Comparative Analysis of Formative Assessment Strategies and Their Impact on Student Performance and Engagement
Keywords:
Formative Assessment, Student Engagement, Learning Outcomes, Feedback, Educational Technology, Peer AssessmentAbstract
Formative assessment encompasses a variety of practices used to monitor learning and provide feedback during instruction. This study reviews and compares different formative strategies both traditional (e.g. written quizzes, peer feedback, verbal questioning) and digital (e.g. Google Forms quizzes, Kahoot!, Quizizz) and examines how each influences student performance and engagement. We analyze published research globally, including K-12 and university settings. The meta-analytical evidence shows that formative assessment generally yields strong gains in learning outcomes and self-regulated learning (Foster, 2024; Wu & Yu, 2025). Key factors include feedback quality and student motivation. For example, Wu and Yu (2025) found that formative practices boost performance indirectly by enhancing teacher emotional support, which in turn increases student engagement. In gamified tools, one study reported that Quizizz led to higher learning outcomes than Kahoot or Wordwall. Pedagogical approaches like peer assessment also improve achievement (Double et al., 2020). Importantly, formative assessment boosts engagement: learners become more active and goal-oriented (Foster, 2024). However, the effect depends on implementation quality and context. We discuss how to best deploy these strategies in diverse classrooms and suggest integrating technology with traditional methods to maximize both achievement and motivation.
References
1. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74.
2. 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, 481–509.
3. Foster, H. (2024). The impact of formative assessment on student learning outcomes: A meta-analytical review. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 28(S1), 1–3.
4. Ibad, W., Lestari, A., Doni, K., Rohmat, M., & Widodo, W. (2023). Comparing Kahoot!, Quizizz, and Wordwall on learning outcomes in EFL reading class. Eduvest Journal of Universal Studies, 3(11), 1989–1999.
5. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.
6. Beatty-Martínez, A. L., Navarro-Torres, C. A., & Dussias, P. E. (2020). Codeswitching: A bilingual toolkit for opportunistic speech planning. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1699. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01699
7. Gumperz, J. J. (1982). Discourse strategies. Cambridge University Press.
8. Heller, M. (Ed.). (1988). Codeswitching: Anthropological and sociolinguistic perspectives. Mouton de Gruyter.
9. Amal Ebrahem Hassan Bedalla, & Mardiya Abobaker Yousef Elzouki. (2025). The importance of Error Correction in EFL Contexts: a comprehensive Narrative Review. African Journal of Advanced Studies in Humanities and Social Sciences (AJASHSS), 4(3), 43–52.
10. Maschler, A. (1998). Morphosyntactic aspects of Welsh/English code-mixing among children (Doctoral dissertation). University of Wales.
11. Myers-Scotton, C. (1993). Social motivations for codeswitching: Evidence from Africa. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
12. Hamed Awedat Alahrash, Ahmed Mohamed Frewan, & Mohamed Misbah Marzoug. (2025). Libyan University Students’ Attitudes towards Using Podcasts and Audiobooks for Learning English. African Journal of Advanced Studies in Humanities and Social Sciences (AJASHSS), 4(3), 69–78
13. Myers-Scotton, C. (2002). Contact linguistics: Bilingual encounters and grammatical outcomes. Oxford University Press.
14. Khiri Saad Elkut, Khairi Alarbi Zaglom, Foad Ashur Elbakay, & Ahmad Mohamed Omeman. (2025). Using Authentic Materials in Foreign Language Classrooms: Teachers’ Perspectives in the Department of English, Faculty of Arts at El-Mergib University. African Journal of Advanced Studies in Humanities and Social Sciences (AJASHSS), 4(1), 218–224
15. Preply. (2021). Bilingualism statistics in 2025: US, UK & Global. Preply Education Inc. Retrieved from https://preply.com/en/blog/bilingualism-statistics
16. Saleh Ali Nuri Abdalla, & Jamila Ali Wenis. (2024). Gender Differences Among Arab Students E-Learning During COVID-19 In Malaysia: Does the Zoom Platform Make a Difference. Afro-Asian Journal of Scientific Research (AAJSR), 2(3), 313-318
17. Zanoni, D. (2016). Code-switching in CLIL classes: A case study. *EL.LE. - Journal of Language, Linguistics and Literature, 5(2), 279-296. DOI:10.14277/2280-6792/ELLE-5-2-6.
18. Asma Issa Karwad. (2025). Challenges Students Encounter When Translating Idiomatic Expression. A Case Study of Faculty of Education Students. Journal of Libyan Academy Bani Walid, 1(2), 229–242.
19. Aisha M. Ahmed. (2025). Examining the Effectiveness of Distance Education: Challenges, Opportunities, and the Future of Learning. Libyan Journal of Educational Research and E-Learning (LJERE), 1(1), 23-30.
20. Intesar Elwerfalli, Hana Mahmoud, & Amal Mohammed. (2024). The Influence of Function Words on Oral Proficiency Among First Semester EFL Students at the University of Benghazi. Afro-Asian Journal of Scientific Research (AAJSR), 2(4), 368-377
21. Zaynab Ahmed Khalleefah. (2025). Harnessing Artificial Intelligence in E-Learning: Enhancing Personalization, Engagement, and Educational Outcomes. Libyan Journal of Educational Research and E-Learning (LJERE), 1(1), 13-22
22. Sumaya Ramadan Aoghala, & Manana Alhasen Mohamed. (2025). Exploring How EFL Young Learners Are Being Assessed in Ghat Primary Schools. African Journal of Advanced Studies in Humanities and Social Sciences (AJASHSS), 4(3), 324–338.
23.
24. McCallum, S., & Milner, M. M. (2020). The effectiveness of formative assessment: Student views and staff reflections. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46, 1–16.
25. Stahl, M. (2021). “Learning is a kahoot!”: Engagement and its effect on exam performance (Unpublished bachelor’s thesis). University of Michigan.
26. Veerasamy, A. K., Laakso, M.-J., & D’Souza, D. (2022). Formative assessment tasks as indicators of student engagement for predicting at-risk students in programming courses. Informatics in Education, 21(2), 375–393.
27. Wu, J., & Yu, X. (2025). The influence of formative assessment on academic performance: Exploring the role of teachers’ emotional support. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, Article 1567615.
28. Yin, X. (2008). The impact of frequent formative assessment on student outcomes. [Conference presentation]. International Teaching Conference.
