Authentic Assessment

Authentic assessment in school psychology is a multifaceted approach to evaluating student learning that aligns assessment practices with real-world contexts and tasks. This article delves into the core principles and historical development of authentic assessment, emphasizing its significance in contemporary education. It explores the various types of authentic assessments, including performance-based assessments, real-world simulations, and situational assessments, shedding light on the design and implementation processes, as well as the ethical considerations involved. Furthermore, the role of school psychologists in fostering authentic assessment practices, their qualifications, collaboration with educators, and ethical responsibilities are highlighted. The article also discusses the benefits and challenges of authentic assessment, emphasizing its advantages for students and educators while addressing common hurdles. Cultural considerations, data interpretation, and reporting methods are examined within the context of authentic assessment, with insights into its application in special education and future directions and innovations in the field. This comprehensive exploration of authentic assessment provides valuable insights for educators, school psychologists, and researchers striving to enhance assessment practices and promote meaningful learning experiences.

Introduction

Definition and Significance of Authentic Assessment

Authentic assessment in the realm of school psychology signifies a fundamental shift in how educators and psychologists evaluate student learning and performance (Brookhart, 2013). Unlike traditional standardized tests and quizzes, authentic assessment is designed to mirror real-world situations and tasks, allowing students to demonstrate their knowledge, skills, and competencies in practical contexts (Wiggins, 1993). This section provides a comprehensive definition of authentic assessment and underscores its profound significance in modern education. Authentic assessment not only measures what students know but also how effectively they can apply their knowledge to authentic, real-life scenarios (Mueller, 2014). This approach aligns closely with the overarching goal of education: to prepare students for success in the complexities of life beyond the classroom.

Historical Context and Evolution

The roots of authentic assessment can be traced back to the late 20th century, emerging as a response to the limitations and criticisms of traditional assessment methods (Gullickson, 1990). This subsection delves into the historical context and evolution of authentic assessment, highlighting the pioneering work of educators and psychologists who championed its development. It explores key milestones and influential thinkers who contributed to the concept’s growth and refinement over time (Wiggins, 1990). The historical perspective provides essential context for understanding the motivations behind the adoption of authentic assessment practices and how they have shaped the landscape of school psychology and education.

Key Principles and Concepts

Characteristics and Features

Authentic assessment is characterized by several key features that distinguish it from traditional assessment methods. It emphasizes real-world relevance, requiring students to apply their knowledge and skills to tasks that mirror authentic, meaningful situations (Herrington & Herrington, 2006). Such assessments often involve open-ended tasks, allowing students to demonstrate their understanding in diverse ways rather than relying solely on multiple-choice questions (Jonsson & Svingby, 2007). Additionally, authentic assessments typically have a strong connection to the content being taught, encouraging deep learning and problem-solving abilities (Mueller, 2014). These assessments often incorporate the use of rubrics, which provide explicit criteria for evaluation and offer valuable feedback to both students and educators (Arter & McTighe, 2001).

Alignment with Learning Objectives

Authentic assessments align closely with the learning objectives of a curriculum or course. They are designed to measure not only the acquisition of knowledge but also the ability to apply that knowledge in practical situations. This alignment ensures that assessments are relevant and meaningful, promoting a deeper understanding of the subject matter (Sadler, 1989). When educators create authentic assessments, they consider the broader educational goals, ensuring that students develop skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and creativity (Wiggins, 1993). This approach connects assessment directly to the intended learning outcomes, fostering a more comprehensive and holistic educational experience (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005).

Types of Authentic Assessment

Authentic assessment encompasses various approaches, each designed to evaluate students’ knowledge and skills within a real-world context. These assessments prioritize practical application and problem-solving, allowing educators to gauge students’ abilities to transfer their knowledge and skills to practical situations.

Performance-Based Assessments

Performance-based assessments require students to demonstrate their understanding by completing tasks or projects relevant to their learning objectives (Jonsson & Svingby, 2007). Unlike traditional tests, these assessments focus on practical application. For example, in a science class, students might design and conduct experiments to illustrate their grasp of the scientific method, emphasizing critical thinking and problem-solving skills (Herrington & Herrington, 2006).

One key advantage of performance-based assessments is their ability to evaluate higher-order thinking skills, such as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). By engaging in complex, real-world tasks, students must apply their knowledge to address multifaceted problems, mirroring the skills required in their future careers (Jonsson & Svingby, 2007).

Performance-based assessments also promote self-regulation and metacognition (Zimmerman & Schunk, 2011). As students plan, execute, and reflect on their performance tasks, they develop a deeper understanding of their strengths and areas for improvement. This self-awareness contributes to lifelong learning skills and personal growth (Panadero & Alonso-Tapia, 2013).

Real-World Simulations

Real-world simulations immerse students in scenarios that replicate authentic situations tied to their learning objectives. These can take various forms, such as virtual labs, clinical simulations in healthcare education, or business strategy games. By participating in realistic experiences, students acquire knowledge while developing problem-solving and decision-making skills (Sadler, 1989).

Real-world simulations offer a safe space for students to apply their theoretical knowledge (Gaba, 2007). For instance, medical students can practice diagnosing patients in virtual clinical settings, improving their clinical reasoning and decision-making abilities (Cook & Triola, 2009). Moreover, simulations can replicate challenging or rare scenarios that students might not encounter during traditional training, ensuring they are prepared for a wide range of situations (Kneebone et al., 2010).

Authentic Tasks and Situational Assessments

Authentic tasks and situational assessments require students to complete tasks mirroring real-life situations (Wiggins, 1993). Often lacking a single correct answer, these assessments encourage creative exploration and application of knowledge and skills. For example, in language arts, students might compose persuasive essays on genuine societal issues, fostering higher-order thinking and practical skill development (Wiggins, 1993).

These assessments reflect the complexity of problem-solving in the real world, where solutions may vary depending on the context (Linn & Miller, 2005). They challenge students to think critically and adapt their knowledge to novel situations, promoting deeper understanding and transferability (Gijbels et al., 2005). Additionally, by addressing authentic problems, these assessments contribute to students’ motivation and engagement (Newmann et al., 1996).

Designing and Implementing Authentic Assessments

Creating authentic assessments involves careful planning, clear criteria, and attention to ethical considerations. This section outlines the key steps in designing and implementing authentic assessments.

Creating Tasks and Criteria

Developing authentic assessment tasks begins with clearly defining learning objectives and aligning them with real-world scenarios. These tasks should reflect the complexity and diversity of challenges students may encounter beyond the classroom (Wiggins, 1993). For example, in a history class, students might analyze primary sources and construct arguments about historical events, emulating the work of historians (Wineburg, 2001).

To ensure the authenticity of the tasks, educators must establish criteria for evaluation. Rubrics are a valuable tool for articulating expectations and promoting transparency in grading (Jonsson & Svingby, 2007). Rubrics describe the characteristics of exemplary performance, helping students understand what is expected and providing educators with consistent criteria for assessment.

Ensuring Validity and Reliability

Validity and reliability are essential for any assessment. In the context of authentic assessment, validity relates to whether the assessment accurately measures what it intends to measure (Messick, 1989). To enhance validity, assessments should directly align with the learning objectives and authentically reflect the skills and knowledge students are expected to demonstrate (Wiggins, 1993).

Reliability, on the other hand, refers to the consistency of assessment results (Berk, 1986). In authentic assessment, inter-rater reliability can be a concern, as different educators might interpret student work differently. Training and calibration sessions for educators, where they collectively review and score sample student work, can enhance inter-rater reliability (Popham, 1997).

Ethical Considerations

Ethical considerations in authentic assessment include fairness, transparency, and the avoidance of bias (Linn & Miller, 2005). Assessments should be designed to minimize cultural, gender, or socioeconomic bias and to accommodate students with disabilities or diverse backgrounds (Messick, 1989).

Transparency is crucial to ensure students understand the assessment process and grading criteria. Students should have access to rubrics or scoring guides before completing tasks. Additionally, educators must provide constructive feedback that guides improvement and supports the development of metacognitive skills (Panadero & Alonso-Tapia, 2013).

The Role of School Psychologists

School psychologists play a vital role in the implementation and support of authentic assessment practices. This section explores the qualifications and training required for school psychologists, their collaboration with educators, and the ethical responsibilities they uphold.

Qualifications and Training

To effectively contribute to the development and implementation of authentic assessments, school psychologists typically possess a strong educational background and specific training. They typically hold a master’s or doctoral degree in school psychology or a related field (NASP, 2020). This comprehensive training equips them with the necessary knowledge in assessment, child development, and educational psychology.

Continuing education is crucial for school psychologists to stay current with the latest assessment methodologies, technologies, and ethical standards (APA, 2017). Many school psychologists pursue certification from professional organizations, such as the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP), which sets high standards for ethical and professional practice.

Collaboration with Educators

Collaboration between school psychologists and educators is essential for the successful implementation of authentic assessments. School psychologists often serve as liaisons between educators, students, and families. They assist educators in understanding the diverse needs of students and adapting assessments to ensure inclusivity and fairness (Parrish et al., 2019).

Additionally, school psychologists can provide professional development to educators on effective assessment practices, including the development of rubrics, scoring guides, and feedback strategies. Collaborative efforts help align assessment practices with learning objectives, ensuring that authentic assessments are integrated seamlessly into the curriculum (Marzano & Kendall, 2007).

Ethical Responsibilities

School psychologists are guided by ethical principles in their assessment-related activities. They are responsible for upholding the rights of students and ensuring that assessments are conducted fairly and without bias (NASP, 2020). Ethical considerations include maintaining confidentiality, respecting cultural diversity, and adhering to the principles of informed consent (Ruble & Dalrymple, 1996).

Moreover, school psychologists should be aware of the potential impact of assessment on students’ well-being and self-esteem (Durlak et al., 2011). Ethical guidelines emphasize the importance of providing constructive feedback and supporting students’ social and emotional development throughout the assessment process.

Benefits and Challenges

Authentic assessment offers several advantages for both students and educators while presenting some notable challenges.

Advantages for Students and Educators

Authentic assessment has gained popularity in educational settings due to its potential benefits for both students and educators. These advantages contribute to a more comprehensive and meaningful learning experience:

1. Enhanced Learning: One of the primary advantages of authentic assessment is its ability to foster enhanced learning. When students engage in tasks that closely mimic real-world scenarios, they are more likely to understand and retain knowledge (Sadler, 1989). This approach encourages them to apply theoretical concepts to practical situations, leading to deeper comprehension.
2. Holistic Evaluation: Traditional assessments often focus on rote memorization and recall of facts. Authentic assessments, on the other hand, consider a broader range of skills and competencies. These may include problem-solving, critical thinking, creativity, communication, and collaboration (Wiggins, 1990). Consequently, educators gain a more comprehensive view of students’ abilities and can assess their readiness for real-life challenges.
3. Motivation and Engagement: Authentic assessment tasks are inherently more engaging for students. When they perceive the assessment as meaningful and relevant to their lives, intrinsic motivation is likely to increase (Ryan & Deci, 2000). This heightened motivation leads to greater effort, active participation, and a genuine desire to excel academically.
4. Effective Feedback: Timely and constructive feedback is an essential component of authentic assessment. Since these assessments often involve practical tasks, educators can provide specific feedback on students’ performance (Sadler, 1989). This feedback not only guides students in understanding their strengths and areas for improvement but also helps them develop a growth mindset, encouraging continuous learning.

Addressing Common Challenges

While the benefits of authentic assessment are significant, it is essential to acknowledge and address the common challenges associated with its implementation:

1. Resource Intensive: Designing, implementing, and assessing authentic tasks can be resource-intensive. Educators may need to invest additional time and effort in creating authentic assessments that align with their learning objectives (Grant et al., 2019). Furthermore, students may require access to specific materials, technologies, or real-world contexts to complete these assessments effectively. Adequate planning and resource allocation are essential to mitigate these challenges.
2. Subjectivity in Evaluation: Authentic assessments often involve subjective scoring since they emphasize the demonstration of skills and competencies in real-life contexts (Popham, 2008). This subjectivity can pose challenges in maintaining consistency in grading, especially when multiple educators are involved in the assessment process. It underscores the importance of clear rubrics and well-defined criteria for evaluation.
3. Access to Technology: Some authentic assessments may require access to technology or specialized resources, such as software applications, labs, or equipment. In educational settings with limited access to these resources, students may face inequalities in assessment opportunities (Barton & Collins, 1993). Ensuring equitable access to technology and materials is crucial to address this challenge.
4. Assessment Literacy: To fully benefit from authentic assessments, both educators and students need to develop assessment literacy. This includes understanding the purpose, criteria, and expectations associated with authentic assessments (Popham, 2008). Providing professional development opportunities for educators and guidance for students on navigating these assessments is essential.

In summary, while authentic assessments offer numerous advantages for enhancing learning and promoting meaningful assessment experiences, addressing resource requirements, subjectivity in evaluation, access to technology, and assessment literacy are essential steps in realizing their full potential in education.

Cultural Considerations in Authentic Assessment

In today’s increasingly diverse educational landscape, cultural considerations in authentic assessment play a pivotal role in ensuring fair, equitable, and inclusive evaluations for all students. This section will delve deeper into the significance of these considerations and provide a more extensive exploration of their various aspects.

Ensuring Fairness and Equity

1. Cultural Bias Awareness: To promote fairness and equity, educators and assessors must cultivate a heightened awareness of potential cultural biases ingrained in assessment materials and procedures (Graham, 2012). This awareness extends to recognizing how a student’s cultural background might influence their performance and responses.

   When developing authentic assessments, it is essential to engage in thorough bias reviews, aiming to identify any elements within the assessment that may inadvertently disadvantage students from specific cultural backgrounds. Awareness of these potential biases empowers educators to make necessary adjustments or revisions to assessment tasks and materials.

2. Culturally Responsive Assessment: A cornerstone of culturally sensitive authentic assessment involves designing assessment tools and tasks that are culturally responsive (AERA, APA, & NCME, 2014). This means they are designed to recognize and respect the diverse cultural backgrounds of students.

   Culturally responsive assessments avoid stereotypes, cultural insensitivity, or language biases that might hinder students’ performance. Instead, they acknowledge and value the unique cultural perspectives and experiences of students. By doing so, these assessments create a more inclusive and supportive testing environment.

3. Accommodations and Accessibility: Cultural considerations also extend to providing appropriate accommodations and accessibility options for students from diverse cultural backgrounds (Artiles et al., 2006). This may include offering assessments in multiple languages, providing additional time for English language learners, or considering cultural norms in response styles.

   For instance, if a student comes from a culture where direct eye contact is considered disrespectful, an awareness of this cultural norm can inform assessment design. Educators can then ensure that the assessment does not inadvertently disadvantage students who adhere to different cultural norms.

Adapting for Diverse Populations

1. Language and Multilingualism: In culturally diverse educational settings, language diversity is prevalent. Authentic assessments should take into account students’ varying language proficiency levels and multilingual backgrounds (Hamayan et al., 2013).

   Providing assessments in students’ primary languages or allowing responses in various languages can help ensure that language barriers do not hinder accurate evaluations. By acknowledging the linguistic diversity within a school community, educators can create a more inclusive and equitable assessment environment.

2. Cultural Sensitivity: An essential aspect of culturally responsive authentic assessments is their cultural sensitivity (Lopez & Guzman, 2019). This involves recognizing that students from different cultural backgrounds may approach tasks, solve problems, or respond to stimuli differently.

   Educators should strive to develop assessments that respect cultural values, traditions, and beliefs that may influence students’ behaviors and responses. By being culturally sensitive, assessments become more inclusive and relevant to the diverse population they serve.

3. Diverse Examples and Contexts: When designing authentic tasks, educators should consider a wide range of cultural examples and contexts (APA, 2017). Authentic assessments should be relatable and meaningful to students from various cultural backgrounds.

   Including scenarios and situations that are relevant and recognizable to students with diverse cultural experiences ensures that the assessments are equitable. It helps students connect their background knowledge to the assessment tasks, promoting a fair evaluation process.

4. Collaborative Approach: A collaborative approach involving students, their families, and communities can provide valuable insights into their cultural perspectives (Banks, 2015). By engaging with these stakeholders, educators gain a deeper understanding of the cultural contexts in which students live and learn.

   This collaborative process helps in tailoring authentic assessments to be culturally inclusive and relevant. Moreover, it fosters a sense of cultural respect and partnership between schools and the communities they serve.

In conclusion, cultural considerations in authentic assessment are fundamental to fostering fairness, equity, and inclusivity in education. Educators must remain culturally aware, adapt assessments to diverse populations, and create a collaborative environment where cultural diversity is celebrated. These efforts contribute to a more equitable and inclusive educational experience for all students.

Data Interpretation and Reporting in Authentic Assessment

Interpreting and reporting assessment data is a crucial phase of the authentic assessment process. This section explores the key aspects of data interpretation and effective communication of assessment results.

Analyzing Assessment Data

1. Holistic Evaluation: Authentic assessment data should be analyzed holistically, considering various dimensions of student performance (Wiggins, 1993). This means going beyond numerical scores to understand the qualitative aspects of student work.

   Holistic evaluation involves examining the depth of understanding, creativity, problem-solving abilities, and the application of knowledge and skills demonstrated by the student in response to the assessment task. It provides a more comprehensive view of a student’s capabilities.

2. Rubric-Based Assessment: Rubrics play a pivotal role in data interpretation for authentic assessments (Andrade & Du, 2005). They provide clear criteria for evaluating different aspects of student performance.

   Educators use rubrics to assess not only correctness but also the quality of responses. Rubric-based assessment helps in identifying strengths and areas for improvement, making the feedback more meaningful to students.

3. Performance Levels: To facilitate data interpretation, educators often categorize student performance into levels or descriptors (Brookhart, 1999). These descriptors help communicate where a student falls on a continuum of performance.

   For example, a four-level scale might include categories such as “novice,” “developing,” “proficient,” and “advanced.” These levels provide a framework for summarizing and communicating assessment results in a way that is easy to understand.

Communicating Results

1. Clear and Meaningful Feedback: Effective communication of assessment results involves providing clear, specific, and constructive feedback to students (Hattie & Timperley, 2007). Feedback should not merely state a score but should focus on strengths, weaknesses, and areas for growth.

   The feedback should help students understand what they did well, where they can improve, and how to make those improvements. Clear feedback empowers students to take ownership of their learning and growth.

2. Student Involvement: Authentic assessment encourages student involvement in the interpretation of results (Andrade & Valtcheva, 2009). Involving students in the reflection on their performance and the identification of areas for improvement enhances their metacognitive skills.

   When students understand how their work is assessed and actively participate in the interpretation process, they become more engaged in their own learning journey.

3. Parent and Guardian Communication: Communicating assessment results with parents and guardians is also a vital component of the process (Epstein et al., 2019). Schools should employ transparent and accessible methods for sharing results with families.

   This communication should include not only scores but also an explanation of what the scores mean, how parents can support their child’s learning, and resources available for additional help or enrichment.

4. Data Visualization: Effective data visualization techniques, such as graphs, charts, and tables, can enhance the clarity of assessment reports (Tufte, 2001). Visual representations of data make it easier for stakeholders, including students, parents, and educators, to grasp the key insights.

   However, it’s essential to ensure that the data visualizations used are appropriate for the audience and do not oversimplify complex information.

In summary, data interpretation and reporting are integral components of authentic assessment. A holistic analysis of assessment data, clear communication of results, and involving students and families in the interpretation process contribute to a comprehensive understanding of student performance and growth. These practices support the overarching goal of authentic assessment – to improve teaching and learning.

Special Education and Authentic Assessment

Tailoring for Students with Disabilities

Authentic assessments offer a promising avenue for tailoring assessments to the unique needs of students with disabilities. By allowing for flexibility in task design, presentation, and response options, these assessments can be individualized to better accommodate diverse learning profiles. This personalization helps students with disabilities demonstrate their knowledge and skills more accurately. For example, students with mobility impairments can benefit from digital assessments that enable them to use assistive technology. Furthermore, educators can adapt authentic assessments to align with the goals outlined in individualized education plans (IEPs) or 504 plans, ensuring that students with disabilities receive the necessary support and accommodations. However, it’s vital to strike a balance between tailoring assessments and maintaining the integrity of the assessment process, adhering to ethical standards, and preserving fairness.

Strategies for English Language Learners

Assessing English Language Learners (ELLs) authentically requires careful consideration of their language proficiency levels and cultural backgrounds. Authentic assessments should be culturally responsive and considerate of language barriers. Educators can employ strategies such as providing instructions in students’ native languages when possible, using visuals, incorporating real-world contexts that are familiar to ELLs, and allowing extra time for completing assessments. Additionally, educators may consider alternative forms of authentic assessment, such as performance-based tasks, where language proficiency plays a less central role. Collaborating with bilingual or English as a Second Language (ESL) specialists can be instrumental in ensuring that ELLs receive appropriate support during the assessment process. Tailored assessment accommodations, such as extended time or translation assistance, should be provided as outlined in the students’ Individualized Language Plans (ILPs) or Language Support Plans (LSPs).

Future Directions and Innovations

Emerging Trends in Assessment

The landscape of authentic assessment continues to evolve with emerging trends that hold promise for enhancing its effectiveness. One notable trend is the increased emphasis on formative assessment, which provides ongoing feedback and informs instruction in real time. Formative authentic assessments, such as digital learning analytics and adaptive assessments, can offer immediate insights into student progress, enabling educators to tailor their teaching strategies more effectively. Additionally, there is a growing interest in alternative credentialing and digital badges, which recognize students’ skills and competencies acquired through authentic assessment. These credentials, often tied to specific tasks or projects, are gaining traction as a way to document and showcase a student’s abilities to potential employers or educational institutions.

Technology Integration

The integration of technology is poised to play a pivotal role in the future of authentic assessment. With the proliferation of digital tools and platforms, educators have the opportunity to create dynamic, multimedia-rich assessment tasks that closely mirror real-world scenarios. Virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) are expanding the possibilities for creating immersive, authentic assessment experiences. For example, VR simulations can be used in healthcare education to assess students’ clinical skills, providing a safe and realistic environment for practice and evaluation. Moreover, the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in scoring and feedback generation is gaining traction, offering automated and timely assessment results. However, ethical considerations surrounding data privacy and the equitable access to technology must be carefully addressed as technology integration continues to advance in the realm of authentic assessment.

References:

1. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. AERA.
2. American Psychological Association (APA). (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. APA.
3. Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
4. Andrade, H. L., & Du, Y. (2005). Student responses to criteria-referenced self-assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 12(3), 209-232.
5. Artiles, A. J., Rueda, R., Salazar, J. J., & Higareda, I. (2006). Within-group diversity in minority disproportionate representation: English language learners in urban school districts. Exceptional Children, 72(3), 283-300.
6. Barton, P. E., & Collins, P. A. (1993). Alternative assessments and the renewal of American education (Policy Information Report). RAND Corporation.
7. Boud, D., & Falchikov, N. (2006). Aligning assessment with long-term learning. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(4), 399-413.
8. Brookhart, S. M. (1999). The art and science of classroom assessment: The missing part of pedagogy. ASCD.
9. Brookhart, S. M. (2013). Toward an understanding of authentic classroom assessment. The Phi Delta Kappan, 94(8), 8-13.
10. Cook, D. A., & Triola, M. M. (2009). Virtual patients: A critical literature review and proposed next steps. Medical Education, 43(4), 303-311.
11. Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta‐analysis of school‐based universal interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405-432.
12. Epstein, J. L., Connors, L. J., & Salinas, K. C. (2019). Creating collaborative solutions for schools and families: A circle of communication. Harvard Education Press.
13. Gaba, D. M. (2007). The future vision of simulation in healthcare. Simulation in Healthcare, 2(2), 126-135.
14. Gándara, P. (2015). Rethinking equity in the assessment of English language learners. Educational Policy, 29(1), 54-82.
15. Gijbels, D., Dochy, F., Van den Bossche, P., & Segers, M. (2005). Effects of problem-based learning: A meta-analysis from the angle of assessment. Review of Educational Research, 75(1), 27-61.
16. Grant, S. G., Kubina, R. M., & Morse, T. E. (2019). Authentic assessment in the classroom: Perspectives and research on using performance-based measures. Routledge.
17. Gullickson, A. R. (1990). Alternative assessment: The history and the hype. Educational Policy, 4(4), 381-406.
18. Hamayan, E. V., Marler, B., Sánchez-López, C., & Damico, J. S. (2007). Special education considerations for English language learners: Delivering a continuum of services. Caslon Publishing.
19. Haladyna, T. M., & Downing, S. M. (2004). Validity of a taxonomy of multiple-choice item-writing rules. Applied Measurement in Education, 17(1), 51-78.
20. Halverson, L. R., & Shapiro, R. B. (2013). Rethinking education in the age of technology: The digital revolution and schooling in America. Teachers College Press.
21. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.
22. Herrington, J., & Herrington, A. (2006). What Is an Authentic Learning Environment? In Re-Engaging with Learning (pp. 1-14). Springer.
23. Jonsson, A., & Svingby, G. (2007). The use of scoring rubrics: Reliability, validity and educational consequences. Educational Research Review, 2(2), 130-144.
24. Kneebone, R., Kidd, J., Nestel, D., Asvall, S., & Paraskeva, P. (2010). Working inside and outside the operating theatre: Enhancing distributed simulation for training in surgery. Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 315-324.
25. Linn, M. C., & Miller, E. (2005). Measurement and assessment in computer-based learning. In Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 337-369). Routledge.
26. Marzano, R. J., & Kendall, J. S. (2007). The new taxonomy of educational objectives (2nd ed.). Corwin Press.
27. Mueller, J. (2014). Authentic assessment toolbox. Retrieved from http://jfmueller.faculty.noctrl.edu/toolbox/index.htm
28. National Association of School Psychologists (NASP). (2020). Professional standards for the practice of school psychology. NASP.
29. Newmann, F. M., Marks, H. M., & Gamoran, A. (1996). Authentic pedagogy and student performance. American Journal of Education, 104(4), 280-312.
30. Panadero, E., & Alonso-Tapia, J. (2013). Self-assessment: Theoretical and practical connotations. When it happens, how is it acquired, and what to do to develop it in our students? Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 11(2), 551-576.
31. Parrish, J. M., Larzelere, R. E., & Strother, D. L. (2019). Cultural competence in behavior analysis: Evidence-based approaches to performance enhancement (pp. 145-157). Springer.
32. Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, R. (Eds.). (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. National Academies Press.
33. Popham, W. J. (2008). Transformative assessment. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
34. Reynolds, C. R., & Suzuki, L. A. (2012). Bias in psychological assessment: An empirical review and recommendations. In Cultural and linguistic diversity in autism: Assessment, diagnosis, and treatment (pp. 79-99). American Psychological Association.
35. Rivera, C., Vincent, L., & Cuéllar, G. (2006). Preschool English learners: Principles and practices to promote language, literacy, and learning. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 37(4), 313-327.
36. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78.
37. Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119-144.
38. Tufte, E. R. (2001). The visual display of quantitative information. Graphics Press.
39. Wiggins, G. (1990). The case for authentic assessment. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 2(2), 1-5.
40. Wiggins, G. (1993). Assessing student performance: Exploring the purpose and limits of testing. Jossey-Bass.
41. Wiggins, G. (1993). Assessment: Authenticity, context, and validity. Phi Delta Kappan, 75(3), 200-214.
42. Wiggins, G. (1993). Assessment: Authenticity, context, and validity. Phi Delta Kappan, 75(3), 200-214.
43. Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2011). Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance. Routledge.
44. Zwiers, J., & Crawford, M. (2011). Guide to fostering academic success for English language learners: Building upon the school’s assets. Pearson.