Â鶹ÒùÔº

Assessment support helps students to understand expectations and improve performance through feedback, enhancing learning and confidence (Tai et al., 2018). Embedding feedback also improves transparency, engagement and achievement (Carless & Winstone, 2023). Formative assessment is not new; since the influential work of Black and Wiliam (1998), it has become increasingly embedded within higher education assessment practice and continues to shape how feedback supports learning. However, the current focus is less on its adoption and more on how it is designed and implemented to generate meaningful impact on student learning, particularly in developing critical thinking, reflective engagement and academic writing (Black & Wiliam, 2009; Carless & Boud, 2018; Tai et al., 2018; Ajjawi et al., 2024). This blog post explores how formative assessment can be embedded in higher education to reduce anxiety and build academic confidence.

Formative assessment integrates feedback into learning, enabling students to monitor progress and refine their work before summative submission. This promotes engagement, motivation and self-regulated learning essential for academic success (Panadero et al., 2019). Evidence shows formative feedback is most effective when dialogic, scaffolded and embedded in structured tasks rather than isolated comments (Ajjawi et al., 2024). In practice, formative writing activities provide low-stakes opportunities to build confidence and reduce anxiety, though engagement varies with experience and confidence, requiring inclusive scaffolded approaches (Carless & Boud, 2018; Winstone & Carless, 2019). Grounded in constructivist theory, learning is an active process supported through interaction and reflection, while formative assessment develops self-regulation and evaluative judgment.

‘Formative feedback is most effective when dialogic, scaffolded and embedded in structured tasks rather than isolated comments.’

I introduced a structured assessment support approach for postgraduate students across Human Resource Management, International Business, and Management programmes. Students were provided with the assessment brief, sample assignments and an explanatory video, and asked to bring research notes. In the first session, they spent 20 minutes reading the brief and making notes, followed by 40 minutes of focused writing. In the second session, they spent 20 minutes on further research and 40 minutes refining their draft, preparing for targeted tutor feedback in the final support session two weeks later.

Figure 1: Student feedback

Table 1: Student feedback themes

Student feedback, interpreted using Gibbs’ Reflective Cycle (1988), indicated that the sessions provided clarification and confidence-building, with students reporting improved understanding of assessment requirements, clearer writing expectations and increased confidence in starting assignments. Key themes included clarity, reduced uncertainty, improved organisation, reflection and appreciation of interactive learning (see figure 1 and table 1). The structured approach supported planning, organisation and engagement with tasks, enhancing readiness for assessment. Future practice will build on this approach, with additional scaffolding and worked examples to strengthen student learning and outcomes.

Figure 2: Gibbs’ reflective cycle

Table 2: Gibbs’ reflective cycle applied to practice (my practice)

Future practice should embed formative writing earlier in module design, using clear staged tasks that move students from understanding the brief to producing a complete draft before summative submission. Sessions should consistently combine short, guided reading of the assessment brief, structured writing time, and opportunities for iterative research and refinement. This should be supported by preparatory materials (briefs, exemplars and explanatory videos) and followed by timely, dialogic feedback to strengthen drafting and self-regulation.

References

Ajjawi, R., Tai, J., Dollinger, M., Dawson, P., Boud, D., & Bearman, M. (2024). From authentic assessment to authenticity in assessment: Broadening perspectives. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 49(4), 499–510.

Black, P., & Wiliam, D., (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74.

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5–31.

Boud, D., & Dawson, P. (2021). What feedback literate teachers do. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(3), 499–512.

Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1315–1325.

Carless, D., & Winstone, N. (2023). Teacher feedback literacy and its interplay with student feedback literacy. Teaching in Higher Education, 28(1), 150–163.

Gibbs, G. (1988). Learning by doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods. Further Education Unit.

Panadero, E., Broadbent, J., Boud, D., & Lodge, J. M. (2019). Using formative assessment to influence self-and co-regulated learning: The role of evaluative judgement. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 34(3), 535–557.

Tai, J., Ajjawi, R., Boud, D., Dawson, P., & Panadero, E. (2018). Developing evaluative judgement: Enabling students to make decisions about the quality of work. Higher Education, 76(3), 467–481.

Winstone, N., & Carless, D. (2019). Designing effective feedback processes in higher education: A learning-focused approach. Routledge.