Authentic assessment is revered to support student learning, but it is typically described within the context of work-integrated learning and professional schools, leaving one to question whether a classroom-based curriculum can offer authentic assessments. This study documented the prevalence of authentic assessments throughout a complete health science undergraduate curriculum in accordance with the four core dimensions of authentic assessment: realism, cognitive challenge, evaluative judgement criteria and feedback. Using a literature-informed authentic assessment tool and institutionally standardized course syllabi, 455 assessments in 62 courses were classified as low, moderate or high on core authentic assessment dimensions. Results show that few assessments scored high across all core dimensions (<1% of all assessments), as there was considerable variability across dimensions. Feedback had the weakest dimensional authenticity score. Authentic assessments were more prevalent within upper-year, small capstone courses, although they were not precluded from early-year, large classrooms. Assignments were significantly more authentic than tests, though tests were more dominant in the curriculum (63% marks from tests versus 37% from assignments). This work serves as a model for others seeking to review assessments in their curriculum and provides evidence from a large, representative BSc program to make practical recommendations to promote authenticity of assessments.