Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Systematic review reveals structural architecture as the primary barrier to programme-level assessment in higher education, highlighting the need to redistribute implementation burdens.
Programme-level assessment (PLA) has gained traction in higher education policy and practice, yet examples of successful implementation remain limited. This systematic review synthesises 28 empirical and conceptual studies to examine the structural and governance factors shaping PLA implementation across institutional and disciplinary contexts. The findings are presented thematically, examining institutional architecture, stakeholder experience and transition mechanisms. Three main arguments are developed: that implementation failure is primarily architectural rather than cultural; that programmatic assessment and Integrated Programme Assessment (IPA) are analytically distinct models with structurally different capacities to address the architecture problem and that mechanisms which sustain successful transition work by redistributing the cost-benefit asymmetry of implementation rather than by asking individuals to absorb it. The evidence base remains heavily concentrated in health and professional education, and findings should be applied to other disciplinary contexts with caution.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Francis et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: