Transformative Authentic Assessment for Learner Identity Reconstruction in Personalized Learning Pathways: Advancing SDG 4 and SDG 10 in Indonesian Education

Afakhrul Masub Bakhtiar; Yatim Riyanto; Sujarwanto Sujarwanto

doi:10.63230/jocsis.2.3.276

Authors

Afakhrul Masub Bakhtiar State University of Surabaya Author
Yatim Riyanto State University of Surabaya Author
Sujarwanto Sujarwanto State University of Surabaya Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.63230/jocsis.2.3.276

Keywords:

Community Education, Learner Identity Reconstruction, Motivation, Personalized Learning Pathways, SDG 4, SDG 10, Self-Efficacy, Transformative Authentic Assessment

Abstract

Objective: To investigate how transformative authentic assessment implemented within Personalized Learning Pathways (PLP) reconstructs learner identity by enhancing motivation and self-efficacy among learners in Indonesian Community Learning Centers (PKBM), while supporting the achievement of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 4 and 10. Method: A qualitative multi-site case study was conducted at PKBM Sekolah Dolan Malang and PKBM Tsurayya Karimah Indonesia. Fifty-seven participants, including institutional heads, tutors, administrative staff, learners, and an external supervisor, were purposively selected. Data were collected through participatory observations, semi-structured interviews, and document analysis. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis and cross-site synthesis to identify recurring patterns across both learning centers. Results: The findings reveal that authentic assessment functions as a continuous, reflective, and learner-centered process rather than merely an instrument for measuring academic achievement. Portfolio-based assessment, reflective discussions, individualized feedback, and continuous learning monitoring significantly enhanced learners' intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy. These assessment practices gradually transformed learners' perceptions from educational failure and low self-confidence toward positive learner identities characterized by confidence, autonomy, responsibility, and lifelong learning orientation. Novelty: Proposing a transformative authentic assessment framework that conceptualizes learner identity reconstruction as a sequential psychological process linking authentic assessment, recognition of learners' strengths, enhanced motivation, strengthened self-efficacy, and positive learner identity. The findings extend authentic assessment literature beyond academic achievement by demonstrating its role as a psychological mechanism for educational inclusion and learner empowerment within personalized learning pathways in community education.

References

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.

Basham, J. D., Hall, T. E., Carter, R. A., Jr., & Stahl, W. M. (2016). An operationalized understanding of personalized learning. Journal of Special Education Technology, 31(3), 126–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643416660835

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Bray, B., & McClaskey, K. (2015). Make learning personal: The what, who, WOW, where, and why. Corwin.

Broadfoot, P. (2007). An introduction to assessment. Continuum.

Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018001032

Cobb, P., Gresalfi, M., & Hodge, L. L. (2009). An interpretive scheme for analyzing the identities that students develop in mathematics classrooms. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 40(1), 40–68.

Dann, R. (2014). Assessment as learning: Blurring the boundaries of assessment and learning for theory, policy and practice. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 21(2), 149–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2014.898128

Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2020). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 24(2), 97–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791

Gardner, H. (1989). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. Basic Books.

Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. Prentice-Hall.

Gulikers, J. T. M., Bastiaens, T. J., & Kirschner, P. A. (2004). A five-dimensional framework for authentic assessment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(3), 67–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504676

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487

Henderson, M., & Phillips, M. (2015). Video-based feedback on student assessment: Scarily personal. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(1), 51–66. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1878

Herrington, J., Reeves, T. C., & Oliver, R. (2014). Authentic learning environments. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (4th ed., pp. 401–412). Springer.

Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 74, 5–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.7401

Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress. Jossey-Bass.

Moon, J. A. (2004). A handbook of reflective and experiential learning: Theory and practice. RoutledgeFalmer.

Moon, J. A. (2019). Experiential learning: A practical guide for educators and trainers (3rd ed.). Routledge.

Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane‐Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090

Paulson, F. L., Paulson, P. R., & Meyer, C. A. (1991). What makes a portfolio a portfolio? Educational Leadership, 48(5), 60–63.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. Guilford Press.

Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2016). Self-efficacy theory in education. In K. R. Wentzel & D. B. Miele (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (2nd ed., pp. 34–54). Routledge.

Sfard, A., & Prusak, A. (2005). Telling identities: In search of an analytic tool for investigating learning as a culturally shaped activity. Educational Researcher, 34(4), 14–22. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X034004014

Swaffield, S., & Dudley, P. (2020). Assessment for learning in practice. Educational Review, 72(2), 123–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2018.1495183

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Walkington, C., & Bernacki, M. L. (2019). Personalizing algebra learning with technology: Effects on student learning and motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(4), 605–624. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000306

Wiggins, G. (1998). Educative assessment: Designing assessments to inform and improve student performance. Jossey-Bass.

Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.