Skip to the content

Formative Assessment: A Meta-Analysis and a Call for Research

Neal Kingston, Brooke Nash2011Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 30(4), 28–37

We checked this card's citation and the finding we state against the source's own page or record in October 2026.

What it found

Formative assessment had a positive but modest effect, well below the 0.40 to 0.70 often claimed for it. Effects looked larger in English language arts than in math or science, and larger when it came with professional development or computer-based systems. Most of the 300 studies screened were too flawed to use.

Effect size, as the source reports it: weighted mean effect size 0.20 (median 0.25).

What kind of study it is

Design
Meta-analysis
Weight
A synthesis: it pools or weighs many studies, so it carries the most weight on the evidence meter.
Sample
Over 300 K–12 studies screened; 13 usable, giving 42 effect sizes
Who
School-age children (K–12)

Read it

doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2011.00220.x · ERIC record EJ951173

We link to the source and summarize it in our own words. We don't host or copy papers.

Cited in the Library

Cite this study

Kingston, N., & Nash, B. (2011). Formative assessment: A meta-analysis and a call for research. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 30(4), 28–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2011.00220.x

Checked against the source in October 2026. All studies · How we rate the evidence · Something wrong? Tell us.