CiteNScope — Scholarly Index & Analytics
Discover / IJRBSPUBLICATION RECORD

Authentic e-assessment in South African higher education: A systematic review of AI-driven assessment practices and challenges

Bianca N Mkhize-Simelane · Xolani Khohliso ORCID ↗

International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science · 2026 · Vol. 15 / Issue 2 · 429-443

Research reach

Publication metrics

External links open provider records or DOI searches. Provider counts are not combined. Mendeley readership measures saves, not citations.

Dimensions

Live provider badge. If unavailable, use the Dimensions link above.

CROSSREF CITATIONS0

Observed 21 Oct 2026, 07:22 UTC

OpenAlex · Citations0Cached provider observation

Observed 21 Oct 2026 07:23 UTC

Mendeley · Readers—No verified count available

OpenAlex and Mendeley observations refresh on article visits, at most once per 24 hours. Unavailable data is not zero. Google Scholar opens a DOI search.

OpenAlex / Citation year

Annual citations to this article

View provider totals ↑

Citations received by this article, grouped by the year of the citing work. Crossref and OpenAlex lifetime totals remain separate in Publication metrics.

2017–2026 Annual history last updated:

Citations received

OpenAlex · year of the citing work

OpenAlex

Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.

2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.

View data & coverage

2026 is incomplete. Within a successfully fetched ten-year window, omitted years mean zero. Years beyond a saved observation’s window remain unknown (—). Older citations are excluded, so this chart’s sum may differ from the OpenAlex lifetime total. The date above belongs to this annual history; an unsuccessful refresh keeps the previous observation.

Overview

Abstract

The growing use of AI in higher education has heightened interest in genuine e-assessment to improve assessment efficacy, inclusivity, and academic integrity. Nonetheless, the implementation of AI-enhanced assessment techniques in South African higher education is inconsistent, influenced by structural disparities, ethical dilemmas, and differing degrees of institutional preparedness. This study offers a qualitative systematic literature analysis that investigates the implementation issues and pedagogical ramifications of AI-enhanced genuine e-assessment at South African Higher Education Institutions (SAHEIs). The evaluation, structured using a PICo-informed framework and according to PRISMA principles, synthesised evidence from 49 peer-reviewed publications published from 2020 to 2024. A narrative theme synthesis was utilised to examine persistent patterns concerning implementation obstacles, ethical considerations, assessment change, inclusion, and governance. AI-driven assessment technologies have significant advantages, such as higher grading consistency, scalability, tailored feedback, and increased student involvement. Nonetheless, infrastructural constraints, ongoing digital disparities, inadequate faculty readiness, and the lack of cohesive institutional policies hinder these advantages. Ethical concerns, especially algorithmic bias, data privacy, and academic integrity, exacerbate the implementation of AI in varied and resource-limited settings. This analysis finds hybrid evaluation models that integrate AI automation with human judgement as the most pedagogically sound and ethically responsible method. The study indicates that AI-enhanced authentic e-assessment possesses transformative potential for SAHE, contingent upon context-sensitive policies, ongoing professional development, equitable infrastructure investment, and strong ethical governance frameworks.

Keywords: {'name': 'artificial intelligence (AI),'}, {'name': 'authentic e-assessment,'}, {'name': 'e-assessment,'}, {'name': 'higher education,'}, {'name': 'ethical governance'}

Authors & affiliations

Bianca N Mkhize-Simelane
Central University of Technology

Xolani Khohliso
Central University of Technology

Deposited references

Supplied references, not a list of publications citing this article.

DOI: 10.37284/ijar.8.1.3606

DOI: 10.4018/979-8-3373-2130-1.ch006

DOI: 10.16920/jeet/2024/v38i3/24246

DOI: 10.24310/ijtei.101.2024.17813

DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.5530978

DOI: 10.33050/itee.v3i1.680

DOI: 10.1109/MSCC62288.2024.10697011

DOI: 10.3389/bjbs.2024.14048

DOI: 10.26803/ijlter.23.11.27

DOI: 10.29138/educatio.v9i4.1585

DOI: 10.14742/ajet.9434

DOI: 10.4018/979-8-3693-2145-4.ch009

DOI: 10.30827/Digibug.59151

DOI: 10.34190/ejel.21.5.3114

DOI: 10.55041/IJSREM52367

DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123258

DOI: 10.31893/multirev.2025016

DOI: 10.38140/ijer-2025.vol7.2.05

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-56953-1_11

DOI: 10.56880/experior31.6

DOI: 10.4018/979-8-3693-0240-8.ch008

DOI: 10.4337/9781035326020.00020

DOI: 10.29007/zqs7

DOI: 10.34190/icer.1.1.3180

DOI: 10.34190/icer.1.1.3231

DOI: 10.4018/979-8-3373-2130-1.ch002

DOI: 10.29333/pr/16677

DOI: 10.20961/ijie.v9i1.100723

DOI: 10.26803/ijlter.23.11.8

DOI: 10.1007/s10639-024-12820-x

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-33261-6_2

Perkins, M., Roe, J., & Furze, L. (2024). The AI assessment scale revisited: A framework for educational assessment. arXiv Preprint. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2412.09029

DOI: 10.30557/QW000079

DOI: 10.1002/tl.20625

DOI: 10.4018/979-8-3693-6170-2.ch009

DOI: 10.47577/teh.v11i.12908

DOI: 10.9734/ajess/2024/v50i101616

DOI: 10.22159/ijss.2024v13i1.52834

DOI: 10.14742/apubs.2024.1128

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.1002176

DOI: 10.4018/979-8-3373-6018-8.ch004

DOI: 10.1080/2331186X.2023.2295654

DOI: 10.14742/ajet.8902

DOI: 10.4018/979-8-3373-2397-8.ch007

DOI: 10.4324/9781003482918-16

DOI: 10.4018/979-8-3693-5443-8.ch003

DOI: 10.34190/icer.1.1.3145

DOI: 10.37074/jalt.2024.7.1.12

DOI: 10.4018/979-8-3693-6351-5.ch008

DOI: 10.1186/s41239-024-00468-z