When was the last time you sat in front of a blank page and had two hours to spill all you knew about a topic? Whatever the question they need to answer, scientists chat, expose issues, consult previous works, and collegially look for solutions. So why do we ask students to do things they will never do again in real life? Five years ago, I decided to tighten the gap between the competencies BSc Biology students need to build and how we assess their skills. I used backward design starting from skills assessment - based on what we expect from scientists engaging in research or higher education - and developed a comprehensive teaching strategy where students use factual information as a tool rather than an end-point. This strategy involves pre-class interactive readings with in-text questions and formative feedback. Students may influence the class content by indicating their "muddy points," which I address during class. Most class time is devoted to real case studies or small-group investigations where students research and evaluate facts they then use to solve a problem.

In this teaching strategy, integration capacities are more central than fact memorization; hence, I created an authentic assessment mode reflecting the learning depth and integration capacity using non-proctored open-book exams containing complex cases. I encourage students to work together and to use the web if they so wish - a double-edged sword for some. Cases include a few strategic questions with unique answers (an algorithm gives every student different starting numbers), asking students to produce personal conclusions even if they work in groups.

I then measured the learning outcomes in four cohorts of BSc Biology students in 2nd-year introductory mandatory courses and five cohorts of 3rd/4th-year advanced optional courses. The measures included objective (numerical scores, benchmark responses) and subjective measures (students' feedback) to evaluate four points:
Specificity: Although one might think everyone would get 100%, exam grades are lower than they were in classical exams of previous years; however, grades are more representative of students' real capacities.

Demonstration: By working on exams at their own pace, students feel they can give their best while less paralyzed by stress, time constraints, or other unrelated distractions.

Empowerment: Confronting answers with peers allows students to justify, explain or elaborate, reinforcing their thinking process.
Capacity: In addition to practicing negotiation skills, students build lasting abilities in concept integration and strategic thinking, which they can confidently reuse in actual, unexplored situations, such as in graduate studies or at the workplace.

Creating all the cases and textbook content took considerable time, extensive research, and work over a two-year transition period and three years of testing. However, it was worth the investment since circular pedagogy and authentic assessments improve students' preparedness for future studies.

Keywords: Pedagogy, authentic assessment, capacity building, STEM education.