View in EDS

Talk Is Cheap: Why Structural Assessment Changes Are Needed for a Time of GenAI

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Talk Is Cheap: Why Structural Assessment Changes Are Needed for a Time of GenAI
Language: English
Authors: Thomas Corbin (ORCID 0000-0001-8750-5711), Phillip Dawson (ORCID 0000-0002-4513-8287), Danny Liu (ORCID 0000-0002-6618-5576)
Source: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 2025 50(7):1087-1097.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 11
Publication Date: 2025
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Evaluative
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: Artificial Intelligence, Student Evaluation, Evaluation Methods, Change, Evaluation Problems, Universities, College Students, Computer Uses in Education
DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2025.2503964
ISSN: 0260-2938
1469-297X
Abstract: Generative AI (GenAI) challenges assessment validity by enabling students to complete tasks without demonstrating genuine capability. In response to this challenge, institutions have developed and implemented various approaches that aim to communicate permissible AI use to students. Familiar examples include the 'traffic light' approach now commonly found within institutional policy. While well-intentioned, these approaches share a common limitation: They focus primarily on communicating rules rather than redesigning assessment mechanics. To clarify why such approaches fail, and to guide more effective responses, this paper introduces a novel conceptual distinction between discursive changes to assessment (modifications relying solely on instructions students remain free to ignore) and structural changes (modifications that reshape the underlying mechanics of assessment tasks themselves). Through a critical analysis of prominent frameworks, we demonstrate that current approaches predominantly rely on discursive changes that create what we term an 'enforcement illusion'. We find that educational frameworks frequently borrow the language of socially familiar structural systems (like vehicular traffic lights) while lacking their actual enforcement capabilities, creating an illusion of assessment security. In place of this, we argue for a shift towards structural assessment redesign that builds validity into assessment architecture rather than attempting to impose it through unenforceable rules.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2025
Accession Number: EJ1490530
Database: ERIC
FullText Text:
  Availability: 0
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1490530
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Talk Is Cheap: Why Structural Assessment Changes Are Needed for a Time of GenAI
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Thomas+Corbin%22">Thomas Corbin</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8750-5711">0000-0001-8750-5711</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Phillip+Dawson%22">Phillip Dawson</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4513-8287">0000-0002-4513-8287</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Danny+Liu%22">Danny Liu</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6618-5576">0000-0002-6618-5576</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Assessment+%26+Evaluation+in+Higher+Education%22"><i>Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education</i></searchLink>. 2025 50(7):1087-1097.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 11
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Evaluative
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Artificial+Intelligence%22">Artificial Intelligence</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Evaluation%22">Student Evaluation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Evaluation+Methods%22">Evaluation Methods</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Change%22">Change</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Evaluation+Problems%22">Evaluation Problems</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Universities%22">Universities</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22College+Students%22">College Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Computer+Uses+in+Education%22">Computer Uses in Education</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/02602938.2025.2503964
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0260-2938<br />1469-297X
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Generative AI (GenAI) challenges assessment validity by enabling students to complete tasks without demonstrating genuine capability. In response to this challenge, institutions have developed and implemented various approaches that aim to communicate permissible AI use to students. Familiar examples include the 'traffic light' approach now commonly found within institutional policy. While well-intentioned, these approaches share a common limitation: They focus primarily on communicating rules rather than redesigning assessment mechanics. To clarify why such approaches fail, and to guide more effective responses, this paper introduces a novel conceptual distinction between discursive changes to assessment (modifications relying solely on instructions students remain free to ignore) and structural changes (modifications that reshape the underlying mechanics of assessment tasks themselves). Through a critical analysis of prominent frameworks, we demonstrate that current approaches predominantly rely on discursive changes that create what we term an 'enforcement illusion'. We find that educational frameworks frequently borrow the language of socially familiar structural systems (like vehicular traffic lights) while lacking their actual enforcement capabilities, creating an illusion of assessment security. In place of this, we argue for a shift towards structural assessment redesign that builds validity into assessment architecture rather than attempting to impose it through unenforceable rules.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1490530
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1490530
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/02602938.2025.2503964
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 11
        StartPage: 1087
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Artificial Intelligence
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Evaluation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Evaluation Methods
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Change
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Evaluation Problems
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Universities
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: College Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Computer Uses in Education
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Talk Is Cheap: Why Structural Assessment Changes Are Needed for a Time of GenAI
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Thomas Corbin
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Phillip Dawson
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Danny Liu
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0260-2938
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1469-297X
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 50
            – Type: issue
              Value: 7
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1