What is Authentic Assessment? A Practical Guide for the Age of AI
Authentic assessment asks students to demonstrate what they know and can do by applying knowledge and skills in meaningful contexts. Instead of measuring only recall, authentic assessments reveal students' ability to apply, transfer, judge, explain, create, perform, and revise. Authentic learning is the broader approach that creates the conditions for this kind of evidence.
Put simply, authentic learning is the experience; authentic assessment is the evidence.
Authentic assessment in the age of AI
How can educators get an accurate picture of what students actually know, and how can they create AI-resistant and cheat-resistant assignments and assessments? Educators everywhere are worried about the validity of their assessments now that AI has made assessing traditional content like essays, slides, and worksheets unreliable.
Instead of trying to catch kids cheating we can design assignments that elevate engagement and foster deeper learning. The question should not be “Did AI write this?” but rather, “Did this assignment require students to think, apply, revise, and make meaning in ways that are visible?”
The answer is one that New York and other states are addressing with Portrait of a Graduate and Portrait of a Learner programs. The New York Inspires policy focuses on evidence of learning, portfolios, and other performance-based assessments meant to facilitate deeper learning. All of this relies heavily on authentic learning and assessment.
Anatomy of authentic learning and assessment
Authenticity can show up in both the learning experience and the evidence students produce.
Meaning/personal connection: The work matters or connects to something students care about.
Disciplinary practice: Students work the way historians, scientists, journalists, designers, mathematicians, artists, and other practitioners.
Purpose and audience: Students create, perform, solve, or communicate for a purpose beyond simply completing an assignment.
Application: Students make decisions about how and when to use what they know rather than merely reproducing information.
Authentic assessment adds another requirement:
Credible evidence: The task reveals students’ thinking, judgment, application, explanation, revision, reflection, or performance.
For example,
Traditional assignment | Authentic assignment |
“Write a five-paragraph essay explaining…” | “Create a field guide, public service message, explainer, exhibit, podcast, design proposal, simulation, or presentation that uses the concept to help a real or imagined audience.” |
An authentic task creates the opportunity for meaningful application; an authentic assessment also gathers credible evidence of the thinking and learning behind the final product.
Authentic learning, project-based learning, and “real-world” work
What is Authentic learning?
Authentic learning places students in situations where they use knowledge in ways that resemble how that knowledge is actually used beyond a traditional school assignment. Students are not simply asked to remember information or produce a prescribed product. They must decide what information matters, apply knowledge and skills in context, make judgments, navigate constraints and ambiguity, and create or perform something that provides meaningful evidence of what they understand.
The important idea is application in context: knowledge becomes something students use to investigate, decide, solve, design, explain, or create—not simply something they reproduce for a grade.
Authenticity is less about whether the setting is literally “the real world” and more about whether the intellectual work is genuine.
What is Project-based learning (PBL)?
Project-based learning is a specific instructional approach in which students learn important knowledge and skills through sustained investigation of a complex question, problem, or challenge, typically culminating in a product or presentation. High-quality PBL includes many of the same characteristics as authentic learning—sustained inquiry, student agency, reflection, critique, a public product, and authenticity.
But the concepts are not interchangeable.
A project is a format. Authenticity describes the nature of the learning.
A student might spend three weeks creating an elaborate model, slideshow, or video and still be following teacher-prescribed steps, reproducing information, and creating something whose only real purpose is to receive a grade. That may be a project, but its authenticity is limited.
Conversely, authentic learning doesn’t always require an extended project. A student defending an interpretation of primary-source evidence, diagnosing a patient from a complex case, conducting and revising a scientific investigation, or responding to questions during an oral defense may be engaged in highly authentic learning even if no traditional “project” is involved.
For authentic learning, ask: Are students using what they know to do meaningful, complex intellectual work? For authentic assessment, ask: What evidence will show us how well they can do it?
Concept | What it does | Require a project? | Key question |
Authentic learning | A way of designing learning experiences around meaningful application, inquiry, agency, reflection, and context | No | Are students using knowledge meaningfully rather than merely reproducing it? |
Project-based learning | A particular instructional method in which a sustained project becomes the vehicle for learning content and skills | Yes | Is the project doing the teaching rather than merely coming after the teaching? |
"Real-world" learning/work | A feature of context, audience, task, tools, or purpose | No | Does the work resemble or matter in contexts beyond school? |
Authentic assessment | How we gather evidence that students can apply what they know | No | Does the task reveal application, transfer, judgment, process, and understanding? |
Real-world relevance without cognitive challenge is not rigor. Cognitive challenge without meaningful application may not be authentic. Strong authentic assessment requires both.
The case for authentic learning and assessment
Standards stay the same; the evidence changes
Standards tell us what students should know and be able to do. Authentic learning asks students to apply that knowledge in increasingly complex situations. Different assessments answer different questions.
A quiz can efficiently tell you whether a student remembers vocabulary or can execute a procedure. It’s weaker evidence of whether the student can decide when, why, and how to use that knowledge in a new situation. Authentic assessment expands the assessment repertoire rather than requiring educators to abandon traditional methods. (Sokhanvar et al, 2021)
A well-designed, interdisciplinary authentic assignment can address many standards at once, perhaps more than traditional assignments that tend to be more narrow in scope.
Rigor is about cognitive demand
Research on authentic intellectual work, project-based learning, performance assessment, and related student-centered approaches challenges the assumption that meaningful application comes at the expense of academic achievement.
Students given assignments demanding more challenging intellectual work showed greater-than-average gains on standardized reading and math tests and stronger performance on state assessments. (Newman et al, 2001)
a medium-to-large positive effect of PBL on academic achievement compared with traditional instruction. (Chen and Yang. 2019)
project based learning improved AP test scores for both high- and low-income students compared to lecture-only classes. (Saavedra et al)
Authentic learning can demand more intellectual work, not less
One of the biggest misconceptions is that rigor means:
more content
more questions
harder tests
less student choice
fewer supports.
Rather than defining rigor primarily through volume, speed, or difficulty, authentic learning emphasizes cognitive demand: asking students to decide, apply, analyze, justify, revise, and reflect. Authentic assessment then gathers evidence of those processes rather than evaluating only the final answer.
Authentic assessment research emphasizes this kind of cognitive challenge through application, judgment, self-regulation, and metacognition. One study specifically found that authentic assessment is associated with learning, autonomy, motivation, self-regulation, and metacognition. (Villarroel et al. 2018)
The authentic challenge doesn’t reduce the content requirement, it asks students to apply it to a novel situation through their own experience.
Relevance, agency, and purpose can increase engagement
A key benefit to authentic learning is that it provides relevance, opportunities for agency, and can provide a meaningful purpose for hard work–all ways to activate intrinsic motivation.
Intrinsic motivation is associated with student success and well-being, and that personally valuing an activity is particularly related to persistence, whereas extrinsic motivation does not. (Howard et al, 2021)
Authentic assessments improve student engagement, satisfaction, effort toward educational goals, and transferable skills including communication, collaboration, problem solving, critical thinking, self-awareness, and confidence. (Shokhanvar and Sokhanvar, 2021) Similar results are found in higher education settings. (Vlachopoulos & Makri, 2024)
Research conducted by the Hewlitt Foundation found that high schools that use deeper learning methods like those facilitated by authentic learning, had 9% higher graduation rates, 4% higher college attendance rates, scored better on PISA, and had higher rates of academic engagement, motivation, self-efficacy, and collaborative skills. (Neason, 2014)
Authentic learning still requires good teaching
Student-centered learning doesn’t mean teacher-absent instruction. Teachers still model, explain, scaffold, coach, question, and provide direct instruction. The difference is that students eventually use that knowledge with increasing independence in meaningful contexts. Research says that novices generally learn less efficiently when they’re expected to discover complex content with insufficient instructional guidance. (Kirchner et al, 2006)
Credible evidence of learning
The final learning artifact is important, but may not be enough on its own to get a full picture of student learning. A polished essay, video, presentation, slide deck, or AI-assisted product may hide as much as it reveals.
Credible evidence of learning might include:
performance
explanation
process documentation
drafts/revisions
reflection
questioning
oral defense
portfolio evidence
teacher observation
multiple measures
These strategies also make assignments cheat-resistant and AI-resistant since each of them requires provenance and a student's unique intellectual fingerprint–a major vulnerability of traditional, standardized assessments.
Where authentic learning and assessment can go wrong
When projects lose rigor
Projects don’t replace standards; they create a context for applying them. Rigor comes from the depth of thinking students must demonstrate—not from whether the work ends in a test or a project.
The grading reliability challenge in authentic assessment
Grading authentic assignments faces challenges similar to grading an essay or judging a debate. Style, originality, impact, and taste are key qualities of those assignments, yet also difficult to quantify or design rubrics that can predict novel outcomes. Instead of grading only what can easily be counted, grade what counts. Complex performance outcomes require:
clear criteria
exemplars
calibration
multiple measures
repeated evidence
In my course, Uncheatable Assessments, I offer a grading strategy called The Four Pillars of Assessment, that triangulates assessment by taking feedback from multiple stakeholders. Other resources for evaluating authentic learning: How to evaluate using project based learning, and Tips for grading authentic assessments.
Equity and access matter
Students may not have equal access to outside resources, family expertise, technology, transportation, or time, so design around that:
provide essential resources at school, including technology
separate learning outcomes from production polish
don't confuse privilege with competence
These are important factors in any kind of learning experience, and aren't reasons to abandon authentic learning. They're design problems we need to solve.
Designing authentic assessments for the age of AI
AI has made authentic assessment more important because a polished final product is no longer reliable evidence of what a student knows or can do. An essay, presentation, image, or piece of code can still be valuable work, but educators increasingly need evidence of the thinking, decisions, application, process, and reflection behind it.
That changes the assessment design challenge. Instead of trying to create assignments that AI cannot complete, design assessment systems that produce credible evidence of student learning.
Instead, design assignments for:
judgment
application
personal connection
decision-making
explanation
process
reflection
The goal is not to AI-proof school. It is to design learning worth doing.
Learn more about designing and grading authentic assignments with my practical guide for educators, Storytelling With Purpose: Digital Projects to Ignite Student Curiosity, and companion course, Uncheatable Assessments.
Citations
Resources by Michael Hernandez
Hernandez, M. (2016, June 6). Evaluation within project-based learning. Edutopia. Article
Hernandez, M. (2017, September 26). From analog to digital: Why and how to teach students to write for an online audience. EdSurge. Article
Hernandez, M. (2024a, September 19). Promoting authentic learning with multimedia research projects. Edutopia. Article
Hernandez, M. (2024b, November 1). The “uncheatable” projects students want. Educational Leadership, 82(3). Article
Hernandez, M. (2025a, November 1). Tips for grading authentic assessments. Educational Leadership, 83(3). Article
Hernandez, M. (2025b, September 1). Five ways to foster a culture of belonging. Educational Leadership, 83(1). Article
Hernandez, M. (2026a, August 3). I used AI to build AI-resistant assignments. EdSurge. Article
Hernandez, M. (2026b, April 1). When assignments invite wonder. Educational Leadership, 83(7). Article
Other citations
ABLConnect. (n.d.). Authentic learning (simulations, lab, field). Harvard University. Harvard ABLConnect source
Center for Innovative Teaching & Learning. (n.d.). Authentic assessment: Assessing student learning. Indiana University Bloomington. Indiana University source
Center for Research on Learning and Teaching. (n.d.). Authentic assessments. University of Michigan. University of Michigan source
Chen, C.-H., & Yang, Y.-C. (2019). Revisiting the effects of project-based learning on students' academic achievement: A meta-analysis investigating moderators. Educational Research Review, 26, 71–81. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2018.11.001. (ScienceDirect)
Gulikers, J. T. M., Bastiaens, T. J., & Kirschner, P. A. (2004). A five-dimensional framework for authentic assessment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(3), 67–86. doi:10.1007/BF02504676. (Open Universiteit research portal)
Herman, J. L., & Klein, D. C. D. (1996). Evaluating equity in alternative assessment: An illustration of opportunity-to-learn issues. The Journal of Educational Research, 89(4), 246–256. doi:10.1080/00220671.1996.9941209. (Taylor & Francis Online)
Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2000). An instructional design framework for authentic learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(3), 23–48. doi:10.1007/BF02319856. (Springer)
Herrington, J., Reeves, T. C., & Oliver, R. (2010). A guide to authentic e-learning. Routledge. (Routledge)
Howard, J. L., Bureau, J., Guay, F., Chong, J. X. Y., & Ryan, R. M. (2021). Student motivation and associated outcomes: A meta-analysis from self-determination theory. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(6), 1300–1323. doi:10.1177/1745691620966789. (Sage Journals)
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1. (DOI)
Lombardi, M. M. (2007). Authentic learning for the 21st century: An overview. EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative. EDUCAUSE source
Mathewson, T. G. (2019, May 8). Project-based learning boosts student engagement, understanding. The Hechinger Report. Hechinger Report article
Messier, N. (2022, April 15). Authentic assessments. Center for the Advancement of Teaching Excellence, University of Illinois Chicago. University of Illinois Chicago source
Nachtigall, V., Shaffer, D. W., & Rummel, N. (2022). Stirring a secret sauce: A literature review on the conditions and effects of authentic learning. Educational Psychology Review, 34, 1479–1516. doi:10.1007/s10648-022-09676-3. (Springer)
Neason, A. (2014, October 6). “Deeper learning” improves student outcomes. But what is it? The Hechinger Report. Hechinger Report article
Newmann, F. M., Bryk, A. S., & Nagaoka, J. K. (2001). Authentic intellectual work and standardized tests: Conflict or coexistence? Consortium on Chicago School Research, University of Chicago. University of Chicago Consortium report
New York State Education Department. (2025, July 31). New York State Portrait of a Graduate. NYSED source
New York State Education Department. (2026, April 30). Performance-based learning and assessment in middle & high school. NYSED source
Parkes, J. (2000). Relationship between reliability and cost of performance assessment. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8, 16. doi:10.14507/epaa.v8n16.2000. (EPAA)
PBLWorks. (n.d.). Gold Standard PBL: Essential project design elements. PBLWorks source
Saavedra, A. R., Lock Morgan, K., Liu, Y., Garland, M. W., Rapaport, A., Hu, A., Hoepfner, D., & Haderlein, S. K. (2022). The impact of project-based learning on AP exam performance. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 44(4), 638–666. doi:10.3102/01623737221084355. (Penn State)
Sokhanvar, Z., Salehi, K., & Sokhanvar, F. (2021). Advantages of authentic assessment for improving the learning experience and employability skills of higher education students: A systematic literature review. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 70, 101030. doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101030. (ScienceDirect)
Taylor Institute for Teaching and Learning. (n.d.). Assessment strategies: Authentic assessment. University of Calgary. University of Calgary source
Villarroel, V., Bloxham, S., Bruna, D., Bruna, C., & Herrera-Seda, C. (2018). Authentic assessment: Creating a blueprint for course design. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(5), 840–854. doi:10.1080/02602938.2017.1412396. (Taylor & Francis Online)
Vlachopoulos, D., & Makri, A. (2024). A systematic literature review on authentic assessment in higher education: Best practices for the development of 21st century skills, and policy considerations. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 83, 101425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2024.101425
Wiggins, G. (1990). The case for authentic assessment. ERIC Clearinghouse on Tests, Measurement, and Evaluation. (ERIC Digest ED328611). ERIC record and full text
Willis, L., Badrinarayan, A., & Martinez, M. (2022). Quality criteria for systems of performance assessment for school, district, and network leaders. Learning Policy Institute. doi:10.54300/439.730. (Learning Policy Institute)
Comments