The impact of formative assessment on self-regulating learning in university classrooms

Fisseha Mikre Weldmeskel, Dreyer Johann Michael


This study describes the extent of which the use of quality formative assessment on lessons of a course involves the students as self-regulated learners. There is an increased interest among educational researchers to observe improvement of student self-regulation on learning. The predominant use of summative assessment remains a challenge to helping students develop self-regulation skills in learning and assessment. Quality formative assessment includes formative feedback, self-assessment and peer assessment. The study followed a partially mixed sequential research design and applied a quasi-experimental intervention that lasted for six weeks where six educators applied quality formative assessment on lessons of a general psychology course for intervention group students (N=191). The quantitative data were collected by self-regulated learning questionnaire before and after the use of quality formative assessment on lessons. The qualitative data were collected by focus group discussions with the students. The students’ perceptions on self-regulating learning were compared between the intervention (N=191) and the comparison (N=187) group of students. The quantitative analysis used t-test and biserial correlation and proved the presence of statistically significant difference between the two groups in perceiving the self-regulation of learning. Moreover, effect size estimate (Cohen’s d) was used to provide a strong validation on the variation between the two groups for the measure of self-regulating learning. Recommendations were made to promote the use of quality formative assessment aiming at the improvement of student self-regulation on learning and assessment in university classes.


self-regulated learning; quality formative assessment; feedback; self-assessment; peer assessment; constructivist learning

Full Text:



Andrade, Heidi. “Students as the definitive source of formative assessment: Academic self-assessment and the self-regulation of learning.” In NERA Conference Proceedings 2010. Paper 25, edited by Northeastern Educational Research Association (NERA) (Rocky Hill: University of Connectut, 2010. Accessed January, 2013.

Bevitt, Sheena. “Assessment innovation student experience: A new assessment challenge and call for a multi-perspective approach to assessment research.” Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 40, no. 1 (2015):103-119.

Birjandi Parvis and Tamjid Nasrin. “The role of self-assessment in promoting Iranian EFL students’ motivation.” English Language Teaching 3, no. 3 (2010): 211-220.

Clark, Ian. “Formative assessment: Policy, perspectives and practice.” Florida Journal of Educational Administration and Policy 4, no. 2 (2011):158-180.

Cohen, Jacob. Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. New York: Routledge Academic, 1988.

Creswell, John W., Vicki L. Plano Clark, Michelle L. Gutmann, and William E. Hanson. “Advanced Mixed Methods Research Designs.” In Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, edited by Abbas Tashakkori and Charles Teddlie, 209-239. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2003.

Creswell, John. Research design: A qualitative, quantitative and mixed- method approaches. 3rd ed. London: Sage Publication inc, 2009.

Hattie, J., and Helen Timperley. “The power of feedback.” Review of Educational Research 77, no. 1 (2007): 81-112.

Johansson, Charity H., and Peter Felton. Transforming Students: Fulfilling the Promise of Higher Education. John Hopkins Press, 2014.

Leech, Nancy, and Anthony Onwuegbuzie. “An array of qualitative data analysis tools: A call for data analysis triangulation.” School Psychology Quarterly 22, no. 4 (2007): 557-584.

Lu Jing Y and Law Nancy, “Online peer assessments: effects of cognitive and affective feedback.” Instructional Science 40, no. 2 (2012):257-275.

Lui, Ngar, and David Careless. “Peer feedback: The learning element of peer assessment.” Teaching in Higher Education 11, no. 3 (2006): 279-290.

Nicol, David J, and Debra M. Dick. “Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice.” Studies in Higher Education 31, no. 2 (2006):199-218.

Pintrich and De Groot, “Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance.” Journal of Educational Psychology 82, no. 1 (1990):33-40.

Pintrich, Paul. “The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning.” In Handbook of self-regulation, 452-502, edited by Boekaerts M. Pintrich PR and M. Zeidner. San Diego: CA Academic, 2000.

Punch, Keith. Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches. 2nd ed. New Delhi: Sage, 2005.

Sambell, Kay, and McDowell Liz. “The construction of the hidden curriculum: messages and meaning in the assessment of student learning.” Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 23, no. 4 (1998):391-402.

Shepard, Lorrie. “Formative assessment: Caveat emptor. The Future of Assessment: Shaping Teaching and Learning.” Paper presented at ETS Invitational conference, New York, October 10-11, 2005.

Wilson, Keithia, and Lizzo Alf. “A just in time intervention to support the academic efficacy of at risk first year students.” FYE Pacific Rim Conference: Griffith University, 2008.

Zimmerman, Barry. “Developing Self-Fulfilling Cycles of Academic Regulation: An Analysis of Exemplary Instructional Models.” In Self-regulated learning: From teaching to self-reflective practice, edited by DH Schunk and BJ Zimmerman, 1-19. New York: Guilford, 1998.

_____. “From Cognitive Modelling to Self-Regulation: A Social Cognitive Career Path.” Educational Psychologist 48, no. 3 (2013): 135-147.

_____. “Becoming a self-regulated student: An overview.” Theory into Practice 41, no. 2 (2002): 64-70.



  • There are currently no refbacks.