Login / Register Submit Your Article
cover
Article Menu

Journal Browser
Vol. 6 (2024)
Vol. 5 (2023)
Vol. 4 (2022)
Vol. 3 (2021)
Vol. 2 (2020)
Vol. 1 (2019)
Open Access Journal Article

Innovative Assessment Methods for 21st Century Skills

by John Jackson 1,*
1
John Jackson
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
PIE  2022 4(1):27; https://doi.org/10.69610/j.pie.20220314
Received: 27 January 2022 / Accepted: 17 February 2022 / Published Online: 14 March 2022
View Full-Text
Download PDF

Abstract

In the rapidly evolving landscape of education, the assessment of 21st century skills has become increasingly integral to the learning process. The traditional methods, often reliant on standardized testing, may not adequately capture the complex competencies required in today's workforce. This paper explores innovative assessment methods that better reflect the dynamic nature of skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving, collaboration, and digital literacy. We argue that these methods, which include project-based learning, portfolio assessments, and peer and self-assessments, provide a more holistic view of student learning and can foster greater engagement and deeper understanding. Through case studies and empirical research, we demonstrate the effectiveness of these alternative approaches in enhancing student outcomes and preparing them for the challenges of the modern world. The paper concludes with recommendations for educators and policymakers seeking to incorporate these innovative methods into their curricula to foster a more adaptive and resilient student population.

Keywords: 21st century skills; Innovative assessment; Project-based learning; Portfolio assessment; Peer and self-assessment.;
Copyright: © 2022 by Jackson. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) (Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
Cite This Paper
APA Style
Jackson, J. (2022). Innovative Assessment Methods for 21st Century Skills. Perspectives in Innovative Education, 4(1), 27. doi:10.69610/j.pie.20220314
ACS Style
Jackson, J. Innovative Assessment Methods for 21st Century Skills. Perspectives in Innovative Education, 2022, 4, 27. doi:10.69610/j.pie.20220314
AMA Style
Jackson J. Innovative Assessment Methods for 21st Century Skills. Perspectives in Innovative Education; 2022, 4(1):27. doi:10.69610/j.pie.20220314
Chicago/Turabian Style
Jackson, John 2022. "Innovative Assessment Methods for 21st Century Skills" Perspectives in Innovative Education 4, no.1:27. doi:10.69610/j.pie.20220314

Share and Cite

ACS Style
Jackson, J. Innovative Assessment Methods for 21st Century Skills. Perspectives in Innovative Education, 2022, 4, 27. doi:10.69610/j.pie.20220314
AMA Style
Jackson J. Innovative Assessment Methods for 21st Century Skills. Perspectives in Innovative Education; 2022, 4(1):27. doi:10.69610/j.pie.20220314
Chicago/Turabian Style
Jackson, John 2022. "Innovative Assessment Methods for 21st Century Skills" Perspectives in Innovative Education 4, no.1:27. doi:10.69610/j.pie.20220314
APA style
Jackson, J. (2022). Innovative Assessment Methods for 21st Century Skills. Perspectives in Innovative Education, 4(1), 27. doi:10.69610/j.pie.20220314

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

References

  1. Burbules, N. C., & Callister, T. A. (2000). Watch IT: The Risks and Promises of Information Technologies for Education. Westview Press.
  2. Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., & Guzdial, M. (1991). Why project-based learning works: A synthesis of research from the learning sciences. Educational Psychologist, 26(3), 363-398.
  3. Krajcik, J. S., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., & Soloway, E. (1997). A constructivist approach to design problems: The case of learning chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 74(9), 962-971.
  4. Barron, F. (1992). Portfolios as assessments. Review of Educational Research, 62(2), 191-225.
  5. Land, R. (1995). Peer and self-assessment: An action research study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 20(3), 257-267.
  6. Black, P., & William, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Rethinking standards, assessment, and accountability. Open University Press.
  7. confer, D. (2003). A hybrid approach to assessment: Integrating traditional and innovative methods. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(6), 637-651.
  8. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. National Academy Press.
  9. Land, R. (2005). Peer and self-assessment: A review of the literature. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(3), 287-302.
  10. Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3-7.
  11. Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. University of Chicago Press.
  12. Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1989). Seven principles for encouraging student development. AAHE Bulletin, 41(7), 3-7.
  13. Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How learning works: 7 research-based principles for smart teaching. Jossey-Bass.
  14. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  15. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.