The article explores the impact of generative AI (GenAI) tools on higher education (HE) assessment practices. It examines how GenAI tools like ChatGPT and Gemini perform in assessing students in data science, data analytics, and construction management disciplines. The study found that GenAI tools demonstrate strong subject knowledge, problem-solving, analytical, critical thinking, and presentation skills. However, their use can limit learning when unethical, such as cheating. The study also highlights the limitations of GenAI tools in certain disciplines, emphasizing the need for curriculum modifications and proper guidance in their use. The research involved three case studies where GenAI tools were tested on assessment tasks. The results showed that while both ChatGPT and Bard performed well in some areas, they struggled with complex thinking and critical analysis in construction management. The study recommends that HE institutions integrate GenAI tools into teaching and learning practices, ensuring ethical use and providing students with proper guidance. It also suggests that assessments should be designed to evaluate the impact of GenAI on learning outcomes, including the use of AI-generated content in assessments. The study concludes that GenAI tools can enhance teaching and learning but require careful implementation to maintain academic integrity. It calls for further research to explore the effectiveness of GenAI in other disciplines and to develop strategies for ethical use in HE. The findings emphasize the importance of adapting assessment practices to incorporate GenAI tools while ensuring that students develop critical thinking and problem-solving skills.The article explores the impact of generative AI (GenAI) tools on higher education (HE) assessment practices. It examines how GenAI tools like ChatGPT and Gemini perform in assessing students in data science, data analytics, and construction management disciplines. The study found that GenAI tools demonstrate strong subject knowledge, problem-solving, analytical, critical thinking, and presentation skills. However, their use can limit learning when unethical, such as cheating. The study also highlights the limitations of GenAI tools in certain disciplines, emphasizing the need for curriculum modifications and proper guidance in their use. The research involved three case studies where GenAI tools were tested on assessment tasks. The results showed that while both ChatGPT and Bard performed well in some areas, they struggled with complex thinking and critical analysis in construction management. The study recommends that HE institutions integrate GenAI tools into teaching and learning practices, ensuring ethical use and providing students with proper guidance. It also suggests that assessments should be designed to evaluate the impact of GenAI on learning outcomes, including the use of AI-generated content in assessments. The study concludes that GenAI tools can enhance teaching and learning but require careful implementation to maintain academic integrity. It calls for further research to explore the effectiveness of GenAI in other disciplines and to develop strategies for ethical use in HE. The findings emphasize the importance of adapting assessment practices to incorporate GenAI tools while ensuring that students develop critical thinking and problem-solving skills.