Factors Contributing to Resistance Toward Alternative Assessment Models Among Faculty
Keywords:
Faculty resistance, alternative assessment, higher education, qualitative study, assessment reform, institutional barriers, academic cultureAbstract
This study aims to explore the key individual, institutional, and cultural factors that contribute to faculty resistance toward the implementation of alternative assessment models in higher education. This qualitative study employed a descriptive research design using semi-structured interviews to gain insights into faculty perspectives on assessment innovation. A purposive sample of 27 faculty members from universities in Tehran, Iran, participated in in-depth interviews. Data collection continued until theoretical saturation was achieved. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed thematically using Nvivo 12 software. Thematic analysis followed Braun and Clarke’s framework, and the credibility of findings was supported through participant validation and peer debriefing. The analysis revealed three overarching themes: individual-level barriers, institutional and structural constraints, and cultural and normative resistance. Within the first theme, faculty reported lack of familiarity with alternative models, perceived complexity, fear of losing authority, low self-efficacy, and concerns about workload. The second theme highlighted structural impediments such as unclear institutional policies, limited resources, inadequate professional development, and misaligned promotion criteria. The third theme emphasized cultural influences, including adherence to traditional academic identity, peer pressure, student expectations, and skepticism about assessment validity. These findings underscore that resistance is multifaceted and contextually embedded rather than rooted in mere unwillingness. Resistance to alternative assessment models among faculty is shaped by a complex combination of psychological, institutional, and cultural factors. Addressing these barriers requires an integrated approach involving professional development, supportive policy reforms, incentive structures, and cultural change at the departmental and institutional levels. Without systemic alignment and stakeholder engagement, efforts to implement assessment reform are likely to remain limited in scope and sustainability.
Downloads
References
Andrade, H. (2019). A critical review of research on student self-assessment. Frontiers in Education, 4, 87. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00087
Aslani, F., & Mohammadi, M. (2022). Faculty members’ perceptions of the challenges of formative assessment in Iranian higher education. Journal of Educational Measurement and Evaluation Studies, 12(1), 24–41.
Bloxham, S., & Boyd, P. (2007). Developing effective assessment in higher education: A practical guide. Open University Press.
Boud, D., & Falchikov, N. (2007). Rethinking assessment in higher education: Learning for the longer term. Routledge.
Boud, D., & Molloy, E. (2013). Feedback in higher and professional education: Understanding it and doing it well. Routledge.
Brown, S., & Knight, P. (1994). Assessing learners in higher education. Kogan Page.
Carless, D. (2007). Learning‐oriented assessment: Conceptual bases and practical implications. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44(1), 57–66.
Carless, D. (2015). Excellence in university assessment: Learning from award-winning practice. Routledge.
Deeley, S., & Bovill, C. (2017). Staff student partnership in assessment: Enhancing assessment literacy through democratic practices. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(3), 463–477. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1126551
Fook, C. Y., & Sidhu, G. K. (2010). Authentic assessment and pedagogical strategies in higher education. Journal of Social Sciences, 6(2), 153–161.
Gikandi, J. W., Morrow, D., & Davis, N. E. (2011). Online formative assessment in higher education: A review of the literature. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2333–2351.
Goff, L., Potter, M. K., Pierre, E., Carey, T., Gullage, A., Kustra, E., ... & Wright, W. A. (2015). Learning outcomes assessment: A practitioner's handbook. Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario.
Han, C., & Xu, Y. (2021). Why don’t they just try? A study on the barriers to faculty adoption of student-centered assessment. Higher Education Research & Development, 40(4), 718–733. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1765741
Hendry, G. D. (2013). Fixing feedback: Do students want it fixed? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(5), 466–476.
Keshavarz, M. H., & Kabiri, M. (2013). Barriers to the implementation of authentic assessment in Iranian universities. Iranian Journal of Medical Education, 13(5), 419–429.
Macfarlane, B. (2015). Freedom to learn: The threat to student academic freedom and why it needs to be reclaimed. Routledge.
Norton, L., Richardson, J. T., Hartley, J., Newstead, S., & Mayes, J. (2005). Teachers' beliefs and intentions concerning teaching in higher education. Higher Education, 50, 537–571.
O’Neill, G. (2002). Assessment strategies for student-centred learning. In Emerging Issues in the Practice of University Learning and Teaching (pp. 85–98). AISHE.
Sambell, K., Brown, S., & Race, P. (2012). Essentials of assessment. Routledge.
Shahvali, M. (2019). Organizational resistance to alternative teaching and assessment strategies in Iranian public universities. Educational Innovations Quarterly, 18(71), 105–122.
Shay, S. (2008). Beyond social constructivist perspectives on assessment: The centering of knowledge. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(5), 595–605.
Tai, J., Ajjawi, R., Boud, D., Dawson, P., & Panadero, E. (2022). Developing evaluative judgement: Enabling students to make decisions about the quality of work. Higher Education, 83(2), 197–216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00653-1
Yorke, M. (2003). Formative assessment in higher education: Moves towards theory and the enhancement of pedagogic practice. Higher Education, 45(4), 477–501.
Zand-Moghadam, A., & Meihami, H. (2016). The evaluation of assessment methods used in Iranian universities: An exploratory study. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 51, 35–42.
Downloads
Published
Submitted
Revised
Accepted
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
