Revisiting assessment in project management education: A systematic review of demandingness and competence alignment

This systematic review synthesises empirical research on assessment practices in project management education (PME) published between 2016 and July 2025. Drawing on 52 peer-reviewed studies, the review examines (1) the distribution of assessment forms, purposes, methods and learning outcomes; (2) the demandingness of assessment practices through a four-dimensional burden framework (cognitive, collaboration, feedback/grading, technical); and (3) the extent to which assessments target and demonstrate competences aligned with the IPMA ICB4 framework. A structure–process perspective and a Purpose–Process–Impact lens guided analysis at both study and episode levels (n = 240 assessment episodes). Findings show a field-level shift toward mixed-purpose, iterative assessment cycles that integrate feedback, reflection and moderation, particularly in postgraduate programmes. Tests/scales and project-based artefacts dominate the landscape, while simulations, games and AI-assisted assessment remain less common. Burden analysis shows that demandingness is patterned and design-dependent: cognitive load is highest in exams and design tasks, collaboration load in peer and team-based activities, feedback/grading load in project artefacts, and technical load in simulations and game-based assessments. Competence mapping reveals strong representation of People competences and partial coverage of Practice competences, but consistent underrepresentation of Perspective competences such as governance, strategy and cultural awareness. These patterns highlight structural tendencies in PME to privilege operational performance over contextual judgement. The review concludes by identifying opportunities to broaden competence coverage, enhance process traceability and design sustainable workload configurations across assessment systems.