Studies in Higher Education
ISSN: 0307-5079 (Print) 1470-174X (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cshe20
Authentic assessment in business education: its
effects on student satisfaction and promoting
behaviour
Lincoln Then James & Riza Casidy
To cite this article: Lincoln Then James & Riza Casidy (2018) Authentic assessment in business
education: its effects on student satisfaction and promoting behaviour, Studies in Higher Education,
43:3, 401-415, DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2016.1165659
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2016.1165659
Published online: 04 Apr 2016.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 2040
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Citing articles: 15 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cshe20
Studies in Higher Education, 2018
Vol. 43, No. 3, 401–415, https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2016.1165659
Authentic assessment in business education: its effects on student
satisfaction and promoting behaviour
Lincoln Then James and Riza Casidy*
Department of Marketing, Deakin Business School, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia
The purpose of this research is to investigate the effects of authentic assessment on
student satisfaction and promoting behaviour. The sample comprised 120 students
enrolled in an undergraduate business programme. A model was proposed and
tested using conditional process analysis. It was found that authentic assessments
are positively related to student satisfaction and promoting behaviour. It was
found that student satisfaction mediated the relationship between authentic
assessments and promoting behaviour. Moreover, the effects of authentic
assessment are stronger among students who are highly career-oriented than
those who are less career-oriented. The implications for higher education
institutions are discussed. The key contribution of the research is in providing
support for the precept that authentic assessments could drive students’ positive
attitudes and behavioural intentions.
Keywords: authentic assessment; attitude; satisfaction; promotion; choice of
programme
Introduction
The literature on employers’ increasing expectations of university graduates is well
established (Cranmer 2006; Gault, Leach, and Duey 2010; Luscombe, Lewis, and
Biggs 2013; Oliver 2015; Pool and Sewell 2007; Tout, Pancini, and Mccormack
2014). Because of these increased expectations, the transmission of theory and knowl-
edge does not adequately prepare university students for their future careers. Students
should be given tasks that develop and test the skills and practices that they will need in
their future careers – tasks that mirror professional practice and test more than just rote
memorisation. In response to these increased expectations, the topic of authentic assess-
ments in higher education has attracted a significant amount of interest in the literature
in recent years (Gulikers et al. 2008; Gulikers, Bastiaens, and Kirschner 2006; Maxwell
2012; Tout, Pancini, and Mccormack 2014). The primary tenets of authentic assess-
ments are based on a constructive alignment of curriculum and assessments where
the activities integrate skill developments that students will require in the real work
environment (Ashford-Rowe, Herrington, and Brown 2014; Vos 2015).
Tout, Pancini, and Mccormack (2014, 597) asserted that ‘theory is no longer able to
govern practice; practice, while drawing on theory, now lights its own path based on pre-
cedent, analogy, experience, imagination and in situ practical judgement’. This state-
ment is highly relevant within the business discipline. While an understanding of the
© 2016 Society for Research into Higher Education
402 L. T. James and R. Casidy
theories such as the 7Ps of marketing (Rafiq and Ahmed 1995) or the principles of scien-
tific management (Taylor 2013) are helpful for university graduates, students also need
to show that they can, and have, applied these theories in real-world settings. Gault,
Leach, and Duey (2010) found that over 75% of employers prefer graduates with experi-
ence in their chosen field. This finding suggests that university students are considered
more employable when they have a firm grasp of both modes of knowledge. Issues of
graduate employability are especially relevant, given that university graduates are enter-
ing a job market with decreasing demand (Oliver 2015). Some countries, such as the UK,
have even gone so far as to consider employability as the primary concern of higher edu-
cation (Cranmer 2006). In Australia, graduate employability rates have recently fallen,
with only 68.1% of 2014 university graduates finding full-time employment within four
months of graduation (Healy 2015a, 2015b). This figure is down from 71.3% in 2013
and 76.3% in 2012. The year 2014 saw the lowest rate of full-time employment since
Graduate Careers Australia began measuring graduate employability in 1982.
Although there has been increasing research interest into authentic assessments in
higher education, there are two major gaps in the literature which this study seeks to
address. First, prior research has focused on the design of authentic assessments and
curriculum from academic and industry perspectives (Maxwell 2012), but student atti-
tudes to authentic assessments have received very limited attention in the literature. In
particular, there is a lack of empirical evidence supporting the relationship between
authentic assessment and students’ positive attitudes (i.e. satisfaction) and behavioural
intentions (i.e. promoting behaviour). Thus, several questions remain unanswered. Do
authentic assessments lead to greater student satisfaction? Will students talk positively
about their subject of study to their peers (i.e. promoting) if the subject is highly auth-
entic? Do personal characteristics (i.e. career orientation) affect students’ attitudes
towards authentic assessments? The second research gap relates to the context of
study. Business schools have been criticised for ‘persistent deficiencies in certain
non-technical graduate skills … [that] could be attributed to outdated curricula, inap-
propriate pedagogical techniques and/or inadequate opportunities for work-integrated
learning’ (Jackson and Chapman 2012, 96). Prior studies have examined authentic
assessment approaches in various disciplines including psychology and technology
(Gulikers, Bastiaens, and Martens 2005), social work (Gulikers, Bastiaens, and Kirsch-
ner 2006; Thomas and Bain 1984), nursing (Gulikers, Bastiaens, and Kirschner 2004;
Scouller and Prosser 1994), science (Scouller and Prosser 1994), law (Martens, Bas-
tiaens, and Kirschner 2007), and education (Birgin 2011; Kearney 2013; Klenowski
2000; Lam 2015), but few studies have examined the issue of authentic assessments,
particularly from the student perspective, in the context of the business discipline.
This study seeks to address these research gaps by examining the relationship
between authentic assessments, satisfaction, and behavioural intention in the context
of the business discipline. We also examine the moderating role of students’ personal
characteristics (career orientation) in the relationship between key constructs of the
study. In doing so, the study makes a theoretical contribution to education literature
in general and business education in particular. The practical implications for business
schools are outlined in the concluding section of this paper.
Literature review and conceptual framework
Figure 1 depicts the theoretical framework developed to address the literature gap we
have identified. Authentic assessment is our framework’s primary antecedent.
Studies in Higher Education 403
Figure 1. Conceptual framework.
Satisfaction mediates the influence of authentic assessment on our outcome construct –
promoting behaviour. The indirect effects of authentic assessment on promoting behav-
iour through satisfaction are moderated by career orientation. The theoretical expla-
nations for the inter-construct relationships depicted in Figure 1 will be elaborated next.
Authentic assessments
One way in which universities can close the gap between graduate skills and industry
demand is to assess students’ learning more authentically. Authentic assessments are
based on tasks that require students to demonstrate practices, behaviours, and skills
that are required of professional practitioners in their careers (Gulikers, Bastiaens,
and Kirschner 2004; Janesick 2001; Larkin 2014; Sridharan and Mustard 2015).
Forms of authentic assessments include: inquiry-based reports, oral presentations,
role-playing, case studies, performances and situational judgement tests, portfolios,
just to name a few. Assessments that are considered to be ‘inauthentic’ or ‘traditional’
include, for example, standardised tests such as closed-book exams consisting of mul-
tiple-choice questions (Janesick 2001; Sridharan and Mustard 2015). Traditional
assessments require students to merely learn facts (knowledge transmission) and
study for their assessments via memorisation rather than engaging in transformational
learning (Gulikers, Bastiaens, and Kirschner 2004; Scouller and Prosser 1994). Auth-
entic assessments, on the other hand, involve multiple tasks that assess higher-order
skills with a demonstration of knowledge that is linked to the real-world environment
(Janesick 2001).
To better capture and measure the aspects of authenticity in assessment design,
Gulikers, Bastiaens, and Kirschner (2004) have developed and tested a five-
dimensional framework (5DF) of authentic assessments comprising the following
dimensions: (1) assessment task, (2) physical context, (3) social construct, (4) assess-
ment result or form, and (5) assessment criteria. Gulikers, Bastiaens, and Kirschner
(2004) argue that an authentic assessment task must mirror the activities, environment,
and interactions involved in professional practice, allowing students to present their
work for assessment to ensure genuine mastery of skills, knowledge, and competencies
relevant to real-world situations.
A highly authentic assessment should reflect a strong degree of proximity, defined
here as ‘how closely the context resembles a professional environment (Oliver 2015).
The concept of ‘proximity’ in education mirrors Gulikers, Bastiaens, and Kirschner’s
(2004) argument that an assessment’s social and physical context are important to its
404 L. T. James and R. Casidy
overall authenticity. While this paper argues that universities need to offer more auth-
entic assessments, we do not suggest that universities should offer only authentic
assessments; rather, both traditional and authentic modes of assessment have their
place in higher education (Kaider and Hains-Wesson 2015). For example, a degree’s
core units may need to include knowledge transmission and standardised testing
to ensure that students understand the basic concepts of their discipline (Gulikers,
Bastiaens, and Kirschner 2004).
Authentic assessment and student satisfaction
Given the increasing global competition amongst universities, it is important for univer-
sities to offer value proposition that matches student needs (Helgesen 2008). Univer-
sities can do so by addressing critical issues such as industry demands and graduate
employability as discussed earlier (GraduateCareers Australia 2015; Healy 2015a,
2015b; Kumar et al. 2011; Oliver 2015). Considering the significant disparities
between the competencies of graduates and the expectations of industry, some argu-
ment can be made for the notion that universities are failing to meet students’ expec-
tations (Cranmer 2006).
Students’ perceptions of their assessment can influence their adopted learning
approach. Students’ general orientation towards learning can be described as either
‘deep’ (transformational) or ‘shallow’ (reproductive) orientation; transformational
learning techniques are more likely to result in higher levels of achievement and
student satisfaction than reproductive techniques (Scouller and Prosser 1994). Scouller
and Prosser (1994) found that students are likely to adopt transformational learning
practices when presented with a particularly interesting or intricate assessment task.
Students’ satisfaction refers to the recognition that they have met, or are meeting,
their goal of increasing their employability throughout their study experience (Oliver
2015; Thomas and Bain 1984). Lent et al. (2007) found that academic satisfaction
was influenced by: how students felt they were progressing towards completing
their degree (goal progress), development of skills needed in their chosen field (self-
efficacy), and ability to access adequate support for their educational goals. Scouller
and Prosser (1994) asserted that assessments that encourage transformational learning
could improve students’ satisfaction with their university. Karns (2006) found that stu-
dents prefer learning activities that are enjoyable, challenging, and similar to the tasks
they would be performing in the business world. In line with the existing literature, this
research predicts that students will perceive the subject of study with authentic assess-
ment more favourably because they will be offered the opportunity to solve real
business problems throughout their learning experience. This leads us to the first
hypothesis:
H 1: Authentic assessment is positively related to student satisfaction.
Authentic assessment and promoting behaviour
Universities often have to rely on voluntary support from businesses, foundations, and
individuals for their survival due to limited public funding and intensifying competition
among education providers (Bruggink and Siddiqui 1995). To remain competitive, a
university must find ways to promote supportive behaviours among its existing and
former students. Promoting the university to others (i.e. providing positive word of
Studies in Higher Education 405
mouth) is one of the most important aspects of student supportive behaviour (Mael and
Ashforth 1992).
This research focuses on student promoting behaviour within the scope of a subject
of study. Our particular interest is to examine the relationship between authentic assess-
ment and student likelihood of promoting the subject of study to others via positive
word-of-mouth. Word-of-mouth recommendations from existing students are an impor-
tant source of information for prospective students when choosing which university to
attend (Briggs and Wilson 2007; Patton 2000). In the age of social media, students’
word-of-mouth behaviour can be an essential marketing tool for higher education insti-
tutions as the message tends to be perceived as reliable and is easily disseminated to
relevant others through various platforms at little cost.
While no empirical studies have examined promoting behaviour within the scope of
subject of study, prior studies revealed that peer influence is one of the key determinants
of students’ subject selections (Panizzon and Levins 1997; Whiteley and Porter 1998).
We predict that authentic assessment could lead to promoting behaviour among stu-
dents since they would recommend only those subjects that are perceived to be high
quality and relevant to their professional context. Highly authentic assessment delivers
experiences that approximate the actual work environment, and thus would be per-
ceived more favourably than less authentic modes of assessment. This favourable
impression would lead to promoting behaviour among students. This leads us to the
second hypothesis.
H 2: Authentic assessment is positively related to promoting behaviour.
Our conceptual framework (Figure 1) indicates that authentic assessments have indirect
effects on promoting behaviour through satisfaction as the mediating variable. The
relationship between satisfaction and promoting behaviour (i.e. word-of-mouth) in
the literature is unclear, with ‘the existence of contradictory findings and viewpoints’
(Anderson 1998). Anderson, however, argues that only those who are either extremely
satisfied or dissatisfied are likely to spread word-of-mouth (positive or negative respect-
ively). Units with authentic assessments should be perceived more favourably by stu-
dents as they have the opportunity to learn to solve real business problems throughout
their learning experience. This, as proposed earlier, should positively affect student sat-
isfaction with the unit. Consistent with previous studies in the literature (Anderson
1998; Chevalier and Mayzlin 2006; Christiansen and Tax 2000; Trusov, Bucklin,
and Pauwels 2009), satisfied customers are likely to spread positive messages about
their experiences. In line with the established arguments in the literature, this research
predicts that students who are satisfied with authentic assessments will in turn spread
positive messages about the unit to other students when they have an opportunity to
do so, thus leading us to the following hypothesis:
H 3: Student satisfaction mediates the relationship between authentic assessments with
promoting behaviour.
Authentic assessment and career orientation
A key factor in student motivation is the teaching method, more than the content being
taught (Christophel 1990). This draws upon the theory of state motivation which argues
that student motivation is based on their attitude towards each of their classes
406 L. T. James and R. Casidy
individually. State motivation links with the cognitive, affective, and conative model,
whereby students’ thoughts (cognitive) and emotions (affective) will influence their
behaviours (conative) in their learning. Pintrich (2003) argues that the nature of motiv-
ation is contested in psychological science. Psychologists argue whether motivation is
informed by our drives and needs (e.g. need for achievement, power, or affiliation) or
whether motivation is instinctual; or even whether a student’s motives are a combi-
nation of the two (Pintrich 2003).
This research focuses on ‘career orientation’ as a personal characteristic that is rel-
evant to students’ attitude towards authentic assessments. The term ‘career orientation’
in this study refers to students’ aspirations to be in a position to do mostly work which
they really like. Career orientation can have significant effects on student attitude
towards authentic assessments. Highly career-oriented students are focused on the
rewards that university courses can offer, and usually have higher levels of attainment
in terms of both their educational achievements and the progress of their career (Judge
and Kammeyer-Mueller 2012). Our conceptual framework positions career orientation
as a moderator between authentic assessment and student satisfaction. Because highly
career-oriented students are focused on their future jobs, they expect assessments that
are closely related to the real-world environment. Thus, their attitude towards authentic
assessments should be more favourable than that of less career-oriented students.
Therefore, we predict that the effect of authentic assessment on satisfaction is stronger
among highly career-oriented students.
H4: The positive effect of authentic assessments on student satisfaction will be moderated
by students’ level of career orientation, with the positive effect being stronger for highly
career-oriented students than for less career-oriented students.
Methodology
Pre-test
We used a scenario-based design where participants read about an assessment brief.
Scenario-based designs minimise ethical issues associated with creating and comparing
student responses to assessments, and also are not subject to memory limitations associ-
ated with reflective surveys (Strizhakova, Tsarenko, and Ruth 2012). To elicit a strong
emotional response, we developed two assessment briefs (see Appendix): (a) non-auth-
entic assessments and (b) highly authentic assessments. The scenarios were developed
in consultation with three experts in assessment design (i.e. Director of Teaching, Scho-
larly Academic, and Industry Lecturer) to reflect Gulikers, Bastiaens, and Kirschner
(2004) 5DF of authenticity. We pre-tested the two scenarios with a sample of 40 under-
graduate students. The results show that the scenario manipulation worked as intended.
Participants who read the non-authentic assessment scenario reported lower perception
of ‘overall authenticity’ (Gulikers, Bastiaens, and Kirschner 2006) compared to those
respondents reading the highly authentic assessment scenario (MNon-authentic = 3.61 <
MAuthentic = 5.26, F = 17.39, p < 0.01). Therefore, we proceeded to use the scenario
for the full data collection.
Sample and data collection
An anonymous, online, self-administered survey was used for data collection. The
researchers invited undergraduate subject coordinators in the Business Faculty of a
Studies in Higher Education 407
university to support the data collection project by posting the survey invitation on the
subject learning management system (LMS) website. Links to the survey were posted
in the first week of the term and a reminder message was posted two weeks after the
initial survey invitation. For every completed survey, a $2 donation was made to a
charity organisation to support education programmes in under-developed nations. Stu-
dents were randomly assigned to non-authentic or highly authentic scenarios and asked
to complete identical sets of questions. The data collection was completed within four
weeks from the initial survey invitation post in the subject LMS. The respondents in the
study were 120 undergraduate students enrolled within the Business Faculty of an Aus-
tralian university. The majority of respondents are female (62%) aged between 18 and
25 years old (69%). International students represent 15% of the total respondents.
Measures
The measurement scales used in this study were mostly adapted from empirically vali-
dated scales from prior research (Arnett, German, and Hunt 2003; Gulikers, Bastiaens,
and Kirschner 2006; Helgesen and Nesset 2007; Rothwell, Herbert, and Rothwell
2008). We used 7-point Likert-type scales (agree–disagree) for our constructs. The psy-
chometric properties presented in Table 1 reveal that all the scales are reliable and valid
(factor loadings ≥ .70, Cronbach’s alpha ≥ .80). As revealed in Table 2, the square root
of average variance extracted for each construct exceeds the correlations between vari-
ables, thus indicating discriminant validity. In sum, all constructs in this study demon-
strate adequate reliability and validity.
Hypotheses testing
To test the direct effect of authentic assessments on satisfaction, the indirect effect of
authentic assessments on promoting behaviour through satisfaction, and the potential
moderating role of student career orientation, a conditional process analysis using
Model 7 of Hayes (2012) PROCESS macro was conducted. This approach is superior
Table 1. Psychometric properties.
SFL t-Value α
Overall authenticity (Gulikers, Bastiaens, and Kirschner 2006)
This assessment is clearly oriented to professional requirements .769 7.841 .869
This assessment would prepare me for my future profession .930 9.169
This assessment is oriented to my future profession .777 7.915
Satisfaction (Helgesen and Nesset 2007)
I would think I had done the right thing if I decided to enrol in .851 11.181 .922
this unit
I would be satisfied with the education I received in this unit .913 12.477
I would be satisfied with my experience in this unit .907 12.347
Promoting (Arnett, German, and Hunt 2003)
In social situations, I would speak favourably about the unit .912 12.321 .942
I would ‘talk-up’ this unit to people I know .907 12.212
I would bring up the unit in a positive way in conversations .934 12.78
I have with friends, classmates and acquaintances
Career Ambition (Rothwell, Herbert, and Rothwell 2008)
I want to be in a position to do mostly work which I really like N/A N/A N/A
408 L. T. James and R. Casidy
Table 2. Correlations.
Mean SD AUTH SAT PRO CO
Authenticity (AUTH) 5.278 1.249 .829
Satisfaction (SAT) 5.306 1.213 .655** .891
Promoting (PRO) 4.808 1.346 .656** .780** .918
Career Orientation (CO) 6.417 .751 .043 .004 −.067 N/A
Note: Square root of average variance extracted.
**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
to Baron and Kenny’s (1986) procedure according to recent literature (Zhao, Lynch,
and Chen 2010). Authentic assessment was entered as the independent variable, pro-
moting behaviour was entered as the outcome variable, and satisfaction and career
orientation were entered as mediator and moderator, respectively. Table 2 summarises
the means and standard deviations of all constructs.
In accordance with Hayes and Matthes’ (2009) recommendation, an analysis was
conducted of 5000 bootstrapped samples. Statistical significance of the indirect effect
was tested using a 95% bias-corrected confidence interval (Preacher and Hayes
2008). Overall, it was found that authentic assessment and career orientation accounted
for a significant amount of the total variance in satisfaction (F (3, 116) = 11.633, p
< .001; R2 = .231). Similarly, authentic assessment and satisfaction explained a signifi-
cant amount of the total variance in promoting behaviour (F (2, 117) = 93.627, p < .001;
R2 = .615).
The first hypothesis, which predicted that authentic assessment is positively related
to satisfaction, was supported by the analysis. Highly authentic assessment leads to a
greater level of satisfaction with the subject of study (β = 1.08, SE = .200, = 5.42, p
< .001). This suggests that the more authentic an assessment, the more satisfied will stu-
dents be with the subject of study. Similarly, H2, which predicted a direct and positive
effects of authentic assessment on promoting behaviour (β = 1.14, SE = .225, = 5.08, p
< .001), was confirmed. This implies that the more authentic an assessment, the more
likely it is that students will promote the subject to their peers.
H3 predicted an indirect effect, with satisfaction mediating the relationship between
authentic assessments and promoting behaviour. Given that the direct effect of auth-
entic assessment on satisfaction is moderated, the indirect effect will also be conditional
on students’ career orientation. In other words, while satisfaction may emerge as a sig-
nificant mediator between authentic assessment and promoting behaviour, this indirect
effect is dependent on students’ career orientation. This is called moderated mediation
or a conditional indirect effect (Hayes and Matthes 2009). In support of H4, our analy-
sis found that students’ career orientation has significant, positive moderating effects on
the relationship between authentic assessment and satisfaction (β = .58, SE = .26, =
2.19, p < .05). The effects of authentic assessment on satisfaction is stronger among
highly career-oriented students (β = 1.42, SE = .25, = 5.68, p < .001) than less career-
oriented students (β = .65, SE = .28, = 2.32, p < .05; see Figure 2). The results also
reveal that the indirect effect of authentic assessment on promoting behaviour
through satisfaction is significant, thereby supporting H3. As predicted, the indirect
effects are stronger among highly career-oriented students (β = 1.16, SE = .24, = 4.93,
p < .001) than less career-oriented students (β = .53, SE = .19, = 2.80, p < .01). The
mediation effect can be regarded as ‘full’ (total) mediation as the direct effects of
Studies in Higher Education 409
authentic assessment on promotion behaviour became non-significant (β = .25, SE
= .173, = 1.47, p > .05) after the inclusion of the mediating variable. This implies that
authentic assessment alone would not lead to promoting behaviour among students.
Rather, promoting behaviour would occur only if students are satisfied with the
subject. Figure 3 summarises the hypothesised results of the conditional process
analysis.
Discussion
In order to respond to issues of graduate employability and increasing employers’
expectations, higher education institutions have endeavoured to design authentic curri-
cula that approximate real work environments. The key contribution of this study is in
providing support for the argument that authentic assessments could drive students’
positive attitudes and behavioural intentions. We tested the hypotheses using an empiri-
cal model looking into the direct and indirect effects of authentic assessments on
student promoting behaviour through satisfaction as the mediating variable. The
results provided support for all proposed hypotheses.
Our findings on the relationship between authentic assessment and satisfaction are
consistent with prior research assertion that students have a more favourable attitude
towards those assessments that are related to the business world (Karns 2006). While
the notion of student satisfaction has been extensively researched in the literature
(Brown and Mazzarol 2009; Carter 2009; Clemes, Gan, and Tzu-Hui 2007; Elliott
and Healy 2001; Sojkin, Bartkowiak, and Skuza 2012), most student satisfaction
research in the past are based on student unit/course evaluations with little insights
into how authentic assessments would affect student satisfaction with the subject. An
objective comparison of these effects based on unit evaluation alone is problematic
due to the existence of other factors such as teachers’ competence, class environment,
and learning resources that may affect student overall satisfaction. Our study design
allows us to directly observe the relationship between authentic assessments and satis-
faction while minimising the potential distorting effects of other confounding factors.
Figure 2. Interaction graph: student satisfaction as a function of authentic assessments and stu-
dents’ career orientation.
410 L. T. James and R. Casidy
Figure 3. Statistical diagram of conditional process analysis. *p < .05 **p < .01. All reported
coefficients are unstandardised. HCO: high career orientation and LCO: low career orientation.
To the best of our knowledge, this research is the first to examine the relationship
between authentic assessment and student satisfaction using a scenario-based design.
In doing so, we have contributed to the body of knowledge on student satisfaction
by providing empirical evidence on the significance of authentic assessment as an ante-
cedent of student satisfaction.
The results with respect to the moderating role of career orientation is consistent
with previous studies on student achievement orientation (Elliot and Harackiewicz
1994). Our results have provided evidence that authentic assessment could drive
student satisfaction, but the effects are stronger among highly career-oriented students.
Prior research asserted that students with a higher achievement orientation will be more
likely to value competency and attain high levels of skill performance (Elliot and
Harackiewicz 1994). These students are therefore more likely to have a positive attitude
towards authentic assessments. The career orientation variable in our study, to an
extent, reflects students’ level of achievement orientation. Thus, this study has contrib-
uted to the body of literature on the relationship between students’ individual charac-
teristics and their attitude towards assessment (Kirby and Downs 2007), within the
context of the business discipline.
The indirect relationships between authentic assessment and promoting behaviour –
with the mediating role of student satisfaction – are of particular interest in this study.
The existing literature does not adequately explain whether authentic assessments
would drive promoting behaviour among students. Our results found that authentic
assessments alone are not sufficient to drive student promoting behaviour. Authentic
assessments drive student satisfaction, which in turn positively affects promoting be-
haviour. The mechanism by which authentic assessment affects promoting behaviour
is in itself a contribution to the body of literature. The results also provide further
empirical evidence about the central role of student satisfaction in driving positive be-
havioural intention among students (Carter 2009; Sojkin, Bartkowiak, and Skuza 2012;
Trang Phuc 2011).
Implications for practice
This research has provided further empirical support for the importance of integrating
authentic assessments in curriculum design (Gulikers, Bastiaens, and Kirschner 2004;
Janesick 2001; Larkin 2014; Sridharan and Mustard 2015). Our results suggest that less
Studies in Higher Education 411
authentic assessments such as multiple-choice exams and other assessments that
examine one level of thinking, rather than higher-order skills with a demonstration
of knowledge will result in students being less satisfied. While neither the current
research, nor other research examined in the literature review recommends replacing
all traditional assessments in favour of authentic assessments, higher education insti-
tutions should actively monitor the perceived authenticity of the assessments in their
programme. Integrating more authentic assessments within curriculum design will
result in greater student satisfaction in the short term and better graduate employability
in the long term.
Our findings reveal that authentic assessments would ultimately drive promoting
behaviour among students. Students who perceive their subject (i.e. in terms of assess-
ment) to be highly authentic are likely to ‘talk-up’ the subject to people they know,
introduce the unit in a positive way in conversations, and speak favourably about the
subject. This will ultimately result in a stronger university reputation, which in turn
could attract prospective students. Higher education institutions should engage and
encourage students to share their experience about the subject with their peers. The
institutions could integrate social media in the LMS of each subject, allowing students
to share their comments about the subject through social media, thereby maximising
positive word-of-mouth about the subject and the institution to their peers.
Finally, our findings reveal that authentic assessments are more appealing to stu-
dents who are career-oriented. In the increasingly competitive environment, higher edu-
cation institutions could distinguish themselves from other competitors by emphasising
the authenticity of their curriculum design, subsequently attracting career-oriented stu-
dents who would have a favourable attitude towards authentic assessments.
Limitations
The findings presented in the study are constrained by a number of limitations. First,
our authentic assessment scenario was designed to reflect a real-world environment
within the general business discipline in the form of report writing. The generalisability
of our findings into other disciplines should be done with caution. Students in other dis-
ciplines may have different criteria of what represents a genuinely authentic assessment
task. Future research could extend the generalisability of this study’s findings by inte-
grating other types of authentic assessments (e.g. oral presentations, role-playing, per-
formances, and situational judgement tests) and focusing on a wider range of
disciplines.
The second limitation relates to the sample size and sampling strategy. This study is
restricted by its small sample size of only 120 students, which does not meet the sample
size required to be representative of the undergraduate student population in Australia.
Larger sample sizes may allow for subgroup analysis and exploration of whether factors
such as students’ demographic and socio-economic (i.e. family education) backgrounds
could influence their attitude towards authentic assessments. Further, because non-
probability sampling does not give population members an equal chance of being
chosen in the sample, there is a much greater risk of sample bias and the sample
being unrepresentative of the population (Hair, Lukas, and Miller 2012). Sampling
that is truly systematic, random, and stratified would offer a better representation of
the student population. Future studies could involve more universities across the
country. Further studies could also compare students’ attitudes towards authentic
assessments at different stages of their studies (i.e. undergraduate versus postgraduate,
412 L. T. James and R. Casidy
first year versus final year). For example, final-year students may be more oriented
towards their career and thus might have a more positive attitude towards authentic
assessments than do the first-year students. There may also be some value in asking
recent graduates to share their experiences of entering the job market; do they
believe that authentic assessments could have better prepared them for the workforce?
What skills have they acquired and what experiences have they encountered during
their tertiary studies that have been particularly helpful, or needed more development?
It is also important to note that an assessment’s authenticity is subjective, and there-
fore different stakeholders will judge it differently. Potentially, students, educators, and
employers are the stakeholders who will judge the authentic nature of assessments. In
their study, Gulikers, Bastiaens, and Kirschner (2006) found that while the surveyed
educators perceived all five dimensions as important facets in determining an assess-
ment’s authenticity, the surveyed students did not perceive social context as an impor-
tant facet. Therefore, an examination of assessment authenticity from multi-stakeholder
perspective is important, and should be further examined in future research.
Conclusion
This study examined the relationship between authentic assessments, student satisfac-
tion, and promoting behaviour within the context of business discipline. The hypoth-
eses testing revealed that there are several statistically significant relationships. First,
authentic assessments are positively related to student satisfaction and promoting be-
haviour. Second, the relationship between authentic assessment and promoting behav-
iour is mediated by satisfaction. Finally, students’ career orientation significantly
moderates the relationship between authentic assessment and satisfaction.
Analysis of the relationships established in this research suggests that student satis-
faction and promoting behaviour are determined by the university (through the design
of authentic assessments) and by the student (through their career orientation). Higher
education institutions should engage key stakeholders, including students and employ-
ers in integrating elements of authenticity in their assessment design, as this would posi-
tively influence students’ attitude and behavioural intention in the short term, as well as
graduates’ employability in the long term. It is expected that this study will be a catalyst
to attract more research on this important topic.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
References
Anderson, E. W. 1998. “Customer Satisfaction and Word of Mouth.” Journal of Service
Research 1 (1): 5–17.
Arnett, D. B., S. D. German, and S. D. Hunt. 2003. “The Identity Salience Model of Relationship
Marketing Success: The Case of Nonprofit Marketing.” Journal of Marketing 67 (2): 89–
105.
Ashford-Rowe, K., J. Herrington, and C. Brown. 2014. “Establishing the Critical Elements that
Determine Authentic Assessment.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 39 (2):
205–22.
Baron, R. M., and D. A. Kenny. 1986. “The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social
Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations.” Journal of
Personality & Social Psychology 51 (6): 1173–82.
Studies in Higher Education 413
Birgin, O. 2011. “Pre-service Mathematics Teachers’ Views on the use of Portfolios in their
Education as an Alternative Assessment Method.” Educational Research and Reviews 6
(11): 710–21.
Briggs, S., and A. Wilson. 2007. “Which University? A Study of the Influence of Cost and
Information Factors on Scottish Undergraduate Choice.” Journal of Higher Education
Policy and Management 29 (1): 57–72.
Brown, R., and T. Mazzarol. 2009. “The Importance of Institutional Image to Student
Satisfaction and Loyalty within Higher Education.” Higher Education 58 (1): 81–95.
Bruggink, T. H., and K. Siddiqui. 1995. “An Econometric Model of Alumni Giving: A Case
Study for a Liberal Arts College.” The American Economist, 39 (2): 53–60.
Carter, R. E. 2009. “The Impact of Perceived Service Quality on MBA Student Satisfaction and
Recommendations: Do Expectations Matter?” Services Marketing Quarterly 30 (3): 234–
48.
Chevalier, J. A., and D. Mayzlin. 2006. “The Effect of Word of Mouth on Sales: Online Book
Reviews.” Journal of Marketing Research 43 (3): 345–54.
Christiansen, T., and S. S. Tax. 2000. “Measuring Word of Mouth: The Questions of Who and
When?” Journal of Marketing Communications 6 (3): 185–99.
Christophel, D. M. 1990. “The Relationships among Teacher Immediacy Behaviors, Student
Motivation, and Learning.” Communication Education 39 (4): 323–40.
Clemes, M. D., C. E. C. Gan, and K. Tzu-Hui. 2007. “University Student Satisfaction: An
Empirical Analysis.” Journal of Marketing for Higher Education 17 (2): 292–325.
Cranmer, S. 2006. “Enhancing Graduate Employability: Best Intentions and Mixed Outcomes.”
Studies in Higher Education 31 (2): 169–84.
Elliot, A. J., and J. M. Harackiewicz. 1994. “Goal Setting, Achievement Orientation, and
Intrinsic Motivation: A Mediational Analysis.” Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology 66 (5): 968–80.
Elliott, K. M., and M. A. Healy. 2001. “Key Factors Influencing Student Satisfaction Related to
Recruitment and Retention.” Journal of Marketing for Higher Education 10 (4): 1–11.
Gault, J., E. Leach, and M. Duey. 2010. “Effects of Business Internships on Job Marketability:
The Employers’ Perspective.” Education + Training 52 (1): 76–88.
Graduatecareers Australia. 2015. “Graduate Destinations 2014.” Report for Australian
Government Department of Education and Training.
Gulikers, J. T. M., T. J. Bastiaens, and P. A. Kirschner. 2004. “A Five-Dimensional Framework
for Authentic Assessment.” Educational Technology Research and Development 52 (3): 67–
86.
Gulikers, J., T. Bastiaens, and P. Kirschner. 2006. “Authentic Assessment, Student and Teacher
Perceptions: The Practical Value of the Five-Dimensional Framework.” Journal of
Vocational Education and Training 58 (3): 337–57.
Gulikers, J. T. M., T. J. Bastiaens, and R. L. Martens. 2005. “The Surplus Value of an Authentic
Learning Environment.” Computers in Human Behavior 21 (3): 509–21.
Gulikers, J. T., L. Kester, P. A. Kirschner, and T. J. Bastiaens. 2008. “The Effect of Practical
Experience on Perceptions of Assessment Authenticity, Study Approach, and Learning
Outcomes.” Learning and Instruction 18 (2): 172–86.
Hair, J., B. Lukas, and K. Miller. 2012. Marketing Research. Sydney: McGraw Hill.
Hayes, A. F. 2012. “Process: A Versatile Computational Tool for Observed Variable Mediation,
Moderation, and Conditional Process Modelling [White Paper].” Accessed July 29, 2015.
http://is.muni.cz/el/1423/podzim2014/PSY704/50497615/hayes_2012_navod_process.pdf.
Hayes, A. F., and J. Matthes. 2009. “Computational Procedures for Probing Interactions in OLS
and Logistic Regression: SPSS and SAS Implementations.” Behavior Research Methods 41
(3): 924–36.
Healy, J. 2015a. “The Australian Labour Market in 2014: Still ill?” Journal of Industrial
Relations 57 (3): 348–65.
Healy, J. 2015b. “Graduating into a Weak Job Market: Why so Many Grads Can’t Find Work.”
Accessed July 28. https://theconversation.com/graduating-into-a-weak-job-market-why-so-
many-grads-cant-find-work-45222.
Helgesen, Ø. 2008. “Marketing for Higher Education: A Relationship Marketing Approach.”
Journal of Marketing for Higher Education 18 (1): 50–78.
414 L. T. James and R. Casidy
Helgesen, Ø., and E. Nesset. 2007. “Images, Satisfaction and Antecedents: Drivers of Student
Loyalty? A Case Study of a Norwegian University College.” Corporate Reputation
Review 10 (1): 38–59.
Jackson, D., and E. Chapman. 2012. “Non-Technical Skill Gaps in Australian Business
Graduates.” Education+ Training 54 (2/3): 95–113.
Janesick, V. J. 2001. The Assessment Debate: A Reference Handbook. Santa Barbara: ABC-
CLIO.
Judge, T. A., and J. D. Kammeyer-Mueller. 2012. “On the Value of Aiming High: The Causes
and Consequences of Ambition.” Journal of Applied Psychology 97 (4): 758–75.
Kaider, F., and R. Hains-Wesson. 2015. Measuring Impact and Evidence: Playing with and
Making WIL in the Sandpit. Melbourne: Deakin University.
Karns, G. L. 2006. “Learning Style Differences in the Perceived Effectiveness of Learning
Activities.” Journal of Marketing Education 28 (1): 56–63.
Kearney, S. 2013. “Improving Engagement: The Use of ‘Authentic Self-and Peer-Assessment
for Learning’ to Enhance the Student Learning Experience.” Assessment & Evaluation in
Higher Education 38 (7): 875–91.
Kirby, N. F., and C. T. Downs. 2007. “Self-Assessment and the Disadvantaged Student:
Potential for Encouraging Self-Regulated Learning?” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher
Education 32 (4): 475–94.
Klenowski, V. 2000. “Portfolios: Promoting Teaching.” Assessment in Education: Principles,
Policy & Practice 7 (2): 215–36.
Kumar, V., E. Jones, R. Venkatesan, and R. P. Leone. 2011. “Is Market Orientation a Source of
Sustainable Competitive Advantage or Simply the Cost of Competing?” Journal of
Marketing 75 (1): 16–30.
Lam, R. 2015. “Assessment as Learning: Examining a Cycle of Teaching, Learning, and
Assessment of Writing in the Portfolio-Based Classroom.” Studies in Higher Education,
1–18. doi:10.1080/03075079.2014.999317.
Larkin, T. 2014. “The Student Conference: A Model of Authentic Assessment.” International
Journal of Engineering Pedagogy (iJEP) 4 (2): 36–46.
Lent, R. W., D. Singley, H.-B. Sheu, J. A. Schmidt, and L. C. Schmidt. 2007. “Relation of
Social-Cognitive Factors to Academic Satisfaction in Engineering Students.” Journal of
Career Assessment 15 (1): 87–97.
Luscombe, J., I. Lewis, and H. C. Biggs. 2013. “Essential Elements for Recruitment and
Retention: Generation y.” Education + Training 55 (3): 272–90.
Mael, F., and B. E. Ashforth. 1992. “Alumni and Their Alma Mater: A Partial Test of the
Reformulated Model of Organizational Identification.” Journal of Organizational
Behavior 13 (2): 103–23.
Martens, R., T. Bastiaens, and P. A. Kirschner. 2007. “New Learning Design in Distance
Education: The Impact on Student Perception and Motivation.” Distance Education 28
(1): 81–93.
Maxwell, T. 2012. “Assessment in Higher Education in the Professions: Action Research as an
Authentic Assessment Task.” Teaching in Higher Education 17 (6): 686–96.
Oliver, B. 2015. “Redefining Graduate Employability and Work-Integrated Learning: Proposals
for Effective Higher Education in Disrupted Economies.” Teaching and Learning for
Graduate Employability 6 (1): 56–65.
Panizzon, D., and L. Levins. 1997. “An Analysis of the Role of Peers in Supporting Female
Students’ Choices in Science Subjects.” Research in Science Education 27 (2): 251–70.
Patton, H. L. 2000. “How Administrators can Influence Student University Selection Criteria.”
Higher Education in Europe 25 (3): 345–50.
Pintrich, P. R. 2003. “A Motivational Science Perspective on the Role of Student Motivation in
Learning and Teaching Contexts.” Journal of Educational Psychology 95 (4): 667–86.
Pool, L. D., and P. Sewell. 2007. “The Key to Employability: Developing a Practical Model of
Graduate Employability.” Education + Training 49 (4): 277–89.
Preacher, K. J., and A. F. Hayes. 2008. “Asymptotic and Resampling Strategies for Assessing
and Comparing Indirect Effects in Multiple Mediator Models.” Behavior Research Methods
40 (3): 879–91.
Rafiq, M., and P. K. Ahmed. 1995. “Using the 7Ps as a Generic Marketing Mix.” Marketing
Intelligence & Planning 13 (9): 4–15.
Studies in Higher Education 415
Rothwell, A., I. Herbert, and F. Rothwell. 2008. “Self-Perceived Employability: Construction
and Initial Validation of a Scale for University Students.” Journal of Vocational Behavior
73 (1): 1–12.
Scouller, K. M., and M. Prosser. 1994. “Students’ Experiences in Studying for Multiple Choice
Question Examinations.” Studies in Higher Education 19 (3): 267–79.
Sojkin, B., P. Bartkowiak, and A. Skuza. 2012. “Determinants of Higher Education Choices and
Student Satisfaction: The Case of Poland.” Higher Education 63 (5): 565–81.
Sridharan, B., and J. Mustard. 2015.” Authentic Assessment Methods: A Practical Handbook for
Teaching Staff.” Accessed July 20, 2015. https://blogs.deakin.edu.au/learning-innovations/
authentic-assessment-methods-a-practical-handbook-for-teaching-staff/.
Strizhakova, Y., Y. Tsarenko, and J. A. Ruth. 2012. ““I’m Mad and I can’t Get That Service
Failure off My Mind”: Coping and Rumination as Mediators of Anger Effects on
Customer Intentions.” Journal of Service Research 15 (4): 414–29.
Taylor, F. 2013. The Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Filiquarian Publishing.
Thomas, P. R., and J. D. Bain. 1984. “Contextual Dependence of Learning Approaches: The
Effects of Assessments.” Human Learning: Journal of Practical Research &
Applications 3 (4): 227–40.
Tout, D., G. Pancini, and R. Mccormack. 2014. “Using Mobile Peer Mentors for Student
Engagement: Student Rovers in the Learning Commons.” Higher Education Research &
Development 33 (3): 595–609.
Trang Phuc, T. 2011. “Effects of Market Orientation on Student Satisfaction: The Student’s
Perspective.” Proceedings of AMA Winter Educators’ Conference, Austin, February 18–20.
Trusov, M., R. E. Bucklin, and K. Pauwels. 2009. “Effects of Word-of-Mouth Versus
Traditional Marketing: Findings From an Internet Social Networking Site.” Journal of
Marketing 73 (5): 90–102.
Vos, L. 2015. “Simulation Games in Business and Marketing Education: How Educators Assess
Student Learning from Simulations.” The International Journal of Management Education
13 (1): 57–74.
Whiteley, S., and J. Porter. 1998. “Student Perceptions of Subject Selection: Longitudinal
Perspectives from Queensland Schools.” Accessed November 23, 2015. http://www.qsa.
qld.edu.au/publications/research/te/tepa/stud-perc-98.pdf.
Zhao, X., J. G. Lynch, and Q. Chen. 2010. “Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and Truths
about Mediation Analysis.” Journal of Consumer Research 37 (2): 197–206.
Appendix.
Scenario A: low authenticity
You are enrolled in a business subject and this is a brief description of your major assignment
that is worth 50% in the unit.
The assignment asks you to observe a case study based on a fictional problem or scenario
that may occur within a specific industry sector.
You are NOT allowed to make any contact with relevant companies or its representatives.
You are then asked to present a report to the assessor addressing various issues or questions
based on the fictional scenario contained within the case study presented.
Scenario B: high authenticity
You are enrolled in a business subject and this is a brief description of your major assign-
ment that is worth 50% in the unit.
The assignment asks you to observe a case study based on an actual problem experienced by
a company.
You are then provided with an internship opportunity within the company to interact with
company representatives in a workplace setting.
You are then asked to present a report to both the assessor and company representatives pro-
posing strategic solutions to the company in order to address their problems.
