A narrative review of assessment in higher education

Abstract

Higher education assessment has historically been characterised by high-stakes examinations that frequently promote surface learning and constrain deep understanding. This narrative review traces the evolution of assessment from early merit-based systems to contemporary methodologies that position assessment as a catalyst for learning. Drawing on 65 peer-reviewed and scholarly sources published between 1967 and 2025, the study employs an interpretive thematic synthesis to examine summative, formative, and sustainable assessment, with particular emphasis on feedback practices, peer assessment, and student motivation. The findings indicate that the design of assessment plays a critical role in shaping student engagement and learning outcomes, with transparent, well-aligned tasks corresponding to deeper learning, whereas poorly designed high-stakes assessments contribute to anxiety and disengagement. The review further identifies persistent gaps between student expectations and institutional practices, particularly concerning feedback quality, fairness, and clarity. To address these challenges, the study advocates for the integration of low-stakes formative assessment, enhanced feedback mechanisms, the development of feedback literacy, and more inclusive and context-sensitive assessment design. Overall, the review underscores the necessity of reconceptualising assessment as a collaborative, equitable, and learning-oriented process in higher education.