Formative Versus Summative Assessment Practices and Their Effects on Student Achievement, Self-Efficacy, and Motivation in Secondary Schools

Abstract

This quantitative study examined the differential effects of formative and summative assessment practices on secondary school students' academic achievement, academic self-efficacy, test anxiety, student engagement, and intrinsic motivation. Using a quasi-experimental, nonequivalent comparison group design, data were collected from 364 students (Grade 9-12) enrolled in eight secondary schools across two school districts in a mid-sized metropolitan region. Students were assigned to one of two conditions: classrooms employing predominantly formative assessment strategies (n = 186) or classrooms employing predominantly summative assessment strategies (n = 178). A one-semester intervention period was followed by collection of outcome data through standardized achievement tests, validated self-report scales, and administrative records. Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) revealed statistically significant differences across all five outcome variables, with students in formative assessment classrooms demonstrating higher academic achievement (M = 74.82 vs. 68.37, d = 0.65), higher self-efficacy (d = 0.62), lower test anxiety (d = 0.93), greater engagement (d = 0.62), and higher intrinsic motivation (d = 0.71) compared to their peers in summative assessment classrooms. Moderation analyses indicated that the benefits of formative assessment were particularly pronounced for students from low-income backgrounds. Findings have significant implications for assessment policy, teacher professional development, and instructional design in secondary education contexts.