Formative assessment in mathematics education: a systematic review
Open accessAbstract
Formative assessment (FA) is a crucial factor influencing learning in schools. However, definitions of FA vary, and findings regarding the effectiveness of FA in mathematics education, specifically, are fragmentary. In this systematic review, we defined five FA components and integrated them into an overarching model. We identified 45 studies spanning the period 2015–2023 that investigated FA’s impact on cognitive and noncognitive learning in mathematics and yielded mixed results. Notably, computer-based assessments in interactive learning environments revealed particular promise. An analysis of the variations in study designs and characteristics provided insight into the factors that could contribute to the effectiveness of FA in progressing and promoting student learning, such as regular implementation over three months, content-specific learning intentions and measurement instruments, and randomized designs. An analysis of the reported moderator and mediator variables facilitated a more nuanced understanding of the effects of FA, highlighting its potential to support lower- to medium-performing students and those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, thus potentially contributing to educational equity. Based on our results, we recommend that future research should prioritize well-defined studies that investigate and describe FA in detail to comprehensively evaluate its potential in supporting mathematical education.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Studies on preservice teachers' beliefs, assessment preferences, and formative assessment in mathematics education suggest that conventional grading practices often fail to capture subtle but meaningful differences in learning and professional growth.
“Studies on preservice teachers' beliefs, assessment preferences, and formative assessment in mathematics education suggest that conventional grading practices often fail to capture subtle but meaningful differences in learning and professional growth”
From Reducing classification risk in developmental performance assessment using fuzzy logic: evidence from preservice mathematics teacher education (2026) · cites this paper as Maskos et al., 2025
Recent research on formative and diagnostic assessment in mathematics education highlights the importance of tools that capture incremental growth and guide targeted instructional support.
“This finding aligns with recent research on formative and diagnostic assessment in mathematics education, which highlights the importance of tools that capture incremental growth and guide targeted instructional support (Maskos et al., 2025; Ruiz-Primo, 2021).”
From Reducing classification risk in developmental performance assessment using fuzzy logic: evidence from preservice mathematics teacher education (2026) · cites this paper as Maskos et al., 2025
Cites
The PRISMA 2020 Statement: An Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., et al. (2021) · International Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.105906 · Cited by 11,748 · see citing works
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane‐Dick, D. (2006) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075070600572090 · Cited by 5,846 · see citing works
Shute, V. J. (2008) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654307313795 · Cited by 4,631 · see citing works
Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems
Sadler, D. R. (1989) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/bf00117714 · Cited by 4,285 · see citing works
Inside the Black Box: Raising Standards through Classroom Assessment
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2010) · Phi Delta Kappan · doi:10.1177/003172171009200119 · Cited by 4,231 · see citing works
Developing the theory of formative assessment
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009) · Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability · doi:10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5 · Cited by 3,301 · cited 8× · see citing works
“Unlike summative assessment, which assesses learning outcomes after the completion of a certain learning phase, FA uses evidence of student achievement to shape further teaching and learning (Black & Wiliam, 2009; Wiliam & Thompson, 2008).”
InfluentialFormative assessment: a critical review
Bennett, R. E. (2011) · Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice · doi:10.1080/0969594x.2010.513678 · Cited by 1,498 · see citing works
Topping, K. J. (2009) · Theory Into Practice · doi:10.1080/00405840802577569 · Cited by 785 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Peer assessment (component 2) and self-assessment (component 3) (Andrade, 2010; Topping, 2009) activate peers or the learner as resources and as owners of their own learning.”
Formative assessment: A systematic review of critical teacher prerequisites for classroom practice
Schildkamp, K., van der Kleij, F. M., Heitink, M. C., Kippers, W. B., & Veldkamp, B. P. (2020) · International Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101602 · Cited by 330 · see citing works
Reconceptualising assessment feedback: A key to improving student learning?
Beaumont, C., O’Doherty, M., & Shannon, L. (2011) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075071003731135 · Cited by 291 · see citing works
Andersson, C., & Palm, T. (2017) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.12.006 · Cited by 195 · see citing works
Harris, L. R., & Brown, G. T. L. (2013) · Teaching and Teacher Education · doi:10.1016/j.tate.2013.07.008 · Cited by 193 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Teachers with adequate pedagogical knowledge of FA and classroom teaching must support and orchestrate these activities (Harris & Brown, 2013; Heritage, 2007; Oeksuez et al., 2024).”
Vattøy, K.-D., & Gamlem, S. M. (2024) · Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1080/00313831.2023.2192772 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Naccache, H., & Hleiss, R. (2026) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2026.1840093
- Authors
- Maskos, K., Schulz, A., Oeksuez, S. S., & Rakoczy, K.
- Affiliations
- Zurich University of Teacher Education (CH)
- University of Teacher Education Lucerne (CH)
- Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Schulz, Andreas
- Venue
- ZDM – Mathematics Education
- Published
- 2025-05-20
- Volume
- 57
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 679-693
- ISSN
- 1615-679X (ISSN-L)
- 1863-9690
- 1863-9704
- OpenAlex
- W4410512325
- Cited by
- 32
- References
- 13
- Citations by year
- 2026: 30 · 2025: 2
- FWCI
- 11.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- ZDM (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Zurich University of Teacher Education
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Education › Mathematics Education and Teaching Techniques
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational and Psychological Assessments
- Keywords
- formative assessment, mathematics education, assessment effectiveness, computer-based testing, interactive learning environment, academic performance, educational equity, underachieving students, socioeconomic background, assessment frequency, learning intentions, measurement instruments
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review