Matthew Cooke, 17299158 RTL2 Literature Review 1

Does student self-assessment promote student engagement in high school classrooms?

Assessment is an important part of developing, supporting, and evaluating student learning

through the education process, and a defining feature of schooling for students (Ashford-

Rowe, Herrington, & Brown, 2014). In much of the globalised world, including Australia,

political emphasis is mostly placed on high-stakes assessments for assessing educational

standards and accountability (Klenowski, 2011), with other forms of assessment having less

prominence (Fletcher & Shaw, 2012). This is considered problematic, as other forms of

assessment, especially student-directed or student self-assessment (SSA), has shown

important benefits for students’ improvement and motivation in learning during school, as

well as continual effects outside of school (Zamora, Saurez, & Ardura, 2018). As such, and

despite this lack of prominence, SSA has remained a main focus area for research in student

education since the late-1980s (Panadero, Jonsson, & Botella, 2017), and is encouraged for

use by educators at the foreground of assessment (Harris, Brown, & Harnett, 2015). The

usefulness of SSA as an educational tool, including for student engagement, is a current area

of investigation.

Generally speaking, SSA involves students’ reflection and consideration of their

learning in class (Brown & Harris, 2014). Although there is no standard definition for SSA

(Kearney, 2013), it can be considered as the “wide variety of mechanisms and techniques

through which students describe (i.e., assess) and possibly assign merit or worth to (i.e.,

evaluate) the qualities of their own learning processes and products” (Panadero, Brown, &

Strijbos, 2016, p. 2). The principles of SSA are built upon a constructivist approach to

learning, whereby students construct new understandings by drawing upon and applying their

current knowledge, and SSA supports this process with opportunities to reflect on knowledge

gaps, areas for improvement, and setting new learning goals (Fletcher & Shaw, 2012). The

characteristics of SSA are a process that involves the nature and responses to data, the context
Matthew Cooke, 17299158 RTL2 Literature Review 2

related to internal and external factors surrounding the self-assessment (climate, relationships,

etc.), and the conflicts or tensions that result from this process (Yan & Brown, 2016). Such

judgements are made based on evidence from teachers, peers, and/or themselves, as well as

internal affects and values (Yan & Brown, 2016), and have various forms and means of

application in classrooms. These uses of SSA, broadly speaking, can be grouped into three

categories—self-estimation, including reflections on class work; self-rating, including rating

scales such as traffic lights; and judgements based from rubrics, including being part of the

rubrics design or using modelled responses (Brown & Harris, 2014)

However, despite the broad uses of SSA in classrooms, there is some disparity

between those examined and recommended in the literature and those techniques

recommended in pedagogical texts, indicating that classroom usage may not reflect

understood best practices (Brown & Harris, 2014). In fact, little research regarding

examination of SSA in real classroom settings exists, and what research does exist suggests

that “implementation of SSA in K-12 classrooms is not well understood” (Panadero, Brown,

& Courtney, 2014, p. 368). Moreover, research into the effectiveness of SSA as an

assessment tool is “highly variable” and “moderate at best”, as it lacks accurate verifiability

and relies on the students’ ability to accurate assess their own work (Brown & Harris, 2014,

p. 22-3). According to Brown and Harris (2014), students may feel socially pressures to be

dishonest, such as in order to protect their reputation or by telling the teacher what they want

to here. Moreover, simply lacking the understanding of criteria or crucial information to

deliver meaningful self-assessments can also pose barriers to accurate SSA (Brown & Harris,

2014). Furthermore, although even inaccurate, positive SSA scores can provide benefits to

students, use of SSA may inadvertently reinforce or discourage favourable learning

development if SSA is used as a means of formal assessment (Brown & Harris, 2014).
Matthew Cooke, 17299158 RTL2 Literature Review 3

Nevertheless, SSA has reported many important benefits to student learning

development beyond use as a student assessment tool. SSA is suggested to provide students

with greater sense encouragement to learn and of ownership of their learning (Harris et al.,

2015). Moreover, use of SSA also offers additional avenues for feedback and evaluation

beyond those typically curated by the teacher (Harris et al., 2015). This latter point is

highlighted in research, as such a method of assessment decreases teacher workload in the

classroom while simultaneously decreasing teacher dependence (Brown & Harris, 2014).

Although engaging in SSA yielded mixed results regarding the accuracy of self-assessment

(Brown & Harris, 2014), Boud, Lawson, and Thompson (2013) suggests that, similar to other

areas of development of expertise, students simply require increased opportunities for

repeated practice and consistent engagement with SSA to properly learn and benefit from it.

Additionally, SSA involves reflective practices that are necessary for developing self-

regulated learning (Zamora et al., 2018). Self-regulation is considered the “self-directive and

self-generated metacognitive, motivational, and behavioural processes through which

individuals transform personal abilities into control of outcomes in a variety of contexts”

(Brown & Harris, 2014, p. 24). This is of particular importance as self-regulation is a

necessary tool for continuing learning beyond school (Zamora et al., 2018), especially in

areas of higher education where self-regulation is an expected requirement of students (Yan

& Brown, 2016). This development of self-regulation from SSA is also linked with the

development of increased engagement, valued by educators for its relationship with learning

success (Munns & Woodward, 2006).

Engagement describes various goal-directed behaviours, and cognitive and emotional

process (Reeve & Tseng, 2011), and is thought to differ from motivation in the sense that

engagement in something is considered the active process of motivation (Wang & Degol,

2014). Specifically, “engagement is...the outward manifestation of motivation”, though

Matthew Cooke, 17299158 RTL2 Literature Review 4

consistent definitions are not apparent, and vary across studies (Wang & Degol, 2014).

Engagement is especially important for learning, as cognitive and emotional engagement is a

strong predictor of student outcomes, school completion, and a measure of aspirations for

further education, which in turn influences students’ life chances outside of school (Wang &

Degol, 2014). Given that SSA also serves cognitive and emotional purposes, related to self-

reflection and improvement (Brown & Harris, 2014), the relationship to SSA and student

engagement is not unsurprising.

Indeed, the link between utilising SSA for increasing student engagement has been

previously explored, including in Australian research. For instance, as part of the Australian

Fair Go Project, Munns and Woodward (2006) indicate an association between SSA and

engagement, and proposed the use of SSA as a means of increasing engagement for students

in primary school settings. Moreover, at the higher education level in Australia, Kearney

(2013) suggests that self and peer assessment are important means of promoting engagement

in learning amongst detrimentally disengaged student. However, studies of SSA often don’t

occur in real class settings, and therefore do not necessarily reflect real life teaching practice

(Panadero et al., 2014). Moreover, engagement is an often confused and multidimensional

term that requires consideration at all levels, including behavioural, cognitive, and affective

(emotional) states (Wang, Bergin, & Bergin, 2014). Many studies only focus on one area of

engagement, despite its multidimensional nature, and are limited as a result (Wang et al.,

2014). Ultimately, research into SSA and student engagement is multifaceted and ongoing.

The subsequent action research project attempts to consolidate these areas of research in

order to further examine the extent and nature of engagement promoted by SSA use in a high

school classroom setting.

Dear Potential Participant:

I am working on a project titled ‘Does student self-assessment promote student engagement in high
school classrooms?’ for the class, ‘Researching Teaching and Learning 2,’ at Western Sydney University.
As part of the project, I am collecting information to help inform the design of a teacher research
proposal.

My project involves understanding if and in what way student self-assessment promotes student
engagement in high school classrooms. This will involve students taking an initial survey to examine
engagement, followed by the implementation of a self-assessment resource, and then a post-
implementation of the same survey to examine any changes in engagement. The data collected will be
from survey responses only. Through this data, it is hoped that insights into how to effectively implement
student self-assessment will be revealed.

By signing this form, I acknowledge that:

 I have read the project information and have been given the opportunity to discuss the
information and my involvement in the project with the researcher/s.
 The procedures required for the project and the time involved have been explained to me, and
any questions I have about the project have been answered to my satisfaction.
 I consent to completing a survey before and after the introduction of a self-assessment resource.
 I understand that my involvement is confidential and that the information gained during this
data collection experience will only be reported within the confines of the ‘Researching Teaching
and Learning 2’ unit, and that all personal details will be de-identified from the data.
 I understand that I can withdraw from the project at any time, without affecting my relationship
with the researcher/s, now or in the future.

By signing below, I acknowledge that I am 18 years of age or older, or I am a full-time university student
who is 17 years old.

Signed: __________________________________

Name: __________________________________

Date: __________________________________

By signing below, I acknowledge that I am the legal guardian of a person who is 16 or 17 years old, and
provide my consent for the person’s participation.

Signed: __________________________________

Name: __________________________________

Date: __________________________________
Classroom Engagement Survey

Classroom Engagement Survey

Answer these questions to the best of your ability by circling the most appropriate word response.
Please circle only one response per question, and ensure your response is clear. If you make an
error, place a cross through the mistaken option and clearly circle the appropriate response.

Note: By ‘in this class’, they survey is referring to the class you are currently taking.

In this class, I feel interested.

Never Hardly ever Sometimes Often Usually

In this class, I feel proud.

Never Hardly ever Sometimes Often Usually

In this class, I feel excited.

Never Hardly ever Sometimes Often Usually

In this class, I feel happy.

Never Hardly ever Sometimes Often Usually

In this class, I listen very carefully

Never Hardly ever Sometimes Often Usually

In this class, I pay attention to the things I am supposed to remember

Never Hardly ever Sometimes Often Usually

In this class, I complete my assignments

Never Hardly ever Sometimes Often Usually

In this class, I get really involved in class activities

Never Hardly ever Sometimes Often Usually

In this class, form new questions in my mind as I join in class activities

Never Hardly ever Sometimes Often Usually

Classroom Engagement Survey

In this class, I do not want to stop working at the end of class

Never Hardly ever Sometimes Often Usually

In this class, I actively participate in class discussions

Never Hardly ever Sometimes Often Usually

In this class, I go back over things I don’t understand

Never Hardly ever Sometimes Often Usually

In this class, if I make a mistake, I try to figure out where I went wrong

Never Hardly ever Sometimes Often Usually

In this class, I ask myself some questions as I go along to make sure the work makes sense to me

Never Hardly ever Sometimes Often Usually

In this class, if I’m not sure about things, I check my book or use other materials.

Never Hardly ever Sometimes Often Usually

In this class, I try to figure out the hard parts on my own

Never Hardly ever Sometimes Often Usually

In this class, I judge the quality of my ideas or work during class activities

Never Hardly ever Sometimes Often Usually

In this class, I know when I have learnt something properly

Never Hardly ever Sometimes Often Usually

In this class, I can see how much I’ve progressed

Never Hardly ever Sometimes Often Usually

In this class, I can identify areas for improvement in my work

Never Hardly ever Sometimes Often Usually

Matthew Cooke, 17299158 RTL2 Literature Review 8

Data collection protocol explanation

The data collection protocol for this research involves administering surveys to

students before and after the implementation of a student self-assessment (SSA) classroom

resource (resource decided upon consultation with school staff) in order to investigate the

effect and nature of SSA on engagement. Although observations could also be taken,

engagement involves internal processes and external tensions that may be difficult to discern

(Yan & Brown, 2016), so a survey is preferred. This data is also used to support a broader

research topic with more varied research methods. The original survey was sourced for its

specific purpose in examining engagement in students across stages at the classroom level,

and was adapted for purpose.

The research utilises an adjusted version of the Classroom Engagement Inventory,

formulated by Wang, Bergin and Bergin (2014), to examine engagement in the classroom at

behavioural, cognitive, and affect levels. Questions pertaining to disengagement were

removed, as were those related to peer-assessment and a confusing affect question, to

maintain relevancy. To these remaining survey questions, three additional questions have

been added that reflect some of the purposes for self-assessment (see Fletcher & Shaw,

2012), including perceived accuracy, development of learning, and gaps in knowledge seen in

the last three questions, respectively (see survey). Responses to these added questions will be

used to identify a baseline state for the class prior to implementation of the SSA resource.

Additionally, these questions act as a point of comparison in the post-implementation survey

to indicate which areas, if any, the SSA resource effected engagement, and indicate the

degree to which the SSA resource served its purpose, partially controlling for potential

confounding effects on engagement external to the SSA resource. However, it should be

noted, as with the original survey, the order of the questions will be scrambled to avoid any

influence the position of questions has on responses (Wang, Bergin, & Bergin, 2014).
Matthew Cooke, 17299158 RTL2 Literature Review 9

In accordance with ethics protocols, consent forms are first supplied to explain the

purpose and use of the surveys, indicate that no identifying student information is collected

from the surveys, and ensure that informed consent attained. The effectiveness of SSA

resources is dependent on the makeup of the class and the time availability of the teacher

(Brown & Harris, 2014), so consultation is necessary before it is administered. Additionally,

depending on the nature of SSA, public mishandling of students personal evaluations may

impose psychological or social harm, furthering the necessity for teacher consultation. Such a

consideration translates to the striving to do no harm ethical concern, first as a by-product of

research, and also in the context educational practice that is aware of “the fragility of human

relationships within the microcosm of the classroom”, making it another important

consideration for ethics protocols for this research (Mockler, 2014, p. 154).
Matthew Cooke, 17299158 RTL2 Literature Review 10

References

Ashford-Rowe, K., Herrington, J., & Brown, C. (2014). Establishing the critical elements that

determine authentic assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education,

39(2), 205-222. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2013.819566

Boud, D., Lawson, R., & Thompson, D. G. (2013). Does student engagement in self-

assessment calibrate their judgement over time?. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher

Education, 38(8), 941-956. doi:10.1080/02602938.2013.769198

Brown, G. T., & Harris, L. R. (2014). The future of self-assessment in classroom practice:

Reframing self-assessment as a core competency. Frontline Learning Research, 2(1),

22-30. doi: 10.14786/flr.v2i1.24

Fletcher, A. & Shaw, G. (2012). How does student-directed assessment affect learning?

Using assessment as a learning process. International Journal of Multiple Research

Approaches, 6(3), 245–263. doi: 10.5172/mra.2012.6.3.245

Harris, L. R., Brown, G. T. L., & Harnett, J. A. (2015). Analysis of New Zealand primary and

secondary student peer- and self-assessment comments: Applying Hattie and

Timperley’s feedback model, Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice,

22(2), 265-281. doi: 10.1080/0969594X.2014.976541

Kearney, S. (2013). Improving engagement: The use of ‘authentic self and peer-assessment

for learning’ to enhance the student learning experience, Assessment & Evaluation in

Higher Education, 38(7), 875-891. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2012.751963

Klenowski, V. (2011). Assessment for learning in the accountability era : Queensland,

Australia. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37(1), 78-83. doi:

10.1016/j.stueduc.2011.03.003
Matthew Cooke, 17299158 RTL2 Literature Review 11

Mockler, N. (2014). When ‘research ethics’ become ‘everyday ethics’: The intersection of

inquiry and practice in practitioner research. Educational Action Research, 22(2),

146–158. doi: 10.1080/09650792.2013.856771

Munns, G. & Woodward, H. (2006). Student engagement and student self‐assessment: The

REAL framework, Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 13(2),

193-213. doi: 10.1080/09695940600703969

Panadero, E., Brown, G., & Strijbos, J. (2016). The Future of Student Self-Assessment: a

Review of Known Unknowns and Potential Directions. Educational Psychology

Review, 28(4), 803-830. doi: 10.1007/s10648-015-9350-2

Panadero, E., Jonsson, A., & Botella, J. (2017). Effects of self-assessment on self-regulated

learning and self-efficacy: Four meta-analyses. Educational Research Review, 22, 74–

98. doi: 10.1016/j. edurev.2017.08.004.

Reeve, J., & Tseng, C. M. (2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of students’ engagement during

learning activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(4), 257–267.

doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.05.002

Wang, M., & Degol, J. (2014). Staying engaged: Knowledge and research needs in student

engagement. Child Development Perspectives, 8(3), 137-143. doi:10.1111/cdep.12073

Wang, Z., Bergin, C., & Bergin, D. A. (2014). Measuring engagement in fourth to twelfth

grade classrooms: The Classroom Engagement Inventory. School Psychology

Quarterly, 29(4), 517-535. doi: 10.1037/spq0000050

Zamora, A., Suárez, J. M., & Ardura D. (2018). Error detection and self-assessment as

mechanisms to promote self-regulation of learning among secondary education

Matthew Cooke, 17299158 RTL2 Literature Review 12

students, The Journal of Educational Research, 111(2), 175-185. doi:

10.1080/00220671.2016.1225657