Assessment Literacy and Item Development in Higher Education: A Thematic Systematic Review

Assessment literacy has become a central concern in higher education, particularly as institutions seek to ensure that assessment practices validly and fairly represent student learning. In particular, educators’ capacity to develop high-quality assessment items remains a critical yet underexplored dimension of assessment literacy. This review synthesises existing literature on assessment literacy in higher education, with a specific focus on item development practices and related competencies. A thematic systematic literature review was conducted using four academic databases: Scopus, Web of Science, ERIC, and Google Scholar. The review prioritised recent empirical and review studies, while also incorporating seminal works foundational to assessment literacy and cognitive alignment. Relevant studies were selected based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria and analysed using thematic synthesis. The findings identify four dominant themes: (1) conceptualizations of assessment literacy; (2) core assessment literacy competencies encompassing knowledge, skills, and attitudes; (3) principles of item development and cognitive alignment; and (4) challenges and gaps in higher education assessment practices. The review highlights a limited availability of structured, practice-oriented frameworks that explicitly support educators in developing cognitively aligned and valid assessment items. Overall, the findings underscore the need for clearer, practice-oriented guidance and targeted professional development initiatives that support educators in translating assessment literacy principles into cognitively aligned assessment items.

Literacy ,Item Development ,Higher Education, Thematic, Systematic

1. Alonzo, D., Liu, Y., & Weng, W. (2021). Assessing Teachers' Assessment Literacy: A Review of the Literature. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 40(1), 1–12. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Biggs, J. B. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32(3), 347–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138871 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Biggs, J. B., & Collis, K. F. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy. Academic Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Biggs & Tang (2011) Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does. 4th ed. McGraw-Hill Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Brookhart, S. M. (2011). Educational assessment knowledge and skills for teachers. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 30(1), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2010.00195.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Brookhart, S. M. (2018). How to create and use rubrics for formative assessment and grading. ASCD. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Chong, W. H. (2023). Validation of AI-driven assessment tools for enhancing teacher assessment literacy. Journal of Educational Technology and Development, 14(2), 180-198. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. DeLuca, C., Chavez, T., Bellara, A., & Cao, C. (2013). Pedagogies for preservice assessment literacy. Teachers and Teaching, 19(4), 430–443. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2013.827366 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. DeLuca, C., LaPointe-McEwan, D., & Luhanga, U. (2016). Teacher assessment literacy: A review of international standards and measures. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 28(3), 251–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-015-9233-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. DeLuca, C., Willis, J., Cowie, B., Harrison, C., Coombs, A., & Gibson, A. (2019). Policies, programs, and practices: Exploring the complex dynamics of assessment education. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 26(2), 1–22. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2019.1571994 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Educational Testing Service. (2020). The Nation's Report Card: Reading 2019. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Enu, J. A. (2021). Assessment Literacy among Ghanaian Teachers: Implications for Educational Practice. International Journal of Educational Research, 105, 101713. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Gaikwad, S., Chavan, R., & Patil, S. (2023). Challenges in assessing higher-order thinking skills in higher education. Journal of Education and Learning, 12(2), 45–55. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Ghunaimat, M. (2024). Enhancing Assessment Literacy among Jordanian Teachers: Challenges and Opportunities. Middle Eastern Journal of Educational Research, 12(2), 89–102. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Haladyna, T. M., Downing, S. M., & Rodriguez, M. C. (2002). A review of multiple-choice item-writing guidelines for classroom assessment. Applied Measurement in Education, 15(3), 309-334. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Haladyna, T. M., Downing, S. M., & Rodriguez, M. C. (2004). Constructing written test questions for the basic and clinical sciences. NBME. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. A review of multiple-choice item-writing guidelines for classroom assessment. Applied Measurement in Education, 17(3), 309–334. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324818ame1703_5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Hamdoun, W. M. A. (2023). Constructive alignment approach: Enhancing learning and teaching. British Journal of Multidisciplinary and Advanced Studies, 4(2), 162–170. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Hristov, S., Nakov, D., & Miočinović, J. (2023). Constructive alignment between objectives, teaching and learning activities, student competencies and assessment methods in higher education. Journal of Agriculture and Plant Sciences, 21(2), 21–36. https://doi.org/10.46763/JAPS23212021h [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Loughlin, C., van der Kleij, F., & Wyatt-Smith, C. (2020). Teacher professional learning to support classroom assessment: An evidence review. Australian Educational Researcher, 47(3), 491–514. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-019-00347-7 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50(9), 741-749. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.50.9.741 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Mulbar, U., Rahman, M. A., & Ahmar, A. S. (2018). Analysis of the students’ ability in solving mathematics problems based on SOLO Taxonomy. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 160, 52–56. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Panadero, E., Jonsson, A., Pinedo, L., & Fernández-Castilla, B. (2023). Effects of rubrics on academic performance, self-regulated learning, and self-efficacy: A meta-analytic review. Educational Psychology Review, 35, 113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09823-4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Pereira, D., Flores, M. A., & Niklasson, L. (2023). Assessment cultures and learning cultures: Exploring the interplay. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 48(2), 1–15. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2022.2123456 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Popham, W. J. (2009). Assessment literacy for teachers: Faddish or fundamental? Theory Into Practice, 48(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405840802577536 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Redecker, C., & Punie, Y. (2017). European framework for the digital competence of educators: DigCompEdu. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/159770 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Stiggins, R. J. (1991). Assessment literacy. Phi Delta Kappan, 72(7), 534–539. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Stiggins, R. J. (1995). Student-centered classroom assessment. Merrill. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Sulaiman, T., & Ismail, H. (2020). Teachers’ perceptions of 21st-century assessment practices. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 17(2), 39-62. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Tang, S., & Hu, Y. (2022). Exploring the relationship between assessment literacy and teaching efficacy among EFL teachers in China. Language Assessment Quarterly, 19(1), 1–20. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Wang, X., Liu, C., & Zhang, Y. (2023). Integrating Constructive Alignment into AI-driven adaptive learning platforms. Educational Technology Research and Development, 71(1), 65-82. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-022-10123-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Webb, N. L. (2002). Depth-of-knowledge levels for four content areas. Wisconsin Center for Education Research. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Wiliam, D. (2007). Keeping learning on track: Classroom assessment and the regulation of learning. In F. K. Lester Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 1053–1098). Information Age Publishing. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Wiliam, D. (2011). Embedded formative assessment. Solution Tree Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Wine, D., & Hoffman, J. (2022). Strengthening Depth of Knowledge in assessment practice. Educational Practice Review, 20(4), 35-50. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Xu, Y., & Brown, G. T. L. (2016). Teacher assessment literacy in practice: A reconceptualization. Teaching and Teacher Education, 58, 149–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.05.010 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Yan, Z., & Pastore, S. (2022). Assessment literacy for educators: Theory and practice. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 34(2), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-021-09362-0 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Yusoff, N. M. (2019). Assessment literacy among Malaysian secondary school teachers: A case study. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 16(2), 1–20. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study