Assessment Design

Authentic assessment

Strategies

• Design assessments reflecting real-world or discipline-specific challenges requiring independent thinking and application of foundational skills. Doing so mitigates the risk of cheating (Sotiriadou et al., 2020)
• Engage students by demonstrating their ability to apply knowledge in practical scenarios

Tasks

• In-person demonstrations, scenario-based problem-solving, or practical exercises
• Collaborative peer-based assessments where students analyze and solve problems, with individual contributions clearly evaluated

Monitored assessment

Strategies

• Conduct assessments in secure, supervised settings to ensure integrity and authenticity; provide flexible formats or accommodations where necessary
• Include traditional exams or quizzes, both paper-based and closed-network digital formats
• Incorporate synchronous assignments for real-time verification

Tasks

• In-class or invigilated exams and quizzes
• Secure online assessments using proctoring tools.

Performance-based assessment

Strategies

• Assess skills directly through live demonstrations, oral presentations, or performances (e.g., lab experiments, in-class problem-solving)
• Include in-class components or synchronous activities when full assessments cannot be conducted in-person
• Focus on key assessment moments to validate skills without GenAI
• Meet with students during the course to engage in interactive reviews

Tasks

• Oral assessments where students explain concepts, present findings, or respond to prompts in real-time
• On-site practical demonstrations or multimodal performances to verify hands-on competency
• Capstone projects and presentations

Critical Thinking Emphasis

Strategy

• Create tasks requiring students to analyze, evaluate, and synthesize information to solve problems or propose solutions
• Highlight the importance of independent work in fostering critical thinking and evaluative judgment

Tasks

• Time-limited exercises such as structured essays, problem sets, or case analyses
• Collaborative problem-solving tasks where process and participation are monitored

Process-oriented (scaffolded) approach

Strategy

• Break large tasks into smaller, progressive steps to encourage independent work and self-reflection
• Provide targeted feedback at each stage to support skill development and critical engagement

Tasks

• Learning journals, process documentation, or portfolios that include regular checkpoints, live presentations, or critiques
• Scaffolded assessments with sequential deliverables requiring independent effort

Formative assessment

Strategy

• Use frequent, smaller formative assessments to evaluate ongoing knowledge and skill development
• Encourage learning through feedback without the anxieties of high-stakes grading

Tasks

• Frequent quizzes or small assignments are conducted synchronously or in class
• Assign reflection-based tasks documenting responsible personal use of GenAI for learning

Bibliography Assignment and Critical Source Engagement

This example describes efforts to review curriculum and assessment tasks to mitigate GenAI risks. It describes how assignments now require detailed, multi-step analytical tasks—like identifying key details, tagging sources, and synthesizing information—that AI tools struggle to replicate. Students must demonstrate comprehension and critical thinking by focusing on specific, structured tasks such as identifying key details, tagging sources, and synthesizing information.

Two-Step Assessments

This example highlights curriculum revisions to reduce GenAI risks, emphasizing multi-step tasks like sourcing, synthesizing, and critical reflection to ensure authentic student work.

The Unboxing Assignment
Keep this assessment task local. The presentation is multimodal. Ask students to script and produce an unboxing video (YouTube has many examples if you are unfamiliar with this concept). Students fill the box with materials and items related to a particular course subject or concept. Students must then explain the unboxing, describing each item and its connection to the assigned topic. When using this approach, provide clear directions about inappropriate GenAI. (Adapted from Bowen & Watson, 2024, p. 195)

Authentic Assessment in Finance

In this authentic assessment, students work in groups as financial analysts, applying course concepts to real-world scenarios. They analyze complex data, using critical judgment to process information and provide well-reasoned investment recommendations. Arguments must be supported by relevant theory or aligned with industry practices.

Critical Thinking Emphasis

Strategy

• Design assessments that require students to critically evaluate or integrate the outputs of GenAI tools with their analysis and ideas
• Highlight essential roles of human judgment and independent critical thinking in learning and knowledge sharing

Tasks

• Research projects where students use GenAI for preliminary research or data summaries but must synthesize and evaluate independently
• Problem-solving tasks where GenAI assists in generating insights or options, but students justify and critique their chosen solutions

Transparent and inclusive design

Strategy

• Ensure instructions address diverse student needs and clearly outline permissible uses of GenAI
• Provide alternatives or support for students facing barriers to tool access

Tasks

• Multimodal assessments allow students to choose formats that align with their learning preferences
• Assignments use institutionally approved GenAI tools to ensure digital equity

Reflective practices

Strategy

• Incorporate self-assessment or reflective components to justify and critically analyze GenAI use
• Foster a deeper understanding of ethical and responsible GenAI practices

Tasks

• Reflective essays or portfolios where students document and evaluate their use of GenAI tools
• Process documentation assessing both the outputs and the rationale behind GenAI use
• Personal Critique Logs (peer or collaborative work with GenAI)

Authentic assessment

Strategy

• Design assessments reflecting real-world challenges where GenAI enhances but does not replace independent student effort
• Engage students meaningfully by testing their ability to apply skills in practical scenarios

Tasks

• Drafting and revision activities where GenAI assists with brainstorming or editing, but final submissions demonstrate original input
• Data-driven analysis that requires students to interpret and adapt AI-generated results independently

Process-oriented Assessment

Strategy

• Focus on assessing the student’s process, reasoning, and original contributions over the final product
• Incorporate checkpoints to monitor progress and provide feedback

Tasks

• Scaffolded assessments with multiple stages, requiring students to integrate feedback and refine their work
• In-class or time-bound exercises use GenAI during preparation but require original application or independent work under supervision

Instructor: Dr. Hiromi Aoki, University of Alberta

Course: JAPAN 202/301/302/401

From 2023 to 2024, Dr. Aoki experimented using ChatGPT as a writing assistant in intermediate and advanced Japanese language courses (JAPAN 202/301/302/401). Intermediate students wrote inquiry emails and movie reviews, while advanced students tackled essays on Japanese social issues. Initially cautious about its misuse as a translation tool, they positioned ChatGPT as an imperfect writing tutor. Students completed drafts independently before using ChatGPT to identify errors and suggest edits. Students were required to evaluate its feedback, incorporating only what they understood critically. Students submitted their drafts, ChatGPT-assisted revisions, and interaction logs to ensure transparency.

The experiment revealed mixed results: some students valued ChatGPT’s assistance, while others, especially advanced students, found analyzing its feedback too time-intensive. However, the process fostered critical thinking, encouraging students to apply their knowledge and engage in personalized learning. This approach highlighted GenAI's potential as a valuable educational tool when structured with clear guidelines, oversight, and expectations for use.

Instructor: Dr. Abdul Aleem, University of Alberta

Course: ECON109 - Basic Writing in Economics I

Students write a 1000-1300 word research essay in the Canadian Journal of Economics (CJE) style, selecting a topic from a provided list. The process is divided into steps: drafting a research proposal, writing body paragraphs, and completing the introduction and conclusion. The focus is on conceptual and structural clarity, with less emphasis on grammar early on.

AI Integration:

• For the proposal, students use ChatGPT-3.5 to brainstorm and refine research questions through iterative sessions, using insights to guide their literature review and proposal writing..
• For the final essay, students use Grammarly (provided by the department) to improve clarity, grammar, and mechanics. This structured approach blends AI tools to support idea generation and polishing, enhancing processes and outcomes

Instructor: Dr. Nancy Bray, University of Alberta

WRS 210: Introduction to Professional Communication

Write an email to a professional (in a field or organization that interests you) requesting an informational interview. Use ChatGPT to write the first draft. Revise ChatGPT’s draft to suit the rhetorical situation (purpose, audience, genre). Write a reflection on your own (up to 500 words) analyzing how you used and revised the generative AI output for professional correspondence.

Process Documentation for Writing Assessments
Instructors can add a process documentation requirement to written assignments that asks them to explain their GenAI use for various aspects of the assignment. The process documentation and its completion can be added to grading rubrics as well.

Rule 1: Highlight everything in the essay where you have used Google Gemini Chat responses.

Rule 2: Write a reflection for each instance, explaining how you evaluated and validated the accuracy and authenticity of the AI-generated information. Explain the sources consulted to evaluate the AI content critically.

Rule 3: Explain briefly how using Google Gemini Chat was either useful or not useful in your writing assignment.

Rule 4: If none of the above applies (i.e., you have not used Google Gemini Chat), please explain why you have not used it.

The GenAI Use: Acknowledgement and Reflection is a template for the documentation process.

Physiotherapy: GenAI and Clinical Technologies
This is a systematic, program-level example: A physiotherapy degree maps all its assessments to graduate learning outcomes. These are supported by numerous small, graded tasks, such as written tasks, engagement with clinical technologies (including AI), observed clinical skills, interactive orals, and supervisor reports on clinical placements. Tasks are collected, collated, and analyzed periodically in a portfolio, guided by a coach or mentor, to track progress and inform decision making (TEQSA, 2023).

Authentic assessment with GenAI integration

Strategies

• Design tasks that mirror real-world contexts and scenarios where GenAI would be used
• Examples include analyzing large datasets or generating creative content

Tasks

• Creative problem-solving projects ask students to use GenAI to generate solutions, explain their reasoning, and critically evaluate its contributions
• Case studies require students to apply GenAI for research, decision-making, or modelling outcomes, supported by a rationale for their approach

Critical engagement focus

Strategies

• Foster critical thinking by requiring students to evaluate and contextualize GenAI outputs within disciplinary settings and practices
• Emphasize ethical considerations and informed decision-making

Tasks

• Reflective portfolios document how students used GenAI tools, their interpretation of results, and their strategies for ethical application
• Dynamic presentations showcase how GenAI shaped their approach and contributed to outcomes

Competency-based assessment

Strategies

• Assess students’ ability to use GenAI tools effectively, evaluating both process and outcomes
• Focus on demonstrating specific skills such as data visualization or project management

Tasks

• GenAI competency demonstrations where students showcase practical skills using tools like data visualization or content generation
• Use GenAI for iterative design paired with manual (student-based) process reflection. Responsible use documentation highlights how and why students employed GenAI ethically

Equity and inclusivity

Strategies

• Ensure all students have access to required GenAI tools and provide support through training or workshops
• Use institutionally approved GenAI tools to maintain digital equity

Tasks

• Collaborative assignments, where students utilize GenAI as a group to combine tool outputs with peer contributions to develop innovative solutions
• Multimodal assessments that allow for diverse formats to support varied learning preferences

Process-oriented (scaffolded) learning

Strategies

• Incorporate tutorials, workshops, or practice tasks to help students build GenAI competency before assessment
• Break larger assessments into smaller, manageable stages with opportunities for feedback

Tasks

• Scaffold assessments with multiple stages that require students to refine their work using GenAI tools iteratively
• In-class or time-bound exercises utilizing GenAI for preparation, followed by independent application in restricted conditions

Instructor: Dr. Geoffrey Rockwell, University of Alberta

INT D 225: Complexity, Creativity, and Critical Thinking

AI for Socratic Dialogue and Historical Role-Play

Aims

1. Evaluate students’ understandings of Socratic dialogue
2. Assess students’ ability to imitate the style of dialogue as they explore a topic of their choosing through discussion with a historical personage.
3. Evaluate students’ ability to frame and critically assess the dialogue through a well-crafted introduction or epilogue

Summary
Develop a dialogue with at least one historic Italian character about one of the issues raised in the course. You can use a chatbot like Character.AI as an interlocutor or an AI system like ChatGPT or Google’s Gemini to generate possible responses and then write both sides of the dialogue yourself. The overall assignment should be between 2500 to 5000 words long. Without using AI, develop an introduction or epilogue where you reflect on the dialogue and what you were trying to achieve (which is included in the word count.) Submit it as a PDF or Microsoft Word document.

Course context
An assignment given to an interdisciplinary class, INT D 225: Complexity, Creativity, and Critical Thinking, that the instructor taught in Cortona, Italy. In the first week, students read and discuss part of a dialogue by Petrarch. Then, the instructor and students explore how successful dialogues work together. Also, the instructor carefully explains how students might begin to plot a dialogue of their own before assigning the task to students.

Instructor Takeaways
Student dialogues will be assessed on these lines:

• Does the dialogue deal with an issue coherently and interestingly?
• Do the characters represent different positions on the issue discussed? Are they believable characters or puppets? Are they historically interesting?
• Is there any drama in the dialogue? Do the characters disagree or challenge each other in interesting ways?

Instructors can also ask students to collaborate on articulating a list of traits of a strong Socratic dialogue, recommended questions (or question types) to encourage quality Socratic interaction, and/or a list of prompts that help facilitate the AI dialogue.

Dr. Marilène Oliver, University of Alberta

ART 351: Media Arts

Encourage Discussions and Evaluative Reflections of AI Art

AI can be used to generate art. Have students use different AI Art generators to produce artistic works. Then, lead a discussion on AI art. You can discuss the ethics, the similarities to non-AI art, the differences from non-A art, and so on. A discussion such as this is a chance for instructors and students to contemplate the implications of AI art for society as a whole. Questions surrounding “authorship,” ownership (of art), originality, intertextuality, and collage can invigorate discussion, debate, and reflection. Moreover, such discussions help instructors and students see how they collectively contribute to how the world makes sense of AI art and defines or redefines art and artistry. Finally, ask students to reflect on their AI art and the class discussion of AI art. What is this new aesthetic? What is actually happening to your images? What is the potential impact on art, artists, and the art world? How students understand, integrate (or not integrate), and engage with the emerging AI aesthetic will influence how societies make sense of and engage with AI art.

1. No AI: Ensures meaningful assessment in controlled environments where students demonstrate independent knowledge/skills. Assessments are completed without AI assistance and may be monitored/invigilated to maintain integrity. This level emphasizes the direct demonstration of student comprehension and abilities.
   • Sample tasks: In-class examinations, supervised written tasks, oral presentations, clinical assessments, laboratory practicals, performance demonstrations, and fieldwork documentation.
2. AI for planning: Facilitates using AI in pre-task activities while maintaining independent student work in final submissions. It emphasizes AI as a planning tool to support synthesis and ideation, requiring students to independently develop and refine their ideas. The focus remains on the ability to transform AI-assisted planning into the student’s original work.
   • Sample tasks: Research design planning, structured brainstorming, argument mapping, literature review preparation, project scope development, and thesis statement refinement.
3. AI collaboration: Integrates AI as a supportive tool throughout the assessment process, from initial drafting to final refinement. Students must demonstrate critical evaluation skills by validating and modifying AI outputs while maintaining their voice and understanding. Requires transparent documentation of AI contributions.
   • Sample tasks: Collaborative writing projects, peer review processes, multilingual compositions, technical documentation, analytical reports, and creative writing development.
4. Full AI: Positions AI as a co-creator in achieving specific learning outcomes. Students direct AI tools to complete defined elements of tasks while students demonstrate their ability to guide and critically evaluate AI contributions. This level requires active student, instructor, and AI engagement to solve discipline-specific problems.
   • Sample tasks: Problem-based learning projects, case study analyses, industry simulations, policy evaluations, and research synthesis projects.
5. AI exploration: Emphasizes creative and innovative applications of AI within disciplinary contexts. Students and instructors collaborate to design and implement novel AI applications, focusing on field-specific problem-solving and advancement. It requires a sophisticated understanding of AI capabilities and limitations within the discipline.
   • Sample tasks: Applied research projects, creative projects, innovative solution design, interdisciplinary investigations, industry-integrated assignments, and emerging technology evaluations.

Using the AIAS can encourage transparent assessment practices and promote responsible use of GenAI. Citation and attribution requirements will vary by level and should be clearly explained. Please see Students and AI for resources to support these activities.

AI as a Study Tool

In addition to providing clear explanations for each level of the scale, UBC’s Senior Education Consultant, Lucas Wright, adds “AI as a Study Tool.” Instructors and students must share a common understanding of appropriate student use of GenAI as a personal study tool.

Adapting the AIAS for English for Academic Purposes

Explores potential applications of a modified EAP-AIAS across various assessment types, including writing tasks, presentations, and research projects. Examines GenAI integration in higher education and how to prepare students to write for an AI-enhanced academic and professional future.

AIAS: Graduated Levels (aligned with Bloom’s Taxonomy) for Academic Tasks

Jessica Barker and Kimberly Pace Becker offer an adapted scale incorporating Bloom’s Taxonomy and providing suggested examples of academic tasks for each scale level.

AIAS Example Assignment (with a template for instructor use)

Instructors might also consider using the AIAS when explaining redesigned assessment tasks for students. Please see the Template for an example of how to do this.

Pre-GenAI integration, students were asked to perform a close reading of a course reading and explain its relevance in their own words. The redesigned assignment still requires students to engage reflectively with course readings but also uses GenAI (where directed) to support learning and written expression.

The assignment template models using the AI Assessment Scale as a reference tool to guide student GenAI use (see p. 6). GenAI use is also a key component of the assignment grading rubric (see p. 7-8 ).

For more examples of the AIAS across disciplines and teaching contexts, see Leon Furze’s Assessment Scale in Action article.

The template is available for instructor use (just be sure to make a copy first).