Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Formative Assessment and Feedback Strategies

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
International Handbook of Psychology Learning and Teaching

Part of the book series: Springer International Handbooks of Education ((SIHE))

  • 1257 Accesses

Abstract

Formative assessment and formative feedback strategies are very powerful factors for promoting effective learning and instruction in all educational contexts. Formative assessment, as a superordinate term, refers to all activities that instructors and/or learners undertake to get information about teaching and learning that are used in a diagnostic manner. Formative feedback is a core component of formative assessment. If well designed and implemented in terms of a formative feedback strategy, it provides students and teachers with information on the current state of learning in order to help the further regulation of learning and instruction in the direction of the learning standards strived for. This chapter presents the issues in, as well as selected approaches for, designing formative assessment and feedback strategies. Based on recent meta-analyses and literature reviews, it summarizes core theoretical and empirical findings on the conditions and effects of formative assessment and feedback in (higher) education. Furthermore, it discusses challenges and implications for applying the current insights and strategies for effective formative assessment and feedback in higher education. Finally, suggestions on helpful resources are provided.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 449.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ajjawi, R., Kent, F., Broadbent, J., Hong-Meng Tai, J., Bearman, M., & Boud, D. (2021). Feedback that works: A realist review of feedback interventions for written tasks. Studies in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2021.1894115

  • Andrade, H., & Cizek, G. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of formative assessment. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, R., & Garner, M. (2010). Is the feedback in higher education assessment worth the paper it is written on? Teachers’ reflections on their practices. Teaching in Higher Education, 15(2), 187–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562511003620019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bearman, M., Dawson, P., Ajjawi, R., Tai, J., & Boud, D. (Eds.). (2020). Re-imagining university assessment in a digital world. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beaumont, C., O’Doherty, M., & Shannon, L. (2011). Reconceptualising assessment feedback: A key to improving student learning? Studies in Higher Education, 36, 671–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for quality learning at university. What the student does (3rd ed.). Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., & McCormick, R. (2010). Reflections and new directions. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 493–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boston, C. (2002). The concept of formative assessment. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 8. https://doi.org/10.7275/kmcq-dj31. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/pare/vol8/iss1/9

  • Boud, D., & Dawson, P. (2021). What feedback literate teachers do: An empirically-derived competency framework. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2021.1910928

  • Boud, D., & Molloy, E. (Eds.). (2013). Feedback in higher and professional education: Understanding it and doing it well. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65, 245–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carless, D. (2020). From teacher transmission of information to student feedback literacy: Activating the learner role in feedback processes. Active Learning in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787420945845

  • Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1315–1325. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carless, D., & Winstone, N. (2020). Teacher feedback literacy and its interplay with student feedback literacy. Teaching in Higher Education, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1782372

  • Carless, D., Salter, D., Yang, M., & Lam, J. (2011). Developing sustainable feedback practices. Studies in Higher Education, 36(4), 395–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carless, D., Bridges, S. M., Chan, C. K. Y., & Glofcheski, R. (Eds.). (2017). Scaling up assessment for learning in higher education. Singapore: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chong, S. W. (2021). Reconsidering student feedback literacy from an ecological perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(1), 92–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, J. , Porath, S., Thiele, J., & Jobe, M. (2020). Action research. NPP eBooks. 34. Online: https://newprairiepress.org/ebooks/34

  • Cranney, J., Hulme, J. A., Suleeman, J., Job, R., & Dunn, D. S. (2021). Assessing learning outcomes in undergraduate psychology education: Lessons learned from five countries. In S. A. Nolan, C. M. Hakala, & R. E. Landrum (Eds.), Assessing undergraduate learning in psychology: Strategies for measuring and improving student performance (pp. 179–201). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000183-013

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • de Kleijn, R. A. (2021). Supporting student and teacher feedback literacy: An instructional model for student feedback processes. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2021.1967283

  • Double, K. S., McGrane, J. A., & Hopfenbeck, T. N. (2020). The impact of peer assessment on academic performance: A meta-analysis of control group studies. Educational Psychology Review, 32(2), 481–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, C. (2013). Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education. Review of Educational Research, 83(1), 70–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fouad, N. A., Grus, C. L., Hatcher, R. L., Kaslow, N. J., Hutchings, P. S., Madson, M. B., Collins, F.L., & Crossman, R. E. (2009). Competency benchmarks: A model for understanding and measuring competence in professional psychology across training levels. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 3(4), 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015832

  • Fouad, N. A., Hatcher, R. L., & McCutcheon, S. (2022). Introduction to the special issue on competency in training and education. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 16(2), 109–111. https://doi.org/10.1037/tep0000408

  • Gikandi, J. W., Morrow, D., & Davis, N. E. (2011). Online formative assessment in higher education: A review of the literature. Computers & education, 57(4), 2333–2351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldin, I., Narciss, S., Foltz, P., & Bauer, M. (2017). New directions in formative feedback in interactive learning environments. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 27(3), 385–392. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-016-0135-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonsalvez, C. J., Deane, F. P., Terry, J., Nasstasia, Y., & Shires, A. (2021). Innovations in competence assessment: Design and initial validation of the Vignette Matching Assessment Tool (VMAT). Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 15(2), 106–116. https://doi.org/10.1037/tep0000302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonsalvez, C. J., Shafranske, E. P., McLeod, H. J., & Falender, C. A. (2021). Competency-based standards and guidelines for psychology practice in Australia: opportunities and risks. Clinical Psychologist, 25(3), 244–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/13284207.2020.1829943

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. A. (2009). Visible learning. A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. A., & Gan, M. (2011). Instruction based on feedback. In R. Mayer & P. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction (pp. 249–271). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, M., Ajjawi, R., Boud, D., & Molloy, E. (Eds.). (2019). The impact of feedback in higher education: Improving assessment outcomes for learners. Singapore: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iglesias Pérez, M. C., Vidal-Puga, J., & Pino Juste, M. R. (2020). The role of self and peer assessment in Higher Education. Studies in Higher Education, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2020.1783526

  • Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, H., Xiong, X., Hunter, C. V., Guo, X., & Tywoniw, R. (2020). Does peer assessment promote student learning? A meta-analysis. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(2), 193–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1620679

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipnevich, A., & Panadero, E. (2021). A review of feedback models and theories: Descriptions, definitions, and conclusions. Frontiers in Education. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.720195

  • Mathan, S. A., & Koedinger, K. R. (2005). Fostering the intelligent novice: Learning from errors with metacognitive tutoring. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 257–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, R., Perry, T., & Wardle, L. (2021). Formative assessment and feedback for learning in higher education: A systematic review. Review of Education, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3292

  • Mory, E. H. (2004). Feedback research revisited. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (2nd ed., pp. 745–783). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Narciss, S. (2004). The impact of informative tutoring feedback and self-efficacy on motivation and achievement in concept learning. Experimental Psychology, 51(3), 214–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narciss, S. (2006). Informatives tutorielles feedback [Informative tutorial feedback]. Entwicklungs- und Evaluationsprinzipien auf der Basis instruktionspsychologischer Erkenntnisse. Münster: Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Narciss, S. (2008). Feedback strategies for interactive learning tasks. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. J. G. van Merrienboer, & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (3rd ed., pp. 125–144). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Narciss, S. (2012). Feedback strategies. In N. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the learning sciences (Vol. F(6), pp. 1289–1293). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Narciss, S. (2013). Designing and evaluating tutoring feedback strategies for digital learning environments on the basis of the interactive tutoring feedback model. Digital Education Review, 23, 7–26. Retrieved from http://greav.ub.edu/der

    Google Scholar 

  • Narciss, S. (2017). Conditions and effects of feedback viewed through the lens of the Interactive Tutoring Feedback Model. In D. Carless, S. M. Bridges, C. K. Y. Chan, & R. Glofcheski (Eds.), Scaling up assessment for learning in higher education (pp. 173–189). Singapore: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Narciss, S., Hammer, E., Damnik, G., Kisielski, K., & Körndle, H. (2021). Promoting prospective teacher competencies for designing, implementing, evaluating, and adapting interactive formative feedback strategies. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 20(2), 261–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narciss, S., & Huth, K. (2006). Fostering achievement and motivation with bug-related tutoring feedback in a computer-based training on written subtraction. Learning and Instruction, 16, 310–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narciss, S., Schnaubert, L., Andres, E., Eichelmann, A., Goguadze, G., & Sosnovsky, S. (2014). Exploring feedback and student characteristics relevant for personalizing feedback strategies. Computers & Education, 71, 56–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Natriello, G. (1987). The impact of evaluation processes on students. Educational Psychologist, 22(2), 155–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicol, D. (2019). Reconceptualising feedback as an internal not an external process. Italian Journal of Educational Research, 71–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicol, D. (2021). The power of internal feedback: Exploiting natural comparison processes. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(5), 756–778.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31, 199–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nolan, S. A., Hakala, C. M., & Landrum, R. E. (Eds.). (2021). Assessing undergraduate learning in psychology: Strategies for measuring and improving student performance. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panadero, E., & Lipnevich, A. (2021). A review of feedback typologies and models: Towards an integrative model of feedback elements. Educational Research Review, 100416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100416

  • Panadero, E., Lipnevich, A., & Broadbent, J. (2019). Turning self-assessment into self-feedback. In M. Henderson, R. Ajjawi, D. Boud, & E. Molloy (Eds.), The impact of feedback in higher education (pp. 147–163). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Price, M., Handley, K., & Millar, J. (2011). Feedback: Focusing attention on engagement. Studies in Higher Education, 36, 879–896.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puentedura, R. (2012). Building Upon SAMR. www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2012/09/03/BuildingUponSAMR.pdf

  • Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback. Behavioral Science, 28, 4–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redecker, C., & Johannessen, Ø. (2013). Changing assessment – Towards a new assessment paradigm using ICT. European Journal of Education, 48(1), 79–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reinholz, D. (2016). The assessment cycle: A model for learning through peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(2), 301–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, S., Pope, D., & Holyoak, L. (2013). Can we meet their expectations? Experiences and perceptions of feedback in first year undergraduate students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38, 260–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodolfa, E., & Schaffer, J. (2019). Challenges to psychology education and training in the culture of competence. American Psychologist, 74(9), 1118–1128. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000513

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional system. Instructional Science, 18, 119–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78, 153–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spector, J. M., Ifenthaler, D., Samspon, D., Yang, L., Mukama, E., Warusavitarana, A., … Gibson, D. C. (2016). Technology enhanced formative assessment for 21st century learning. Educational Technology & Society, 19(3), 58–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • To, J., & Panadero, E. (2019). Peer assessment effects on the self-assessment process of first-year undergraduates. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(6), 920–932.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Todd, J. S., & Hammer, E. Y. (2021). How to create a culture of assessment. In S. A. Nolan, C. M. Hakala, & R. E. Landrum (Eds.), Assessing undergraduate learning in psychology: Strategies for measuring and improving student performance (pp. 67–76). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000183-006

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Kleij, F. M., & Lipnevich, A. A. (2021). Student perceptions of assessment feedback: A critical scoping review and call for research. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 33(2), 345–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, D., & Han, H. (2021). Applying learning analytics dashboards based on process-oriented feedback to improve students’ learning effectiveness. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37(2), 487–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wanner, T., & Palmer, E. (2018). Formative self-and peer assessment for improved student learning: the crucial factors of design, teacher participation and feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(7), 1032–1047. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1427698

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitmore, J. (2010). Coaching for Performance: The principles and practice of coaching and leadership fully revised 25th anniversary edition. Hachette UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiener, N. (1954). The human use of human beings: Cybernetics and society. Oxford: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiliam, D. (2006). Formative assessment: Getting the focus right. Educational Assessment, 11(3-4), 283–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiliam, D. (2010). An integrative summary of the research literature and implications for a theory of formative assessment. In H. Andrade & G. Cizek (Eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 18–40). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiliam, D., & Thompson, M. (2007). Integrating assessment with instruction: What will it take to make it work? In C. A. Dwyer (Ed.), The future of assessment: Shaping teaching and learning (pp. 53–82). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winstone, N. E., Balloo, K., & Carless, D. (2022). Discipline-specific feedback literacies: A framework for curriculum design. Higher Education, 83, 57–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00632-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winstone, N., & Carless, D. (2019). Designing effective feedback processes in higher education: A learning-focused approach. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wylie, E. C., & Lyon, C. J. (2020). Developing a formative assessment protocol to support professional growth. Educational Assessment, 25(4), 314–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiong, Y., & Suen, H. K. (2018). Assessment approaches in massive open online courses: Possibilities, challenges and future directions. International Review of Education, 64, 241–263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-018-9710-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Science - Faculty of Psychology, Psychology of Learning and Instruction, Technische Universitaet Dresden, Dresden, Sachsen, Germany

    Susanne Narciss

  2. Department of Educational Research, University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria

    Joerg Zumbach

Authors
  1. Susanne Narciss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joerg Zumbach
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Susanne Narciss .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Educational Research, University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria

    Joerg Zumbach

  2. Department of Psychology, University of South Florida, Bonita Springs, FL, USA

    Douglas A. Bernstein

  3. School of Science - Faculty of Psychology, Psychology of Learning and Instruction, Technische Universitaet Dresden, Dresden, Sachsen, Germany

    Susanne Narciss

  4. Department of Human, Philosophical and Educational Sciences (DISUFF), University of Salerno, Fisciano, Italy

    Giuseppina Marsico

Section Editor information

  1. University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria

    Joerg Zumbach

  2. Psychologie des Lehrens und Lernens, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Deutschland

    Susanne Narciss

  3. Department of Psychology, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA

    Douglas A. Bernstein

  4. University of Salerno, Fisciano, Italy

    Giuseppina Marsico

  5. Federal University of Bahia, Salvador, Brazil

    Giuseppina Marsico

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Narciss, S., Zumbach, J. (2023). Formative Assessment and Feedback Strategies. In: Zumbach, J., Bernstein, D.A., Narciss, S., Marsico, G. (eds) International Handbook of Psychology Learning and Teaching. Springer International Handbooks of Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28745-0_63

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation