Walking the tightrope of quality assessment: balancing perspectives and priorities of stakeholder groups

The ongoing evolution of digital technologies, particularly Generative Artificial Intelligence, continues to shape and challenge assessment design in higher education. Given the complex and sometimes competing factors that contribute to assessment design, and the evolving digital landscape in which assessment is placed, this study examines the perspectives and priorities of five key stakeholder groups – educators, students, employers of graduates, accrediting bodies, and institutional policy-makers – regarding the defining characteristics of quality assessment. Using a mixed-methods approach, we conducted interviews, focus groups, and a national survey to extend a framework for designing quality digital assessments in business education that was originally developed using educator perspectives only. The findings highlight the importance of balancing academic integrity, feedback quality, student experience, and authenticity in assessment design to address stakeholder perspectives. They also extend the framework by including two additional design elements: purpose and technology, and by emphasising the value of dialogue about contrasting interpretations of assessment quality. The study provides a refined framework that incorporates nuanced differences in stakeholder priorities, supports educators in designing digital assessments that respond to stakeholder needs, and encourages co-design and shared accountability.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Studies in Higher Education
Published
2026-01-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2026.2619909
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Student Assessment and Feedback
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
192.69
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Walking the tightrope of quality assessment: balancing perspectives and priorities of stakeholder groups

Andrew Cram, Andrew Brodzeli, Amanda White, Sandris Zeivots et al.
1 citations
Studies in Higher Education
Student Assessment and Feedback
192.69
article

Walking the tightrope of quality assessment: balancing perspectives and priorities of stakeholder groups

Andrew Cram, Andrew Brodzeli, Amanda White, Sandris Zeivots, Lynne Harris, Elaine Huber, Sue Wright, Corina Raduescu
article en
1 citations

Abstract

The ongoing evolution of digital technologies, particularly Generative Artificial Intelligence, continues to shape and challenge assessment design in higher education. Given the complex and sometimes competing factors that contribute to assessment design, and the evolving digital landscape in which assessment is placed, this study examines the perspectives and priorities of five key stakeholder groups – educators, students, employers of graduates, accrediting bodies, and institutional policy-makers – regarding the defining characteristics of quality assessment. Using a mixed-methods approach, we conducted interviews, focus groups, and a national survey to extend a framework for designing quality digital assessments in business education that was originally developed using educator perspectives only. The findings highlight the importance of balancing academic integrity, feedback quality, student experience, and authenticity in assessment design to address stakeholder perspectives. They also extend the framework by including two additional design elements: purpose and technology, and by emphasising the value of dialogue about contrasting interpretations of assessment quality. The study provides a refined framework that incorporates nuanced differences in stakeholder priorities, supports educators in designing digital assessments that respond to stakeholder needs, and encourages co-design and shared accountability.

Studies in Higher Education
University of Technology Sydney (AU), The University of Sydney (AU), South Metropolitan Technical and Further Education (AU), Metropolitan Research Institute (HU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Student Assessment and Feedback
192.69
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.