What is the Two-Lane Approach to Program-Level Assessment Design?
The rise of Generative AI (GenAI) has fundamentally challenged the traditional model of university assessment. For teaching, learning, and assessment professionals, a viable path forward can be found in the two-lane approach to program-level assessment design, which is being pioneered i.a. at the University of Sydney (Bridgeman et al., 2024). This approach aims to balance the need for secured validation of core skills with the essential development of authentic, future-ready capabilities (Bridgeman et al., 2024).
This approach necessitates a shift from siloed unit assessment to a program-level model, where program-level learning outcomes (PLOs) are progressively and holistically validated across the entire degree. This change towards a program-level model results in two distinct “lanes”, each with their own approaches to assessment in terms of focus, security, and usage of AI.
| Lane 1 | Lane 2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Role of assessment | Assessment of learning | Assessment for and as learning |
| Level of operation | Mainly at program level | Mainly at unit level |
| Assessment security | Secured, in person | ‘Open’ / Unsecured |
| Role of generative AI | May or may not be allowed by examiner | As relevant, use of AI scaffolded & supported |
| TEQSA alignment | Principle 2 – forming trustworthy judgements of student learning | Principle 1 – equip students to participate ethically and actively in a society pervaded with AI |
| Examples | In person interactive oral assessments; viva voces; contemporaneous in-class assessments and skill development; tests and exams. | AI to provoke reflection, suggest structure, brainstorm ideas, summarise literature, make content, suggest counterarguments, improve clarity, provide formative feedback, etc. |
Source: Bridgeman et al., 2004
Within Australian higher education there is increased interest in adopting concepts from, or even fully shifting toward the two-lane assessment approach. In this blog post, you’ll learn more about how Portflow supports the demands of the two-lane approach and enables program-level assessment within your existing digital learning environment, including the Learning Management System.
How do Portflow & the LMS complement each other?
Portflow is the digital student portfolio designed to facilitate student-owned learning, reflection, and assessment in higher education. It enables institutions to move towards a program-level assessment design that is fully streamlined with their existing digital learning environment. Learning Management Systems (LMS) such as Canvas by Instructure, Brightspace by D2L, Blackboard by Anthology, and Moodle, are the cornerstone of many digital learning environments across (Australian) higher education. These systems already provide powerful mechanisms and tools for organising and arranging learning activities, delivering content, as well as assessment of learning. This is why Portflow is explicitly built to serve as an extension to the LMS.
The LMS is often the place for unit-level content and assessments. However, assessments that are siloed at the unit level run the risk of producing shallow learning (Whitfield & Hartley, 2019).
In contrast to the LMS, Portflow adds a complementary, program-level (overarching) space where the student:
- Curates evidence from various sources and contexts (e.g. units, placements, but also non-formal learning contexts),
- Reflects on that evidence, soliciting feedback from peers, educators, and external users (e.g. placement supervisors).
- Structures their developmental journey against the overarching PLOs of their degree.
How dows Portflow enable program-level assessment design?
In Portflow, students (under their own direction) can visualize their developmental progress towards goals, which can be mapped to PLOs. Students are accountable for collecting evidence, soliciting feedback from teachers, fellow students, and experts, and recording progress evaluations. Teachers/programs can offer structured templates for different parts of the portfolio to students. In the template, the program can define sections, collections, goals, and even specific learning activities. This allows the program to provide the necessary degree of scaffolding to its learners. The components (sections, collections, goals) in Portflow can be used in a flexible manner to accommodate various learning designs.
- Section: set of collections (year, semester, project, minor, subject)
- Collection: where learning takes place (unit, placement, project, internship)
- Goal: towards which a student is working (PLOs ,competency, learning objective, skill)
- Evidence: artefacts, reports, products, reflections (data points)
How do Portflow & your LMS support both lanes required for program-level assessment?
In a digital learning environment that includes both an LMS and Portflow, the LMS remains the engine for the unit-level delivery of content, and the place where assignments are submitted for a grade. Portflow, in contrast, functions as the environment where the continuous, developmental work of Lane 2 is collated, reflected upon, and structured against the PLOs to provide the necessary developmental evidence and visual journey required for Program-Level Assessment (Bridgeman et al., 2024).
Subsequently, Portflow’s seamless integration with the LMS allows it to act as a bridge between both lanes, so that institutions can ensure that the learning demonstrated in Lane 2 can inform the secure judgment in Lane 1.
| Portflow Capabilities | Alignment to Two-Lane Approach |
|---|---|
| Templates, Goals, Collections | Provide the structure to map both lanes to a framework of PLOs (Lanes 1 and 2). |
| Assignment import | Certain learning management systems allow students to directly import previously submitted assignments into Portflow, along with their original rubric and feedback. This helps students to more easily connect unit-level learning to their PLOs (Lane 2). |
| Feedback dialogues (threaded conversations) | Promoting learner engagement with feedback and insights provided by academics, coaches, peers, and external users (e.g. placement supervisor). |
| Evidence versioning | Allowing learners to show understanding of the feedback they received through iterative versions of evidence. |
| Growth charts (e.g. spider diagrams) | Visualises the student’s progressive development against PLOs (Lane 2). |
| Progress reviews | Encourage self-assessments as well as assessments from peers, unit leaders, coaches, and external users (e.g. placement supervisors) on student progress towards PLOs. Can be used to inform intermediate-stakes progress decisions (Lane 2). |
| AI feedback summaries | Can be used by learners as well as coaches to summarise the feedback provided to them across their learning journey, sparking reflection and responsible use of AI, and informing choices for future learning (Lane 2). |
| Snapshots | Bridge the gap to Lane 1 (High-Stakes) assessment. A student can create a frozen version of their complete portfolio (or a section), and hand in their snapshot in an LMS assignment or external grading tool for independent review by a final assessment panel. This ensures the integrity of the submitted evidence at the point of high-stakes validation, providing the necessary assurance of learning. |
Criticism regarding the Two-Lane Approach
Some criticism voiced on the two-lane approach to assessment is that it can be perceived or positioned as an oversimplification, or too binary of a choice between secured and open/free use of AI. The reality of assessment often needs to be more nuanced. Additionally, the concept might miss the focus on the process of learning in favour of the result of learning, while the process of learning is considered to be paramount in holistic assessment (c.f. Curtis, 2025, Reynoldson, 2025, and Steel, 2024).
Portflow mitigates both of these concerns by visualising the iterative approach to learning through usage of multiple versions of evidence, threaded feedback conversations and continuous engagement in the learning and reflective process. Additionally, Portflow allows users to track the authentic learning journey as well as authentic engagement with AI tools for full transparency.
What does an example assessment design look like?
Weeks 1 -3 Low-stakes
- The course (program) works with a template to give students a structure for their portfolio;
- The student collects data points both in the LMS, and within Portflow itself;
- The student imports the data points and feedback from the LMS, and any additional feedback is extracted and processed.
- The student links the data points and feedback to the relevant goals (PLOs)
Weeks 3-4 Intermediate-stakes 1
- The student performs a self-assessment, and additionally requests progress evaluations from their coach or an expert.
Weeks 4-6 Low-stakes
- Based on the intermediate-stakes progress evaluations, the students adds a self-reflection and collects additional feedback
Weeks 6-7 Intermediate-stakes 2
- A second self-assessment and progress evaluation follows.
Week 7-9 Low-stakes
- The student collects additional data points and feedback following the intermediate-stakes feedback.
Curious to see how Portflow works in practice?
Now that you know how Portflow supports the two-lane approach to program-level assessment by seamlessly integrating with your LMS, you might be curious to see Portflow in action. Book a demo now, and discover how Portflow can help future-proof your assessment design.
Sources
Bridgeman, A., Liu, D., & Weeks, R. (2024). Program level assessment design and the two-lane approach. The University of Sydney: Teaching@Sydney. https://educational-innovation.sydney.edu.au/teaching@sydney/program-level-assessment-two-lane/
Curtis, G. J. (2025). The two-lane road to hell is paved with good intentions: why an all-or-none approach to generative AI, integrity, and assessment is insupportable. Higher Education Research and Development. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2025.2476516
Reynoldson, M. (2025) The two-lane approach has us veering further off track. The Mind File. https://themindfile.substack.com/p/two-lane-approach-veering-off-track
Steel, A. (2024). 2 lanes or 6 lanes? It depends on what you are driving: Use of AI in Assessment. UNSW. https://www.education.unsw.edu.au/news-events/news/two-six-lanes-ai-assessment
Whitfield, R., Hartley, P. (2019). Assessment Strategy: Enhancement of Student Learning Through a Programme Focus. In: Diver, A. (eds) Employability via Higher Education: Sustainability as Scholarship. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26342-3_16
About the Author: Thomas Ohlenforst
