Why formative assessment matters more than ever
Schools are under constant pressure to demonstrate achievement through summative measures—unit tests, benchmark assessments, and state or provincial exams. In many districts, these results influence school ratings, public perception, and sometimes even funding decisions. But summative tests only tell you what happened at the end. They rarely explain why students struggled, what misconceptions they held during learning, or what instructional moves could have changed the outcome sooner.
That is where formative assessment becomes a practical advantage. In Natalie Miller’s action research study in a seventh-grade science setting, formative assessment was used not as “more testing,” but as a structured way to shape instruction while learning was still in progress. The results were striking: average scores increased from 35.7% on a pre-test to 94.4% on a post-test, showing how strategically placed checks for understanding can align teaching, studying, and student confidence.
What formative assessment is (and what it is not)
Formative assessment is the process of gathering evidence of student understanding during instruction so educators can adjust teaching and students can adjust learning strategies. Multiple scholars describe it as feedback-driven and improvement-oriented: it focuses on the learning process and the dialogue between teacher and student.
Just as important: formative assessment is typically not designed to be a high-stakes grade. It is meant to inform next steps. That distinction matters because when students feel safe to show what they don’t know, educators get more accurate data—and can intervene earlier.
The five building blocks of effective formative assessment
Black and Wiliam (2009) outline five practical “tenants” (often discussed as core strategies) that show up in strong formative assessment systems. These can be applied in any subject area, including therapy-informed learning supports and special education contexts.
- Clarity of goals and success criteria: Students need to know what success looks like for the lesson and unit.
- Tasks that reveal evidence of learning: Activities should make thinking visible, not just completion.
- Fast, useful feedback: Feedback should be timely enough to change what happens next.
- Peer learning as a resource: Students can learn effectively from structured peer discussion and peer review.
- Student ownership: Students build self-monitoring skills when they track progress and reflect on learning.
These principles are simple on paper, but powerful in practice—especially when schools build consistent routines around them.
Two types of formative assessment: “for learning” vs. “as learning”
One helpful distinction from the research is that formative assessment can serve different purposes:
- Assessment for learning: Checks whether students are meeting learning targets (e.g., a pre-test, exit ticket, short quiz, or quick probe). This helps teachers adjust instruction.
- Assessment as learning: Builds student reflection and metacognition (e.g., students explaining reasoning, self-assessing against a rubric, or reflecting on study habits). This helps students adjust their own strategies.
In practice, schools get the best results when they use both: educators gain instructional insight, and students develop the self-regulation skills that carry into future grades.
A real classroom example: pre-test + bellringers + targeted instruction
Miller’s study provides a clear blueprint that schools can adapt. Over two weeks, seventh-grade science students experienced a formative cycle that included:
- A pre-test (14 multiple-choice questions) administered before instruction, used to surface background knowledge and misconceptions.
- Daily bellringer questions to activate prior learning, preview the day’s topic, and continuously gauge understanding.
- Direct instruction with guided notes aligned to learning objectives.
- A project requiring students to create a model of Earth’s global wind patterns and define key terms in their own words.
- Webquests and data interpretation tasks (including NOAA-based activities) to apply concepts using authentic information.
- A modified post-test (7 repeated multiple-choice questions plus a diagram) used as a summative measure.
Several design choices are worth noting for school leaders and support teams:
- The pre-test was explicitly not graded, which can reduce anxiety and encourage honest effort.
- Technology (Google Forms and automated grading tools) made it easier to track patterns and respond quickly.
- Students were told some questions would reappear, encouraging them to treat the pre-test as a roadmap for what mattered.
What the data showed—and why it’s meaningful
The improvement was not marginal. Average performance rose from 35.7% to 94.4%. When focusing only on the seven questions repeated on the post-test, students improved from 41% to 94.4%.
Even more telling is the shift in the “floor” of performance:
- Lowest pre-test score: 7.1%
- Lowest post-test score: 57.1%
- Post-test mode: 100%
In other words, the formative process didn’t just help top performers—it raised the baseline for many learners.
Why formative assessment supports motivation, confidence, and self-regulation
Formative assessment is often discussed as an instructional tool, but the research also links it to student motivation and metacognition. When students receive clear expectations and actionable feedback, they are more likely to:
- Set goals and plan study strategies
- Monitor their understanding (“Do I really get this?”)
- Reflect on what worked and what didn’t
- Build confidence through coaching-style feedback rather than judgment
This matters because academic success is not only about content. It is also about the habits that support learning—especially for students who need additional structure, executive functioning support, or confidence-building.
Feedback: the hinge that makes formative assessment work
Feedback is not automatically helpful just because it exists. Research cited in the paper emphasizes that feedback should be clear, relevant, and constructive. Poorly delivered feedback can reduce motivation; well-designed feedback can increase it.
Strong feedback practices often include:
- Transparent evaluation criteria
- Specific guidance on what to improve next
- Opportunities to revise or apply feedback quickly
- Peer discussion that helps students compare approaches
- Prompts that encourage students to explain their thinking
In many schools, the biggest barrier is time. That is why short, repeatable routines (bellringers, exit tickets, quick conferences, brief digital checks) can be more sustainable than large, complex systems.
Equity and access: formative assessment must work for all learners
The research also highlights a critical caution: assessment practices can unintentionally advantage some students and disadvantage others. Cultural relevance, language patterns, and hidden assumptions in question design can influence outcomes. Additionally, schools must be careful that formative data does not become a tool for rigid “tracking” that limits opportunity.
A more equitable approach is to use formative assessment for differentiation—adjusting supports, scaffolds, and pathways—without lowering expectations or narrowing access to rigorous learning.
How TinyEYE’s online therapy model can support formative assessment in schools
TinyEYE provides online therapy services to schools, and formative assessment aligns naturally with how therapy and education both work: observe, respond, adjust, and reinforce. While classroom teachers focus on academic outcomes, therapy providers often support the underlying skills that make learning possible—communication, self-regulation, attention, and confidence.
In practice, schools can strengthen formative assessment systems by partnering across roles:
- Speech-language and occupational therapy teams can help educators interpret student performance patterns (e.g., language load, working memory demands, attention fatigue).
- Consistent routines (like daily bellringers or quick reflection prompts) can be adapted to support students receiving services.
- Student self-monitoring tools used in therapy (goal tracking, reflection, strategy checklists) can reinforce “assessment as learning.”
When instruction and support services share a common formative mindset, interventions become more timely—and students experience a more coherent support system.
Limitations to keep in mind (and what schools can do next)
Miller notes an important reality: you cannot attribute gains to the pre-test alone. Students also received direct instruction, projects, daily bellringers, and technology-enabled learning. There were also contextual factors such as strong parental support and access to devices.
For schools looking to replicate the approach, consider these next-step improvements:
- Keep pre- and post-tests more consistent to isolate impact
- Add student perception surveys (Did the pre-test help? Which activities helped most?)
- Use both quantitative and qualitative data
- Track growth using approaches like normalized gain where appropriate
Even with limitations, the core insight holds: formative assessment routines help educators teach with better timing and help students learn with better focus.
For more information, please follow this link.
