiable way to recognize and document student achievements. Unlike traditional paper certificates, digital credentials can be easily shared and authenticated, ensuring that the credentials are tamper-proof and credible. These digital badges and certificates can be issued through various platforms and integrated into students’ digital portfolios, making them accessible to potential employers and other educational institutions (Carey & Stefaniak, 2018).

Learning Analytics

Advanced data analysis techniques provide insights into student learning processes. Predictive analytics can identify at-risk students early, allowing for timely interventions (Viberg et al., 2018). Learning analytics dashboards offer real-time feedback to both students and instructors on learning progress (Matcha et al., 2020).

4.4.2 Applications and Benefits

Immediate and Personalized Feedback

AI-driven assessments offer instant feedback, allowing students to learn and adjust their understanding in real-time. Adaptive learning paths adjust content difficulty based on individual student needs (Wang et al., 2020; Xie et al., 2019).

Improved Accessibility and Inclusivity

Advanced technologies provide more accessible assessment methods for students with disabilities or those in remote locations, ensuring a more inclusive educational environment. Remote proctoring solutions enable assessments from diverse locations (Burgstahler & Cory, 2008; Langenfeld, 2020).

Enhanced Security and Integrity

AI-powered proctoring systems detect and prevent cheating in online exams, maintaining academic integrity. Digital credentialing ensures the authenticity of credentials and reduces fraud (Li et al., 2021; Turkanović et al., 2018).

Data-Driven Decision Making

Comprehensive analytics provide educators with insights to improve instructional strategies and track long-term student progress and curriculum effectiveness (Siemens & Long, 2011; Viberg et al., 2018).

4.4.3 Innovative Educational Software Tools at FHSU

Fort Hays State University (FHSU) employs a variety of cutting-edge educational software tools to enhance the learning experience for students and streamline instructional processes for educators. Below are five key tools that are particularly impactful:

• Feedback Fruits: Automating and Enhancing Feedback Processes: Feedback Fruits automates and streamlines the feedback process, allowing instructors to provide timely, detailed, and constructive feedback on student work. It also facilitates peer feedback exercises, promoting collaborative learning. Key features include automated feedback on assignments, peer review functionalities, integration with existing LMS, and analytics to track student progress (Winstone & Carless, 2020).
• GoReact: Immersive Learning Experiences: GoReact is a video-based skill development platform ideal for courses requiring practical skill demonstration. It supports language learning, public speaking, teacher training, performing arts, and healthcare simulation training. GoReact allows students to record and receive time-coded feedback on video submissions, enhancing skill acquisition and retention (Yousef et al., 2014).
• InSpace: Virtual Interactions and Presence: InSpace facilitates natural interactions in online learning environments, creating a sense of presence through customizable virtual spaces and proximity-based audio. It supports virtual collaboration, integrates with LMS platforms, and offers breakout rooms for group work. InSpace enhances student engagement and social presence in online learning (Garrison et al., 2010).
• Respondus LockDown Browser: Enhancing Online Test Security Respondus LockDown Browser secures the testing environment within our LMS by preventing access to other applications during exams, disabling printing and screen capture, and offering optional webcam monitoring. This tool addresses academic dishonesty concerns and maintains the integrity of online assessments (Daffin & Jones, 2018).
• Yellowdig: Facilitating Engaging Student Discussions Yellowdig is a social learning platform that enhances student discussions through gamification elements, rich media integration, and analytics to track engagement. It fosters a sense of community in online courses by encouraging meaningful interactions and seamless LMS integration (Garrison & Cleveland-Innes, 2005).

For more information on selecting the right educational technology tools for your courses, please visit the FHSU EdTech Tools page to explore and choose the best options that align with your educational goals.

Dive into the following H5P interactive questions to test your understanding and apply what you’ve learned before moving on to the reflection questions.

References

Andrade, H. G. (2005). Teaching With Rubrics: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. College Teaching, 53(1), 27–31. https://doi.org/10.3200/CTCH.53.1.27-31

Aronson, E., & Bridgeman, D. (1979). Jigsaw groups and the desegregated classroom: In pursuit of common goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 5(4), 438–446. https://doi.org/10.1177/014616727900500405

Barkley, E. F., Major, C. H., & Cross, K. P. (2014). Collaborative learning techniques: A handbook for college faculty. John Wiley & Sons.

Barkley, R. A. (Ed.). (2014). Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: A handbook for diagnosis and treatment. Guilford Publications.

Barrett, H. C. (2005). Researching electronic portfolios and learner engagement. The Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 48(6), 436-449.

Bates, A. W. (2015). Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning. Vancouver, BC: Tony Bates Associates Ltd.

Bennett, R. E. (2011). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(1), 5-25.

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74.

Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational psychologist, 26(3-4), 369-398.

Boud, D., & Molloy, E. (2013). Rethinking models of feedback for learning: the challenge of design. Assessment & Evaluation in higher education, 38(6), 698-712.

Brindley, J. E., Blaschke, L. M., & Walti, C. (2009). Creating effective collaborative learning groups in an online environment. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 10(3).

Burgstahler, S. & Cory, R. (2008) ‘ Moving in from the margins: from accommodation to universal design’, in S. Gabel and S. Danforth (eds), Disability and the Politics of Education. New York: Peter Lang.

Carey, K. L., & Stefaniak, J. E. (2018). An exploration of the utility of digital badging in higher education settings. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66, 1211-1229.

Cheng, G., & Chau, J. (2016). Exploring the relationships between learning styles, online participation, learning achievement and course satisfaction: An empirical study of a blended learning course. British journal of educational technology, 47(2), 257-278.

Daffin Jr, L. W., & Jones, A. A. (2018). Comparing Student Performance on Proctored and Non-Proctored Exams in Online Psychology Courses. Online Learning, 22(1), 131-145.

De Jong, T., Linn, M. C., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2013). Physical and virtual laboratories in science and engineering education. Science, 340(6130), 305-308.

Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011, September). From game design elements to gamefulness: defining” gamification”. In Proceedings of the 15th international academic MindTrek conference: Envisioning future media environments (pp. 9-15).

Essa, A. A possible future for next generation adaptive learning systems. Smart Learn. Environ. 3, 16 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-016-0038-y

Fleming, N. D., & Mills, C. (1992). Not another inventory, rather a catalyst for reflection. To improve the academy, 11(1), 137-155.

Gao, F., Zhang, T., & Franklin, T. (2013). Designing asynchronous online discussion environments: Recent progress and possible future directions. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(3), 469-483.

Gao, P., Ascano, M., Zillinger, T., Wang, W., Dai, P., Serganov, A. A., … & Patel, D. J. (2013). Structure-function analysis of STING activation by c [G (2′, 5′) pA (3′, 5′) p] and targeting by antiviral DMXAA. Cell, 154(4), 748-762.

Garrison, D. R., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Fung, T. S. (2010). Exploring causal relationships among teaching, cognitive and social presence: Student perceptions of the community of inquiry framework. The internet and higher education, 13(1-2), 31-36.

Gülbahar, Y., & Tinmaz, H. (2006). Implementing project-based learning and e-portfolio assessment in an undergraduate course. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(3), 309-327.

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. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504676

Gulikers, J. T., Runhaar, P., & Mulder, M. (2018). An assessment innovation as flywheel for changing teaching and learning. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 70(2), 212-231.

Hadjerrouit, S. (2014). Wiki as a collaborative writing tool in teacher education: Evaluation and suggestions for effective use. Computers in human behavior, 32, 301-312.

Herrington, A., & Herrington, J. (2006). Authentic learning environments in higher education. Information Science Pub.

Herrington, J., & Parker, J. (2013). Emerging technologies as cognitive tools for authentic learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(4), 607-615.

Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2014). Students’ and instructors’ use of massive open online courses (MOOCs): Motivations and challenges. Educational research review, 12, 45-58.

Huang, H. M., Rauch, U., & Liaw, S. S. (2010). Investigating learners’ attitudes toward virtual reality learning environments: Based on a constructivist approach. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1171-1182.

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Making cooperative learning work. Theory Into Practice, 38(2), 67-73. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip3802_2

Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K. L., & Wilson, B. G. (1999). Learning with technology: A constructivist perspective. NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.

Kharb, P., Samanta, P. P., Jindal, M., & Singh, V. (2013). The learning styles and the preferred teaching—learning strategies of first year medical students. Journal of clinical and diagnostic research: JCDR, 7(6), 1089.

Kinsel, E., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Garrison, D. R. (2005, October). Student role adjustment in online environments: From the mouths of online babes. In 20th annual conference on distance teaching and learning (pp. 1-5).

Koh, K. H. (2017). Authentic assessment. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. Retrieved from https://oxfordre.com/education/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.001.0001/acrefore-9780190264093-e-22

Laal, M., & Ghodsi, S. M. (2012). Benefits of collaborative learning. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31, 486-490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.12.091

Lane, C., & Rollnick, S. (2007). The use of simulated patients and role-play in communication skills training: a review of the literature to August 2005. Patient education and counseling, 67(1-2), 13-20.

Langenfeld, T. (2020). Internet‐based proctored assessment: Security and fairness issues. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 39(3), 24-27.

Li, M., Luo, L., Sikdar, S., Nizam, N. I., Gao, S., Shan, H., … & Wang, G. (2021). Optimized collusion prevention for online exams during social distancing. npj Science of Learning, 6(1), 5.

Lowenthal, P., Dunlap, J., & Snelson, C. (2017). Live synchronous web meetings in asynchronous online courses: Reconceptualizing virtual office hours. Online Learning Journal, 21(4).

Manca, S., & Ranieri, M. (2016). Facebook and the others. Potentials and obstacles of social media for teaching in higher education. Computers & Education, 95, 216-230.

Martin, F., & Parker, M. A. (2014). Use of synchronous virtual classrooms: Why, who, and how. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(2), 192-210.

Matcha, W., Uzir, N. A., Gasevic, D., & Pardo, A. (2020). A systematic review of empirical studies on learning analytics dashboards: A self-regulated learning perspective. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 13(2), 226–245. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2019.2916802

Means, B., Bakia, M., & Murphy, R. (2014). Learning online: What research tells us about whether, when and how. Routledge.

Messier, N. (2022). Authentic assessments. Center for the Advancement of Teaching Excellence at the University of Illinois Chicago. https://teaching.uic.edu/resources/teaching-guides/assessment-grading-practices/authentic-assessments/

Mueller, J. (2016). What is Authentic Assessment?. Retrieved from http://jfmueller.faculty.noctrl.edu/toolbox/index.htm

Newmann, F. M., & Archbald, D. A. (1992). The nature of authentic academic achievement. Toward a new science of educational testing and assessment, 71, 83.

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.

Nicol, D., Thomson, A., & Breslin, C. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: a peer review perspective. Assessment & evaluation in higher education, 39(1), 102-122.

Novak, G. M., Patterson, E. T., Gavrin, A. D., & Christian, W. (1999). Just-in-time teaching blending active learning with web technology.

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2010). Collaborating online: Learning together in community (Vol. 32). John Wiley & Sons.

Raven, & T. Romberg (Eds.), Toward a new science of educational testing and assessment (pp. 71-84). State University of New York Press.

Rovai, A. P. (2002). Sense of community, perceived cognitive learning, and persistence in asynchronous learning networks. The Internet and Higher Education, 5(4), 319-332.

Sauvé, L., Renaud, L., Kaufman, D., & Marquis, J. S. (2007). Distinguishing between games and simulations: A systematic review. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 10(3), 247-256.

Shi, D., Wang, T., Xing, H., & Xu, H. (2020). A learning path recommendation model based on a multidimensional knowledge graph framework for e-learning. Knowledge-Based Systems, 195, 105618.

Siemens, G., & Long, P. (2011). Penetrating the fog: Analytics in learning and education. EDUCAUSE review, 46(5), 30.

Turkanović, M., Hölbl, M., Košič, K., Heričko, M., & Kamišalić, A. (2018). EduCTX: A blockchain-based higher education credit platform. IEEE access, 6, 5112-5127.

urgstahler, S. & Cory, R. (2008) ‘ Moving in from the margins: from accommodation to universal design’, in S. Gabel and S. Danforth (eds), Disability and the Politics of Education. New York: Peter Lang.

VanLEHN, K. (2011). The Relative Effectiveness of Human Tutoring, Intelligent Tutoring Systems, and Other Tutoring Systems. Educational Psychologist, 46(4), 197–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2011.611369

Viberg, O., Hatakka, M., Bälter, O., & Mavroudi, A. (2018). The current landscape of learning analytics in higher education. Computers in human behavior, 89, 98-110.

Wang S., Christensen C., Cui W., Tong R., Yarnall L., Shear L., et al. (2020). When adaptive learning is effective learning: comparison of an adaptive  learning system to teacher-led instruction. Interact. Learn.  Environ. 10.1080/10494820.2020.1808794

Wiggins, G. P. (1998). Educative assessment : designing assessments to inform and improve student performance (1st ed.). Jossey-Bass.

Winstone, N. E., Balloo, K., & Carless, D. (2022). Discipline-specific feedback literacies: A framework for curriculum design. Higher Education, 83(1), 57-77.

Xie, H., Zou, D., Zhang, R., Wang, M., & Kwan, R. (2019). Personalized word learning for university students: a profile-based method for e-learning systems. Journal of computing in Higher education, 31, 273-289.

Yadav, A., Lundeberg, M., DeSchryver, M., Dirkin, K., Schiller, N. A., Maier, K., & Herreid, C. F. (2007). Teaching science with case studies: A national survey of faculty perceptions of the benefits and challenges of using cases. Journal of College Science Teaching, 37(1), 34.

Yadav, M. S. (2010). The decline of conceptual articles and implications for knowledge development. Journal of Marketing, 74(1), 1-19.

Yarnall, L., Means, B., & Wetzel, T. (2016). Lessons learned from early implementations of adaptive courseware. SRI Education.

Yousef, A. M. F., Chatti, M. A., & Schroeder, U. (2014). The state of video-based learning: A review and future perspectives. International Journal on Advances in Life Sciences, 6(3), 122-135.

Zhu, N., Zhang, D., Wang, W., Li, X., Yang, B., Song, J., … & Tan, W. (2020). A novel coronavirus from patients with pneumonia in China, 2019. New England journal of medicine, 382(8), 727-733.