A good assessment question is only the beginning
An assessment question may be factually correct, clearly worded and well aligned with a learning objective. But that alone does not say everything about the quality of the assessment. What happens to the questions after they have been created? Who reviews the question set? Where is the correct version stored? How is the question evaluated after the assessment? And do these questions lead to reliable results?
Anyone involved in assessment, examinations or quality assurance knows that assessment quality is shaped by the entire process around it. It depends on how questions are developed, reviewed and reused. On how an assessment is assembled, administered and marked. And on what happens afterwards with results, feedback and analysis.
An assessment is therefore not only a moment to measure knowledge or skills. It is also a source of information to learn from.
This broader perspective is becoming increasingly important. A recent observation from The State of Education 2026 underlines that assessment quality is created throughout the entire assessment process. The Dutch Inspectorate of Education notes that quality assurance remains a vulnerable area across several education sectors. When schools and programmes do not systematically monitor, analyse and improve their education, it also becomes more difficult to properly safeguard the quality of assessments and examinations. This applies, for example, to secondary vocational education, where the safeguarding of certification is mentioned as a point of attention. It also applies to higher education, where examination boards generally take their responsibilities seriously, while there is still room for improvement in ensuring that all final qualifications are actually assessed.
This requires a structured and cyclical process in which assessment objectives, administration, marking, analysis and improvement are logically connected. By organising assessment in this way, institutions gain better insight into the reliability of results, the value of qualifications and the quality of education as a whole.
The assessment cycle as a framework
Assessment quality is not a final check at the end of the process. It is built step by step. From defining learning objectives and assessment matrices to developing questions, administering the assessment, marking answers and analysing results.
An assessment cycle, such as the one described by the Bureau for Testing and Assessment, helps to go through these steps consciously and transparently. Which choices are we making? Who reviews what? How do we mark fairly? And how do we use the outcomes to improve the next assessment?
This is especially important when several colleagues are involved in assessment development, administration and marking. Without a clear way of working, for example around how feedback is handled, fragmentation can quickly arise. One colleague works in their own document, another stores feedback in an email, and someone else knows from experience which question actually needs to be adjusted. As long as that knowledge is not shared and recorded, assessment quality remains vulnerable.
Going through the assessment cycle does not guarantee valid and reliable assessment scores, but it does increase the likelihood of achieving them. The cycle helps you look not only at the content of an assessment, but also at how that assessment is created, administered and used.
Even when an assessment is part of a larger assessment programme, the cycle remains relevant. Each assessment has its own development, administration and evaluation. At the same time, assessments within a programme are not separate from one another. They are connected to learning pathways, final qualifications and other assessment moments. It is precisely this coherence that determines whether the overall assessment programme provides a reliable picture of what students or candidates know and can do.
The quality of an assessment is not only in the question
An assessment question never stands entirely on its own. Its value depends on the purpose of the assessment, its place in the assessment matrix, the marking criteria and what happens with the results afterwards.
A question may be strong in terms of content, but still perform poorly if the marking criteria are too broad. Or if the question is included in an assessment where the level is not quite right. Sometimes it only becomes clear after the assessment that many candidates interpreted the question in the same wrong way. In that case, the question may not have been understood well enough.
A question can also function well on its own, but say little about the learning objective you actually wanted to measure. In that case, the improvement does not necessarily lie in the wording of the question, but in the place it has within the assessment, the way it is marked or the way results are interpreted.
That is why it is valuable to assess questions not only one by one, but also in relation to the wider whole. Does the question fit what you want to measure? Does it fit the rest of the assessment? And does the assessment provide information that can help improve the next assessment or the education itself?
In this way, assessment quality is not limited to the moment a question is approved. It is also about what you do afterwards with that question, the results and the insights gained.
Smarter assessment starts with control over your item bank
A well-structured item bank can deliver a lot of value. Good questions do not have to be developed from scratch every time, but can be carefully reused. This saves time and contributes to a more consistent assessment process.
But reuse also requires oversight. You need to know which questions are available, what they are linked to, how they performed previously and whether they still fit the purpose of the assessment.
This is reflected clearly in the customer story of MBO Amersfoort. A central item bank was an important point of attention for them. Previously, new questions were created for each new exam, which took a lot of time and introduced risks. By working from a fixed item bank, questions can be reused and variants can be generated. According to MBO Amersfoort, this improves both efficiency and quality.
This example shows how important oversight is. Which question is current? Which version has been approved? Which learning objective is the question linked to? And how do you ensure that quality remains safeguarded, even when several people are working on the same assessment or item bank?
In a digital item bank, safeguarding assessment quality becomes easier to transfer. Not because the system takes over the substantive review, but because agreements, versions, feedback and analyses come together in one place. This makes quality less dependent on separate documents, email inboxes or the knowledge of a few experienced colleagues.
Analysis makes quality easier to discuss
After the assessment, another important moment begins. Results show which questions function well, where candidates struggle and where improvement may be needed.
By properly analysing assessment results and item performance, the conversation about quality becomes more concrete. What went well? What stands out? Which questions need to be reviewed? And which insights are relevant for the next assessment?
Analysis does not automatically tell you whether a question is right or wrong. It provides signals. Its strength lies in the combination of data and educational judgement. What do we see in the results? Do we recognise this from practice? Does it match what teachers or assessors observed? And what does this mean for the next assessment?
Without analysis, much knowledge remains implicit. Teachers, examiners and assessors often have a sense of what works well and what could be improved. Analysis helps to substantiate that sense. Not simply to check afterwards, but to learn together from what the assessment reveals.
This aligns with the idea that assessment does not only have to be a final step. As also described in this blog about digital assessment, an assessment can actually be a starting point for improvement: a source of feedback for students, teachers, assessment developers and the organisation as a whole.
A short self-scan for your assessment process
If you want to take a broader look at assessment quality, you do not need to start with a large audit right away. A few targeted questions can already help start the conversation within your team:
Can we see, for each question, which learning objective, assessment criterion or final qualification it is linked to?
Is it clear who reviewed a question and why it was approved or adjusted?
Do we know which questions perform well and which need to be reviewed?
Can colleagues easily see which version of a question or assessment is current?
Are results and feedback used to improve future assessments?
When several answers are uncertain, this does not mean the assessment process is poor. It mainly shows where quality assurance can be made stronger, clearer or easier to transfer.
From assessment to improvement
Assessments will continue to have an evaluative function in the coming years. Sometimes it needs to be determined whether someone meets a standard, learning objective or final qualification. That requires careful assessment, clear marking criteria and a reliable process.
But the value of assessment does not have to end with the result.
An assessment can also show where questions can be refined, where feedback is needed or which areas require extra attention. In this way, assessment becomes not only a final step, but also input for improvement.
A good assessment question therefore remains important. But true assessment quality only emerges when that question is part of a carefully designed process. Then you know not only what you are measuring, but also why you are measuring it, how reliable the process is and how you can use the insights to keep improving.
Want to see how assessment development, administration, marking and analysis come together in one process?
Discover how Remindo helps connect item banks, assessment delivery and analysis more effectively.
