Assessing Knowledge Transformation Through an Authentic Assessment Ecosystem: Evidence from a First-Cycle Classroom Action Research Study in an Introductory Economics Course
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11594/Keywords:
Authentic assessment, Classroom action research, Economics education, Transformative learningAbstract
This first-cycle classroom action research study examines whether students’ perception of their economic knowledge and skills can transform through an authentic assessment ecosystem of an introductory economic course. The authentic assessment ecosystem comprised learning circles organized around real Philippine economic issues, weekly scaffolded individual assignments grounded in the 10 Principles of Economics, group presentations as formative checkpoints, a midterm learning paper, and a final group podcast. Using a convergent mixed-methods design, pre-course and post-course self-assessment surveys measured changes in students' self-perceived economic knowledge and skills across five domains, while thematic analysis of post-course open-ended responses provided qualitative evidence of perspective transformation. Findings indicate a consistent and directionally uniform pattern of upward change across all survey items and all knowledge domains, with the greatest gains concentrated in foundational economic knowledge and the smallest gains observed where students entered with already high levels of competence. Qualitative analysis revealed four themes consistent with Mezirow's (1991) perspective transformation framework: a shift from intuitive to analytical decision-making, from surface to systemic understanding, from personal to social awareness of economic conditions, and from national to global analytical framing. Findings are treated as design inputs for a more methodologically rigorous second cycle and contribute practitioner-generated evidence on the role of authentic assessment ecosystems in fostering knowledge transformation in introductory economics education.
Downloads
References
Andrade, H. L. (2019). A critical review of re-search on student self-assessment. Fron-tiers in Education, 4, Article 87. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00087
Bassey, M. (1998). Action research for improv-ing educational practice. In R. Halsall (Ed.), Teacher research and school im-provement (pp. 93-108). Open University Press.
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quali-ty learning at university (4th ed.). McGraw-Hill/Open University Press.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through class-room assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139-148. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171008000205
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Re-search in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Christie, M., Carey, M., Robertson, A., & Grain-ger, P. (2015). Putting transformative learning theory into practice. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 55(1), 9-30.
Cohen, L., & Manion, L. (1994). Research methods in education (4th ed.). Routledge.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). De-signing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Ferrance, E. (2000). Action research. LAB at Brown University.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Herder and Herder.
Gogh, E., & Kovari, A. (2025). Homework in the AI era: Cheating, challenge, or change? Frontiers in Education, 10, Arti-cle 1609518. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1609518
Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analy-sis, 11(3), 255-274. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737011003255
Karaman, P. (2021). The impact of self-assessment on academic performance: A meta-analysis study. International Jour-nal of Research in Education and Science, 7(4), 1151-1166. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijres.2344
Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1988). The action research planner (3rd ed.). Deakin Uni-versity.
Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Nixon, R. (2019). The action research planner: Doing criti-cal participatory action research. Spring-er. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9151-1
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE.
Little, R. J. A., & Rubin, D. B. (2002). Statistical analysis with missing data (2nd ed.). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119013563
Mertler, C. A. (2013). Action research: Improv-ing schools and empowering educators (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. Jossey-Bass.
Spady, W. G. (1994). Outcome-based educa-tion: Critical issues and answers. Ameri-can Association of School Administrators.
Stenhouse, L. (1975). An introduction to cur-riculum research and development. Heinemann.
Villarroel, V., Bloxham, S., Bruna, D., Bruna, C., & Herrera-Seda, C. (2018). Authentic as-sessment: Creating a blueprint for course design. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(5), 840-854. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1412396
Walstad, W. B., & Rebeck, K. (2008). The test of understanding of college economics. American Economic Review, 98(2), 547-551. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.98.2.547
Wiggins, G. (1990). The case for authentic as-sessment. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 2(2). https://doi.org/10.7275/ffb1-mm19
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2006). Understand-ing by design (2nd ed.). ASCD.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Raymond Allan G. Vergara, Kimberly Christie S. Vergara
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See the Effect of Open Access).
