Reimagining success and failure: equitable assessment practices in an age of AI

Mollie Dollinger & Juuso Nieminen

Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice2026https://doi.org/10.53761/20z06b11article
ABDC C
Weight
0.50

What the paper says

With disruption comes the affordance to not only think about things differently, but to truly do things differently. In the context of Generative AI in higher education this holds unique promise on how students are assessed, particularly from the viewpoint of equity. For decades, assessments practices and designs have been flawed; compartmentalised, standardised, and as well documented, disadvantaging to many students. In this conceptual paper, we now explore how the emergence of GenAI may help to challenge entrenched and exclusionary notion of student success in two key dimensions: distribution of knowledge and agentic assessment. We argue that GenAI creates an opportunity to move away from assessment practices that sort and rank students toward approaches that recognise diverse ways of knowing. Thus, rather than viewing GenAI as a threat to academic integrity, we propose it as a catalyst for more equitable assessment that values collaboration and student agency over individual performance and predetermined standards.

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.53761/20z06b11

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{mollie2026,
  title        = {{Reimagining success and failure: equitable assessment practices in an age of AI}},
  author       = {Mollie Dollinger & Juuso Nieminen},
  journal      = {Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.53761/20z06b11},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Reimagining success and failure: equitable assessment practices in an age of AI

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.