Unlocking High-Quality Teaching

Formative assessment and feedback is about the process of setting the learning goals as well as understanding and further supporting students’ progress towards them. It is an ongoing, fluid process; teachers elicit and consider student thinking, respond to this with appropriate feedback and pedagogical moves, and repeat the process in a regular, spiralling manner as student learning steadily advances. These are guided by the learning goals that teachers communicate to students, which demonstrate what students are working towards and inform the types of formative assessment activities teachers use to understand how students are progressing.

There is reasonable consensus that processes of determining levels of student understand and using this information to then provide feedback to students and inform instruction can have a high impact on learning outcomes (Rakoczy et al., 2019[1]; Elliott, V. et al., 2020[2]; Kyriakides and Creemers, 2008[3]; Muijs and Reynolds, 2010[4]; Scheerens, 2015[5]; Wiliam, 2011[6]).

In particular, there is a strong body of evidence that has been established across subjects, age groups and student groups documenting the important role that providing feedback to student thinking can play in pushing student learning forward (Wiliam et al., 2004[7]; Newman et al., 2021[8]; Webb et al., 2021[9]). It can be a very high impact approach if implemented thoughtfully and effectively, as evidenced by large systematic reviews (Newman et al., 2021[8]) and meta-analyses (Wisniewski, Zierer and Hattie, 2020[10]).

This feedback hinges upon correctly understanding levels of student understanding in order to ensure alignment between student understanding and feedback (Black and Wiliam, 2009[11]; Chiu, 2004[12]; Wiliam, 2017[13]). Indeed, the picture is complex; high-quality feedback can be hard to implement (Gorard and Siddiqui, 2016[14]) and some studies have shown that feedback may have negative effects on students (Kluger and DeNisi, 1996[15]; Wiliam, 2011[6]). For instance, comparative feedback between students, rather than using a student’s previous performance as an individual reference norm, may be less effective for student learning (Wiliam, 2011[6]). Similarly, a reasonably consistent finding is that feedback that does not contain information, but instead contains features like rewards or punishments or a focus on students’ self-concept and personal traits, has a low or even negative effect on motivation (Wisniewski, Zierer and Hattie, 2020[10]).

Learning is an ongoing process. Teachers need access to information on how this learning is progressing, so that they can recalibrate their teaching and provide appropriate support. However, this means there is then a need to again understand how learning is progressing – has it improved, or is a different approach needed? Teachers engage in formative assessment and feedback by:

• learning goals

• diagnosing student learning

• feedback

• adapting to student thinking.

All of these practices are important and inter-connected, and teachers might draw upon them simultaneously. Even if there is no strict sequence or endpoint, formative assessment and feedback are often seen as a continuous process that begins with setting learning goals to provide direction. This is followed by diagnosing student learning, which then informs both the direct feedback given to students and how teachers adapt to students' thinking.

Each of these practices are outlined one-by-one below. Each section presents a definition for the practice and other associated terms on how it might also be referred to; key research findings on its impact on student outcomes; main implementation challenges identified by researchers and schools in designing the structure of the activity, task or content, role of students and role of teachers. Then, it looks into the complexity for teachers in monitoring them in the classroom. The final section builds on schools’ insights to provide an indication about the complexities of implementation and provides reflection questions for instructional and school leaders.

Learning goals are what students are aiming to achieve and master in a lesson or sequence of lessons. They are clearly communicated to students verbally, in written form, or both. They may be established with or for students so that they clearly understand what they should be able to do and demonstrate.

Learning goals will convey the success criteria for mastering certain knowledge or skills, and may also include certain values or attitudes, and associated behaviours, that students should be aiming to demonstrate. Students will also have an active role in also monitoring their progress against the goals.

Associated Terms: Expectations; Aims and objectives; Learning intentions; Success criteria; Structuring and sequencing

Research into teacher effectiveness has consistently identified the use of learning goals as a contributing factor to a well-structured learning environment, and accordingly associated it with student learning (Kyriakides and Creemers, 2008[3]; Muijs et al., 2014[17]). A large body of evidence on student motivation and student psychology has also contributed to understanding around learning goals. Research has suggested that students can be motivated to reach goals that are specific and challenging yet attainable (Schunk, 2003[18]; Bandura, 1991[19]; Locke and Latham, 2002[20]).

In translating this research into day-to-day teaching, researchers have argued that it is important that learning goals are clear, shared and understood, by both teachers and students (Wiliam, 2011[6]), in order to support students’ ability to self-regulate their learning. This connects to a substantial body of evidence relating to metacognition and self-regulation. This body of evidence argues that students can benefit from having opportunities to learn and practise how to become self-regulated learners (Education Endowment Foundation, 2020[21]). These are learners that monitor their behaviour and learning in terms of their goals and the effectiveness of their progress towards these goals.

One contributing factor to low achievement may be students not fully understanding what teachers expect of them (Black and Wiliam, 1998[22]). Goals need to be clear and comprehensible to students. This means it is important to ensure that students engage with understanding what the target knowledge and skills are (Wiliam, 2011[6]). This includes engaging students with the key ideas behind this goal and what successful completion may actually look like.

Insights from schools:

Show the expected outcome with examples of ‘what a good final output looks like’, highlighting the features that made it a success. This could be contrasted with a ‘partial’ success to show the difference.

Draw attention to short-term and long-term goals, so that the learning goal seems feasible and students understand the key steps of progression ahead of them. For instance, portraying this as a learning ‘map’ or ‘journey’ can be meaningful and clear, where students can track their progress along the way.

Balance student-friendly language and technical vocabulary, so that students can understand what is tangibly expected of them while using disciplinary language.

Teachers can share learning goals in a way that support students’ thinking about what they will learn and where it fits with other topics they have learned, as well as how it relates to their personal experience (Rakoczy, K. et al., 2007[23]). This can help students to see how their learning is progressing, which is significant considering low expectations of students can negatively impact self-confidence and student motivation (Prediger and Neugebauer, 2020[24]; Jussim and Harber, 2005[25]; Schneider et al., 2022[26]). Wider connections to the real-world or students’ lives may help highlight the relevance of what they are doing, giving the goal new meaning.

Insights from schools:

Explain the logic of the new learning goal in how it connects to prior learning and how it is moving students forward by now adding something new to their skillset or knowledge.

Address the bigger picture ‘why’ behind goals, such as examples of how the goal’s work is applicable to certain challenges, questions or careers - of course students may always say '”That doesn't interest me!', so ideally there needs to be a focus on transversal skills and a range of applications.

Give scope to shape the learning goal: if the goal is being able to say analyse a text for a particular feature, or factors behind a historical event, can the students choose the content focus on?

Challenge students to create an ‘individual goal’ the sits alongside the collective one of the class, which could be something they struggled with before, a skill or piece of content, and can now try to focus on too.

It is important to return to the learning goals at different points in the lesson to support students, as well as the teacher too, to monitor students’ progress towards learning goals. Regular opportunities to monitor their thinking can be important for promoting students as self-regulated learners (Education Endowment Foundation, 2021b[27]), with evidence from a large meta-analysis suggesting that students who perform in self-grading performed better on subsequent tests than those who did not (Sanchez et al., 2017[28]).

Insights from schools:

Bring the long-term learning goal back into focus at the start of a lesson with a student summary of the previous lesson. This can highlight where the class has got to on the overall progress to prepare for what comes next in the lesson.

Encourage a clear, structured way of tracking how goals are being mastered that students can complete in an ongoing way, such as a portfolio or logbook of specific examples (e.g., questions, quotes, pieces of work) for different parts of a goal that students can then easily refer back to.

Re-doing a piece of work can be a means of encouraging them to see their progress towards a goal.

Teachers use formative assessment tasks or strategies to elicit and diagnose what students are thinking and understand their ongoing progress towards particular learning goals. These tasks or strategies are designed to capture students' reasoning to allow the teacher to better diagnose different levels of students' understanding. The teacher elicits a range of students’ thinking to be best prepared to support all students.

Associated Terms: Monitoring student learning; Interpreting student thinking; Probing student think; Making thinking visible

Diagnosing student learning is a foundation of providing adequate feedback that supports students’ learning (Wiliam, 2011[6]). Research has consistently highlighted (see Feedback below) that it is particularly important that feedback is relevant to students and closing the gap between where they are at and where they need to be. To provide this type of feedback it is vital that teachers know in a clear and accurate manner where students currently are in their learning (Black and Wiliam, 1998[22]; Elliott, V. et al., 2020[2]).

While few empirical studies have investigated eliciting student thinking as a standalone feature, it is a logical theoretical requirement for a number of well-evidenced practices, both in this chapter and in others. Where it is has been empirically investigated directly, results have been promising. In a classroom study, Chiu (2004[12]) found that evaluating levels of student understanding was the key factor in determining how effective was the support later offered to students. Elsewhere, a lot of research has focused on how questioning can be used to elicit and diagnose student learning (Wiliam, 2017[13]). In particular, research has distinguished between the depth of understanding that certain questions may uncover, the timing of these questions, and how teachers can ensure they have a picture of student understanding across a range of students (University of Queensland, 2016[29]; Wiliam, 2011[6]).

Trying to understand student thinking should be thought of as an ongoing dialogue, but teachers still need to think about the specific moments where they want to go beyond the constant small-scale, informal opportunities in the classroom (Ruiz-Primo, 2011[30]) to more systematically understand how students are progressing (Wiliam, 2017[13]). Teachers can strategically plan in advance where formative assessment of what students are learning could be most valuable, while remaining flexible in lessons to adjust these timings based on their perceptions of student progress.

Insights from schools:

Following certain explanations of new content, it can be useful to gauge how much of the explanation has been processed by a class – can students correctly identify and explain what the key steps were before they try it themselves?

When there is a common misconception that typically surrounds a certain part of the topic, explicitly checking if students can differentiate between examples of work with and without a misconception can make it clear who has mastered this or not, and provide a platform for discussion.

Before progression to more complexity or a new idea, it is helpful verifying that the foundations of what we have just been working on are solid.

Research has argued that to be able to best respond to student needs it is important that teachers have an understanding of the levels of understanding of as many students as possible in their classroom (Wiliam, 2017[13]). Balancing between depth and breadth is of course tricky; it can be very time consuming to ask every single student in detail, while whole-class responses may yield insufficient detail or not be entirely reliable (e.g., students raising their hand in line with the majority). Teachers therefore need to think carefully about how they can build a detailed picture of a range of students’ thinking while drawing appropriate extrapolations.

Insights from schools:

Whole-class tools such as whiteboards or online response tools can be powerful for real-time information, though it is not enough to just have a single response – what if they guessed? – so it needs to be paired with follow-up questions or asking for steps to be shown too.

Tasks that facilitate a series of rapid responses can be helpful with certain content, such as true or false, multiple-choice quizzes, or spot the odd one out, which can be particularly helpful for quickly recalling content in an engaging way.

Understanding the reasons behind students’ answers can help teachers to correctly identify students’ needs (Elliott, V. et al., 2020[2]), as well as more broadly engaging students in cognitively demanding thinking (Prediger and Neugebauer, 2020[24]; Webb et al., 2019[31]). Prompts that push students to share their thinking can be both in written tasks and delivered as follow-up questions (Webb et al., 2009[32]).

Insights from schools:

In multiple-choice questions, challenge students to differentiate between one correct answer and several wrong answers that are ‘nearly correct’. These types of ‘hinge’ questions are almost trying to catch students out by gauging their depth of understanding through their ability to identify potential mistakes or misconceptions.

Establish a routine where answers are to be coupled with a justification, such as consistently prompting students to use sentences such as “The reason for this is…”, or providing ‘justification boxes’ on worksheets for answers.

Give students the answer and see if they can find the question, so they essentially have to work backwards through the steps.

Tap into the power of pairs, with students discussing questions in pairs and then randomly calling on these pairs for answers, before asking another pair to evaluate the answer, and so on.

Push students to explain how their answer might change if a certain feature is adjusted, such as changing the tense of a word or the magnitude of a number.

Feedback is designed to provide students with specific, meaningful information on their current performances in relation to a particular learning goal, with the intention of helping them to close the gap between current and desired performances.

Students should have the opportunity to think about this feedback and act on it, using the specific information they receive to try to move their learning forward. In this respect feedback is an ongoing process and sometimes referred to as a ‘loop’ or 'spiral': information is provided, it is acted upon, and new information is provided to further close the gap between current and desired performances, and so forth.

Feedback may be provided by the teacher, by a peer with the oversight of the teacher, or involve a student self-evaluating and feeding back to oneself. It may be provided in different formats, such as verbally or written, and it may be provided individually or to groups of students.

Associated Terms: Feedback loops; Marking; Verbal feedback

There is a large amount of research around the potential of feedback to enhance students’ learning. It can be a very high impact approach if implemented thoughtfully and effectively, as evidenced by large systematic reviews (Newman et al., 2021[8]) and meta-analyses (Wisniewski, Zierer and Hattie, 2020[10]). When done well, evidence suggests feedback can support student learning across subjects and age groups (Newman et al., 2021[8]). Evidence suggests that feedback can be implemented effectively in different ways, such as written, verbal and through digital tools, as well as through peers, though the key is the quality of the feedback, with the role of the teacher in ensuring this quality being essential (Education Endowment Foundation, 2018[33]).

Feedback that is provided during, immediately or a short time after the task or learning, tends to be more effective than that provided a long time afterwards (Education Endowment Foundation, 2018[33]). Nevertheless, there is an inevitable degree of teacher judgement because sometimes a slight delay in feedback can be helpful for some tasks by instigating more challenge through how it forces students to recall their previous work (Wiliam, 2017[13]).

A large meta-analysis of 435 studies found that feedback which involved information on the content of the task, the processes or strategies adopted by the student, and sometimes the self-regulation level, was particularly effective for student learning (Wisniewski, Zierer and Hattie, 2020[10]). Instead, a common finding of meta-analyses is that directing feedback towards a student, such as through praise or comparison with others, tends to be less effective than that which is directed towards the task and the learning that students are engaged in (Hattie and Timperley, 2007[34]; Kluger and DeNisi, 1996[15]). Interestingly, this is also supported by research with students on what type of feedback they find helpful; qualitative studies with students in a range of contexts suggests that feedback was perceived of value where there was relevant, focused feedback for student improvement (Kerr, 2017[35]; Peterson and Irving, 2008[36]; Tan et al., 2018[37]).

Insights from schools:

Identify in the student’s work one particular area to focus on, such as a student’s use of transition phrases or explaining evidence, that seems to be holding them back and provide specific guidance on how to correctly do this for an example or two in their work.

Cite specific evidence from the student’s work in the feedback, for example circling a problematic sentence or step in a method, so they can see the exact connection between your feedback and their work.

Monitor and give feedback on the go, quickly noting on student work where something needs more attention, or saying “Look again at this please, and I’ll be back in a few minutes to hear what you have noticed”, can be efficient and impactful in drawing student attention to where they can improve.

A recent meta-analysis of 54 studies suggested that peer assessment can be impactful for students’ academic performance in a range of contexts, including across a wide range of subject areas, education levels, and assessment types (Double, McGrane and Hopfenbeck, 2019[38]). Moreover, feedback from peers might even be more beneficial when students have the opportunity to both receive and provide feedback according to a recent meta-analysis of 17 studies that investigated the overall effect of online peer assessment on students’ higher-order thinking (Zhan et al., 2023[39]).

Insights from schools:

Guide students an assessment rubric and model how to apply it to particular examples to give quality feedback. A class discussion, discussing strengths and areas for development, might also be helpful.

Facilitate a student review of other students’ feedback to check it is of high-quality; after students have exchanged feedback in a pair, can they swap with another pair to see if they all agree?

Audit a sample of the feedback to ensure it is meeting expectations. Reviewing every piece of feedback is probably impractical but take a select sample and verify that it is supporting student learning. If necessary, share further suggestions on their feedback with the class.

The effort and time that teachers put into providing high-quality feedback as outlined above, needs to be actually used by students to close the gap between where they are and where they need to be (Leahy et al., 2005[40]; Wiliam, 2011[6]). Teachers can create the dedicated time and conditions for this feedback to be effectively acted upon and used by students. This is then more information that can be used for further diagnoses, feedback and adaptation as part of a continuous, ongoing process of learning.

Insights from schools:

Consider when to provide grades to avoid distractions and ensure that students focus on the areas to improve.

Build a clear routine for engaging with feedback in the lesson, where students know that they have a dedicated amount of time to complete the feedback task. This also communicates the value of feedback; it is not simply given to students at the end of the lesson as a last thing.

Implement some checks on their responses to feedback, whether it is circulating to scan for task completion, calling on some students for reflections, or students self-marking, so there is a degree of accountability.

Teachers use information from diagnosing student learning to inform and align the practices and approaches that they are using in the classroom. The teacher proactively interprets student thinking and uses this to adapt their teaching to better align to student understanding and students’ needs. This alignment helps to move students forward from where they currently are in their learning to where they need to be.

Associated Terms: Scaffolding; Progressing learning; Attending to student thinking; Adaptive teaching

One body of evidence that is important relates to the impact of studies looking at differentiation. A meta-analysis by Deunk and colleagues (2018[41]) found evidence at the primary level that differentiating teaching and support to students can have a positive impact on maths and language learning, though, as with many meta-analyses in education, the effect sizes are variable. In this study, differentiation was defined as careful progress monitoring coupled with adapting instruction in response to this. One notable finding is that high-quality differentiation does not just happen automatically (e.g., by putting students in groups), but requires a conscious, thoughtful effort from the teacher in terms of their practices and approaches. These findings are echoed in a recent systematic review by Smale-Jacobse and colleagues (2019[42]).

Even with extensive planning and careful consideration, a teacher will always find that sometimes some, or even all students, need extra support to reach a learning goal. Scaffolds are designed to help close the gap between where students are and where they need to get to, providing a balance between not too much support, but also not too little. Scaffolds can be both remedial, administrated retrospectively at a moment of need, though they also can be pre-emptive in the sense that they may be available should students need them. Empirical work has demonstrated that they are not automatically beneficial but require skill and thought in their implementation (van de Pol et al., 2015[43]), responding to the specific learning needs in the classroom.

Insights from schools:

Keep in mind that the scaffold should not be permanent – consider how can they be faded away so students work increasingly on their own, say by providing the starting steps for a couple of questions before students try to apply this on their own for a question.

Draw upon a range of mediums, such as using visual prompts like ‘fill in the gaps’ or diagrams, alongside oral clues that speak out your thinking during a scaffold.

Offer students choice that lets them decide how much of a scaffold they need, for instance a full or half template that they can choose to use if they are struggling, or the same question where they can try it on their own depending on where they are with their learning.

Students can also be resources for one another in terms of providing additional support to one another. There is evidence that peer-tutoring in pairs or small groups seems particularly effective when used to review or consolidate learning, rather than to introduce new material (Education Endowment Foundation, 2021b[27]).

Insights from schools:

Organise student-led stations around the room, each with an assigned ‘leader’ who has successfully completed a certain aspect of the work. Invite students to go to the station for where they are struggling: “If you are finding this part difficult, come here, if you are finding this part difficult, go here”.

Ask students who are pushing ahead in a task to come together to explain and compare their different approaches as a form of extension challenge.

Teachers claim that efforts to differentiate instruction are time consuming and difficult to prepare and implement (Nunley, 2006[44]). Classrooms are characterised by multiple students each with particular needs, which presents challenges to how adaptation is effectively implemented in an equitable and fair way. In particular, research suggests that adapting to student needs may be particularly hard for novice teachers (van de Grift, van der Wal and Torenbeek, 2011[45]).

Insights from schools:

Invite those who are confident to start working on an activity, while saying that you are going to demonstrate another example to the whole-class for those who feel less confident and want to practise again. It can work the other way too; if most of the class is struggling with the work, be ready to bring most of the class back together for another whole-class example while others carry on working.

Provide students with videos of key content being explained by the teacher so they can revisit content in the classroom in their own time, or during a lesson potentially too, when they need more support.

Have a check-in table where you are available for students to come for more support if they are stuck.

Keep expectations high throughout, the goal should be staying the same and the belief that all will get there, it’s just some students may be taking a longer route to that end goal.

A theme that runs across this chapter is that formative assessment and feedback is a continuous and ongoing process. It can be thought of as a ‘loop’ or ‘spiral’, with teachers diagnosing learning based on goals, and providing feedback that should be acted upon and used or adapting to student thinking with their instruction. These then essentially re-start the process again. This continuous process means that teachers are constantly mindful of the signals that students share around how effectively their core practices are working.

Table 6.1 includes some of the key signals that teachers gather to check whether they have achieved the goal that they had intended when adopting that practice. The signals can be thought of as the short-term, in-class manifestation of the long-term knowledge, skills, values and attitudes that teachers seek to encourage:

• Knowledge: Students demonstrate that they are aware of the purposes of the tasks or activities, or the potential improvements that they could make after receiving feedback.

• Skills: Students are able to self-assess themselves and act upon it, and to provide feedback to others.

• Values and attitudes: Students are motivated to go beyond their current understanding of a learning goal and are willing to be open and take risks to progress in their learning.

Formative assessment and feedback is shaped by the actions of the teacher in the classroom, but it is also informed by the wider actions at the school- and system-levels. A deeper exploration of its complexity can shed light on ways in which school and system leaders can create more supportive environments for meaningful feedback and assessment.

The foundation for feedback and assessment to be meaningful is teachers’ understanding of learners. Teachers’ opportunities to interact with students early on in the academic year might be helpful to understand their interests, attitudes and behaviours, build a safe and trusted space for interactions, and facilitate putting the emphasis on their progress in their own learning journey rather than a static picture of performance.

A curriculum that is clear and not overloaded may help teachers in delineating learning goals. Translating the expected curricula into planned lesson units with specific goals can be challenging when curriculum is overloaded, classrooms are heterogeneous, and planning time is limited. In gauging trade-offs between advancing or slowing down the lessons, having clear and aligned curricula and external assessments can help teachers balance the pace of lessons and ensure all students learn what matters most. This raises the connected question of the type of instructional materials that are available. Trusted resources with carefully designed scaffolds and extensions may help teachers align instruction to different levels and paces.

The challenges of diagnosing student learning, providing feedback and adapting to student thinking are likely to be proportionally related to the varying levels of knowledge in the classroom, with class size being a compounding factor. That said, for leaders, it is not only a question of class size to be considered but also composition and the strategic deployment of support staff that can support the formative assessment and feedback process.

Providing teachers with formative assessment tools aligned with curricula, and digital tools for individualised tracking, can aid the diagnosis of student learning too. Similarly, school-level data approaches can provide helpful information for identifying and monitoring at-risk students. Yet, much of the complexity lies in how teachers interpret student thinking in class, and their ability to notice and respond to students can be enhanced through continuous professional learning opportunities, in particular those relating to observation. Similarly, while adaptive resources and digital tools like AI-trained rubrics may facilitate immediate feedback, the crucial relational judgement by teachers continues to play an essential role. Indeed, the need for teachers to consider students' learning profiles and social-emotional characteristics when delivering meaningful feedback means that enabling teachers to build this more tacit understanding of students remains important.

In navigating the challenge of enabling high-quality formative assessment and feedback in classrooms, school and system leaders may carefully consider some of the following questions:

• How can school leaders support teachers in balancing clarity and flexibility in curricula to deliver meaningful instruction with clear learning goals? How can these subject-specific learning goals be adjusted to facilitate cross-curricular experiences?

• What student tracking and classroom monitoring data systems exist in the school? What school-level assessment policies exist to monitor and support progress towards these leaning goals, and how do these complement external evaluations? How is external data used to provide a comparative perspective of progress?

• What structures can enable the manageable, impactful use of feedback in lesson time? How can school leaders ensure the consistent impact of diagnosing and feedback strategies across the teaching body in different subjects?

• How much time is provided to teachers for lesson planning and to collaboratively develop resources or tap into resource banks for diagnosis and to support learners with different needs?

• What criteria is used to decide the size and composition of classes? When classrooms are diverse in terms of students’ abilities, what additional resources (e.g., second teachers, ad hoc teacher aids) are made available to teachers? Are temporary groupings by ability or extracurricular catch-up lessons available to students?

• How do teachers in every subject and across subjects discuss about the learning profiles and progress of individual students? Are there individual student learning plans? How is students’ progress reported, and what synergies are expected between formative and summative assessments?

[19] Bandura, A. (1991), “Social cognitive theory of self-regulation”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 50/2, pp. 248-287, https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90022-l.

[11] Black, P. and D. Wiliam (2009), “Developing the theory of formative assessment”, Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, Vol. 21/1, pp. 5-31, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5.

[22] Black, P. and D. Wiliam (1998), “Inside the black box: raising standards through classroom assessment”, Phi Delta Kappan, Vol. 80/2, pp. 139-148.

[12] Chiu, M. (2004), “Adapting Teacher Interventions to Student Needs During Cooperative Learning: How to Improve Student Problem Solving and Time On-Task”, American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 41/2, pp. 365-399, https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312041002365.

[41] Deunk, M. et al. (2018), “Effective differentiation Practices:A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on the cognitive effects of differentiation practices in primary education”, Educational Research Review, Vol. 24, pp. 31-54, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2018.02.002.

[38] Double, K., J. McGrane and T. Hopfenbeck (2019), “The Impact of Peer Assessment on Academic Performance: A Meta-analysis of Control Group Studies”, Educational Psychology Review, Vol. 32/2, pp. 481-509, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09510-3.

[21] Education Endowment Foundation (2020), Metacognition and Self-Regulation: Evidence Review, https://d2tic4wvo1iusb.cloudfront.net/production/eef-guidance-reports/metacognition/EEF_Metacognition_and_self-regulated_learning.pdf?v=1693902110 (accessed on 13 August 2024).

[33] Education Endowment Foundation (2018), Teacher Feedback to Improve Pupil Learning – Guidance Report, https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/education-evidence/guidance-reports/feedback (accessed on 13 August 2024).

[27] Education Endowment Foundation (2021b), Collaborative learning approaches, https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/education-evidence/teaching-learning-toolkit/collaborative-learning-approaches#nav-what-is-it (accessed on 13 August 2024).

[2] Elliott, V. et al. (2020), Feedback: Practice Review, Education Endowment Foundation, https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/public/files/Evaluation/EEF_Feedback _Practice_Review.pdf (accessed on 7 August 2024).

[14] Gorard, S. and N. Siddiqui (2016), “Teachers’ use of research evidence in practice: a pilot study of feedback to enhance learning”, Educational Research, Vol. 58/1, pp. 56-72.

[34] Hattie, J. and H. Timperley (2007), “The Power of Feedback”, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 77/1, pp. 81-112, https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487.

[25] Jussim, L. and K. Harber (2005), “Teacher Expectations and Self-Fulfilling Prophecies: Knowns and Unknowns, Resolved and Unresolved Controversies”, Personality and Social Psychology Review, Vol. 9/2, pp. 131-155, https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0902_3.

[35] Kerr, K. (2017), “Exploring student perceptions of verbal feedback”, Research Papers in Education, Vol. 32/4, pp. 444-462, https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2017.1319589.

[15] Kluger, A. and A. DeNisi (1996), “The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory.”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 119/2, pp. 254-284, https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254.

[3] Kyriakides, L. and B. Creemers (2008), “Using a multidimensional approach to measure the impact of classroom-level factors upon student achievement: a study testing the validity of the dynamic model”, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, Vol. 19/2, pp. 183-205, https://doi.org/10.1080/09243450802047873.

[40] Leahy, S. et al. (2005), “Classroom assessment: minute-by-minute and day-by-day”, Educational Leadership, Vol. 63/3, pp. 18-24.

[20] Locke, E. and G. Latham (2002), “Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey.”, American Psychologist, Vol. 57/9, pp. 705-717, https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.57.9.705.

[17] Muijs, D. et al. (2014), “State of the art – teacher effectiveness and professional learning”, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, Vol. 25/2, pp. 231-256, https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2014.885451.

[4] Muijs, D. and D. Reynolds (2010), Effective Teaching: Evidence and Practice, SAGE Publications.

[8] Newman, M. et al. (2021), The impact of Feedback on student attainment: a systematic review, https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/support-for-schools/school-planning- (accessed on 7 August 2024).

[44] Nunley, F. (2006), Differentiating in the high school, Corwin Press.

[16] OECD (2013), Synergies for Better Learning: An International Perspective on Evaluation and Assessment, OECD Reviews of Evaluation and Assessment in Education, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264190658-en.

[36] Peterson, E. and S. Irving (2008), “Secondary school students’ conceptions of assessment and feedback”, Learning and Instruction, Vol. 18/3, pp. 238-250, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.05.001.

[24] Prediger, S. and P. Neugebauer (2020), “Capturing teaching practices in language-responsive mathematics classrooms Extending the TRU framework “teaching for robust understanding” to L-TRU”, ZDM – Mathematics Education, Vol. 53/2, pp. 289-304, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01187-1.

[23] Rakoczy, K. et al. (2007), Structure as a quality feature in mathematics instruction, https://www.fachportal-paedagogik.de/literatur/vollanzeige.html?FId=798958 (accessed on 13 August 2024).

[1] Rakoczy, K. et al. (2019), “Formative assessment in mathematics: Mediated by feedback’s perceived usefulness and students’ self-efficacy”, Learning and Instruction, Vol. 60, pp. 154-165, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.01.004 (accessed on 13 August 2024).

[30] Ruiz-Primo, M. (2011), “Informal formative assessment: The role of instructional dialogues in assessing students’ learning”, Studies in Educational Evaluation, Vol. 37/1, pp. 15-24.

[28] Sanchez, C. et al. (2017), “Self-grading and peer-grading for formative and summative assessments in 3rd through 12th grade classrooms: A meta-analysis.”, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 109/8, pp. 1049-1066, https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000190.

[5] Scheerens, J. (2015), “Meta-Analyses of School and Instructional Effectiveness”, in Educational Effectiveness and Ineffectiveness, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-7459-8_8.

[26] Schneider, B. et al. (2022), “Improving Science Achievement—Is It Possible? Evaluating the Efficacy of a High School Chemistry and Physics Project-Based Learning Intervention”, Educational Researcher, Vol. 51/2, pp. 109-121, https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x211067742.

[18] Schunk, D. (2003), “Self-efficacy for reading and writing: Influence of modeling, goal setting, and self-evaluation”, Reading & Writing Quarterly, Vol. 19/2, pp. 159-172, https://doi.org/10.1080/10573560308219.

[42] Smale-Jacobse, A. et al. (2019), “Differentiated Instruction in Secondary Education: A Systematic Review of Research Evidence”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 10, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02366.

[37] Tan, F. et al. (2018), “Students’ perception of teachers’ two-way feedback interactions that impact learning”, Social Psychology of Education, Vol. 22/1, pp. 169-187, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-018-9473-7.

[29] University of Queensland (2016), “Cooperative Learning: Review of Research and Practice”, Australian Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 41/3, pp. 39-54, https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2016v41n3.3.

[45] van de Grift, W., M. van der Wal and M. Torenbeek (2011), “Development in Teaching Skills”, Pedagogische Studien, Vol. 88/6, pp. 416-432.

[43] van de Pol, J. et al. (2015), “The effects of scaffolding in the classroom: support contingency and student independent working time in relation to student achievement, task effort and appreciation of support”, Instructional Science, Vol. 43/5, pp. 615-641, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-015-9351-z.

[32] Webb, N. et al. (2009), “‘Explain to your partner’: teachers’ instructional practices and students’ dialogue in small groups”, Cambridge Journal of Education, Vol. 39/1, pp. 49-70, https://doi.org/10.1080/03057640802701986.

[31] Webb, N. et al. (2019), “Teacher practices that promote productive dialogue and learning in mathematics classrooms”, International Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 97, pp. 176-186, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2017.07.009.

[9] Webb, N. et al. (2021), “Learning through explaining and engaging with others’ mathematical ideas”, Mathematical Thinking and Learning, Vol. 25/4, pp. 438-464, https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2021.1990744.

[13] Wiliam, D. (2017), Embedded Formative Assessment: (Strategies for Classroom Assessment That Drives Student Engagement and Learning) (The New Art and Science of Teaching), Solution Tree Press.

[6] Wiliam, D. (2011), “What is assessment for learning?”, Studies in Educational Evaluation, Vol. 37/1, pp. 3-14, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2011.03.001.

[7] Wiliam, D. et al. (2004), “Teachers developing assessment for learning: impact on student achievement”, Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, Vol. 11/1, pp. 49-65, https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594042000208994.

[10] Wisniewski, B., K. Zierer and J. Hattie (2020), “The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 10, p. 3087.

[39] Zhan, Y. et al. (2023), “Effects of online peer assessment on higher‐order thinking: A meta‐analysis”, British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 54/4, pp. 817-835, https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13310.