The CDIO framework provides extensive guidelines for improving engineering education quality, yet a critical gap exists in its Standard 11 - Learning Assessment. The framework’s treatment of assessment quality enhancement is superficial, concentrating primarily on assessment 'of' learning (AoL) and neglecting the transformative potential of assessment 'for' learning (AfL). While the CDIO syllabus expresses a deep understanding of the importance of self-regulation (González, León, & Sarmiento, 2020) and identity affirmation for success in engineering education, their link to assessment is ignored. The study highlights the necessity for a cohesive integration and reinforcement between AoL and AfL, advocating for self-regulation as a key element of the latter. This is crucial especially in engineering mathematics where serious shortcomings have been identified. To spark a dialogue about the need to update Standard 11, this study presents a practical case from Finnish engineering education, demonstrating how Flipped Assessment (FA) has been specifically developed to facilitate the implementation of Flipped Learning (FL) in teaching of engineering mathematics. The study argues that simply evolving mathematics teaching cultures to align with CDIO standards is not enough; there is a critical need to revolutionize assessment practices as well. In an era where artificial intelligence is challenging conventional assessment paradigms, it is an opportune moment to critically reflect on the ethics of assessment and its validity. As an inherently ethical endeavor, the focus of discussion should shift from the technical validity of assessments to their normative validity. If assessment is detached from its role in nurturing students’ mathematical identity and self-regulation, it may lead to engineers who are unprepared for the demands and expectations of their professional careers.
