Students' Perceptions of SA

Educational Psychology Review (2023) 35:81

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09799-1

REVIEW ARTICLE

A Systematic Review on Students’ Perceptions

of Self‑Assessment: Usefulness and Factors Influencing
Implementation
Zi Yan1 · Ernesto Panadero2,3 · Xiang Wang4 · Ying Zhan1
Accepted: 18 July 2023 / Published online: 4 August 2023

© The Author(s) 2023
Abstract
Students are the central agent in self-assessment; therefore, their perceptions are crucial
for successful self-assessment. Despite the increasing number of empirical studies
exploring how students perceive self-assessment, systematic reviews synthesising
students’ perceptions of self-assessment and relating them to self-assessment
implementation are scarce. This review covered 44 eligible studies and synthesised
findings related to two key aspects of students’ perceptions of self-assessment: (1)
usefulness of self-assessment; and (2) factors influencing their implementation of self-
assessment. The results revealed inconclusive findings regarding students’ perceived
usefulness of self-assessment. Although most studies reported a generally positive
perception of self-assessment among students, some studies revealed students’
skepticism about its usefulness. Usefulness was influenced by specific individual factors
(i.e., gender, age, and educational level) and instructional factors (i.e., external feedback,
use of instruments, and self-assessment purpose). Additionally, implementation was
influenced by specific individual factors (i.e., perceived usefulness, affective attitude,
self-efficacy, important others, and psychological safety) and instructional factors (i.e.,
practice and training, external feedback, use of instruments, and environmental support).
The findings of this review contribute to a better understanding of students’ perceptions
of self-assessment and shed light on the design and implementation of meaningful self-
assessment activities that cater to students’ learning needs.
Keywords Self-assessment · Perception · Perceived usefulness · Implementation
* Zi Yan
[email protected]
1
Department of Curriculum and Instruction, The Education University of Hong Kong,
Hong Kong, China
2
Facultad de Educación Y Deportes, Universidad de Deusto, Bilbao, Spain
3
IKERBASQUE, Basque Foundation for Science, Bilbao, Spain
4
Department of Sport, Physical Education and Health, Hong Kong Baptist University,
Hong Kong, China
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
81 Page 2 of 28 Educational Psychology Review (2023) 35:81
Introduction
Self-assessment has drawn increasing interest among researchers and practitioners

due to its potential in promoting learning (Andrade, 2019; Brown & Harris, 2013).
The positive impact of self-assessment on both academic performance (e.g.,
Brown & Harris, 2013; Topping, 2003; Yan et al., 2022) and affective outcomes
(e.g., Panadero et al., 2017; Zhan et al., 2023; Sitzmann et al., 2010) has been well
documented. Despite the generally positive impact, findings of meta-analyses (e.g.,
Brown & Harris, 2013; Yan et al., 2022) suggest that the self-assessment process
is complex and its impact on student performance varies across contexts. As self-
assessment is a student-directed process, students’ perceptions of self-assessment
play a crucial role in its implementation and influence its effect. Although there are
an increasing number of empirical studies exploring how students perceive self-
assessment, to our knowledge, there is no systematic review on this topic. Thus,
this review has aimed to synthesise the findings on two key aspects of the students’
perceptions of self-assessment: usefulness and factors influencing implementation.
A nuanced understanding of these aspects is critical to guide the design and
implementation of self-assessment in future research and practice. The pedagogical
insights generated from the synthesis can be used by researchers and practitioners to
increase students’ engagement in self-assessment and maximise its positive impact.
This article first outlines the conceptualisation of self-assessment and the critical
role of students’ perceptions in their self-assessment practices, then discusses the
limitations of existing reviews. Next, methods applied in this review are described,
and results are reported against the research questions. The article concludes by
discussing implications for educational research and practice.
Student Self‑assessment
There are diversified descriptions of self-assessment in the literature (e.g., Andrade,

2019). Panadero et al. (2016) defined self-assessment as “a wide variety of mech-
anisms 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” (p. 804). This definition was adopted in the current review as it cov-
ered a broad spectrum of self-assessment implementation. Self-assessment can be
as simple as “guessing a grade”, or can be a complicated process during which,
students engage in different actions, such as determining standards and/or criteria,
seeking feedback information, reflecting on one’s own performance, making and
calibrating self-assessment judgement (Panadero et al., 2016; Yan & Brown, 2017).
Self-assessment can happen as an explicit activity (e.g., self-assessment exercises
organised in classrooms) or occur in an implicit fashion (e.g., spontaneous self-
questioning during learning) (Nicol, 2021; Panadero et al., 2019; Yan, 2022). The
current review focused on explicit and/or structured self-assessment. Despite the
value of implicit self-assessment, this decision was made for two practical reasons.
Firstly, it is easier to study explicit self-assessment with observable evidence.
Secondly, by analysing the process of explicit, structured self-assessments, crucial
13
Educational Psychology Review (2023) 35:81 Page 3 of 28 81
pedagogical insights can be generated for teachers to refine teaching and for students
to advance learning.
The effect of self-assessment on students’ learning performance has been studied
in numerous studies. For example, Topping (2003) concluded in a narrative review
that self-assessment could improve both the effectiveness and quality of learning.
Brown and Harris (2013) also found similar results by reviewing 23 studies, which
covered a wide range of self-assessment operationalisations. The effects ranged
from -0.04 to 1.62 (Cohen’s d), with a median effect between 0.40 and 0.45. In a
more recent meta-analysis, Yan et al. (2022) synthesised 626 effect sizes from 175
independent studies. The results indicated that self-assessment had medium to large
effects (g = 0.585) on academic performance. However, all these reviews revealed
that the effect of self-assessment varies across contexts. For example, in Yan et al.’s
(2022) meta-analysis, despite the overall positive effects of SA, negative effects
were reported in 22.8% of studies. These findings suggest that self-assessment is
a complex process and may be influenced by a wide range of factors. One of the
crucial factors could be students’ beliefs/conceptions of self-assessment because
how students perceive self-assessment might affect their behaviours in the self-
assessment process, which, in turn, influence the effect of self-assessment.
The Importance of Student Beliefs
It is generally accepted that learning belief significantly affects learning behaviours

(van der Kleij & Lipnevich, 2021). For example, students’ control and self-efficacy
beliefs significantly predict their behavioural engagement in mathematics (Gjicali
& Lipnevich, 2021). In addition, students’ adaptive perceptions of high-stakes
assessment are associated with the use of self-regulated learning strategies and
knowledge transferability (Cho et al., 2020). Students’ perceptions about assessment
also influence their learning behaviours and the effects of assessment. Brown and
colleagues have studied students’ conceptions of assessment, particularly the purposes
of assessment (e.g., Brown, 2011; Brown & Hirschfeld, 2008; Brown & Wang, 2013).
They found that students’ conceptions of assessments influenced student learning-
related behaviours, such as self-regulation (Brown, 2011) and academic achievement
(Brown & Hirschfeld, 2008). Since self-assessment is a student-directed process that
heavily relies on students’ active role in the process (Panadero et al., 2019; Yan, 2022),
students’ perceptions of self-assessment might determine whether self-assessment
can be implemented as intended and how the self-assessment can impact their
learning. Students’ misperceptions of self-assessment may be a significant obstacle
to its implementation (Panadero et al., 2016). For example, if students perceive
feedback received in the process of self-assessment as humiliating and dissatisfying,
their learning will be hampered (Tavsanli & Kara, 2021). Students’ conceptions
of self-assessment cover different aspects. Among them, perceived usefulness and
factors influencing implementation are of utmost importance because both aspects
substantially impact students’ engagement in self-assessment and the learning gains
from self-assessment.
13
Students’ Perceived Usefulness of Self‑assessment
Students’ perceived usefulness of self-assessment is crucial because it could be a

necessary condition precedent to actual engagement in self-assessment. Perceived
usefulness was found to be the most powerful predictor of students’ intentions to
conduct self-assessment (Yan, Brown et al., 2020). Our preliminary literature search
also showed that the perceived usefulness of self-assessment is one of the most pop-
ular topics among studies examining students’ perceptions of self-assessment.
Most students who possessed positive beliefs about self-assessment acclaimed
that it helped them gain independence, take responsibility for learning, grow in con-
fidence, work in a structured manner, and be analytical and critical during learning
(Bourke, 2014; Siow, 2015; van Helvoort, 2012). However, the findings are incon-
sistent in that students’ perceived usefulness of self-assessment is not universal, and
it is affected by a wide range of factors, such as education level, self-assessment
instruments, and the environment (Andrade, 2019; Hill, 2016).
Students’ Perceived Factors Influencing the Implementation of Self‑assessment
Factors influencing self-assessment implementation in students’ perceptions are

critical because they affect students’ actual behaviours in the self-assessment
process and, therefore, determine the learning impact of self-assessment. Past
studies have provided evidence of the association between personal factors and the
implementation of self-assessment. For example, Yan, Brown et al. (2020) found
that attitude, subjective norms, self-efficacy, and perceived controllability were
significant predictors of self-assessment intention and practice. Students are more
likely to engage in self-assessment if they realise it is a crucial learning tool (Logan,
2015; Tavsanli & Kara, 2021). Important others’ (e.g., teachers and peers) beliefs
also substantially influence students’ implementation of self-assessment (Andrade
& Du, 2007; Harris & Brown, 2013). Furthermore, students’ sense of psychological
safety also influences students’ self-assessment actions (Harris & Brown, 2013; Yan,
Brown et al., 2020).
In addition to individual factors, instructional factors also influence students’
self-assessment. For instance, instructional scaffoldings of self-assessment are
usually considered helpful, such as rubrics and checklists (Andrade & Du, 2007;
Wang, 2017), or receiving feedback from teachers and peers (Harris & Brown,
2013; Orsmond et al., 1997). Relevant practice and training can enhance students’
confidence in self-assessment (Wong, 2016, 2017) and change their attitude towards
self-assessment so that they are more likely to self-assess (Perera et al., 2010;
Wang, 2017). In contrast, lacking experience in assessment could be a barrier for
students to carry out self-assessment (Hanrahan & Geoff, 2001; Zekarias, 2023).
Moreover, it is useful to develop students’ confidence in their skills and abilities
to facilitate self-assessment (Butler & Lee, 2006; Wolffensperger & Patkin, 2013).
Additionally, the class climate (e.g., emotional support from peers) is also a crucial
instructional factor that could encourage the implementation of self-assessment
(Sargeant et al., 2011).
13
Prior Review of Students’ Perceptions of Self‑assessment
As the empirical studies on self-assessment accumulate with time, there is an increasing

number of review studies. However, most reviews focus on either the effectiveness
of self-assessment interventions (e.g., Topping, 2003) or the validity (or accuracy) of
self-assessment (e.g., Li & Zhang, 2020; Sitzmann et al., 2010). Students’ perceptions
of self-assessment and how such perceptions relate to the implementation of self-
assessment have not attracted sufficient attention. The only exception that the authors are
aware of is a two-paragraph section in Andrade’s (2019) review that discussed 15 studies
investigating students’ perceptions of self-assessment. The results show that students’
perceptions of self-assessment were influenced by education level, self-assessment
instruments, and the purpose of SA. For example, college and university students usually
understand the purpose of self-assessment and appreciate its value in optimising the
learning process and facilitating self-regulated learning. In contrast, younger children
tend to have unsophisticated understandings of the purposes of self-assessment, which
may result in poor implementation of the self-assessment process. Andrade’s review also
shows that students are likely to have a positive perception of self-assessment if they
have the opportunity to develop or use their own criteria, rubrics, or checklists to guide
their self-assessment and the subsequent revision of their work. Furthermore, students’
perceptions of self-assessment can be negatively influenced if the assessment serves a
summative purpose.
As Andrade’s (2019) review aimed to report on “what has been sufficiently
researched and what remains to be done” (p. 5), the discussion on students’
perceptions is merely one of the reviewed topics, among many others. Its literature
search did not specifically target this topic and included only a small number of
relevant studies (N = 15). In addition, it did not explicitly define which aspect(s) of
students’ perceptions were being reviewed. Hence, despite the insights generated,
the short section in Andrade’s (2019) review does not allow a detailed elaboration
of how students perceive self-assessment and how students’ perceptions of self-
assessment relate to its implementation.
The Current Review
The above discussion shows that despite the crucial role of students’ perceptions
of self-assessment and the increasing interest in studying this topic, a synthesis
of the available literature is lacking. The current review has aimed to advance the
understanding of students’ perceptions of self-assessment and explore how such
perceptions were related to the implementation of self-assessment. In particular, the
following research questions were investigated:
RQ1- What are the characteristics of studies on students’ perceptions of self-assessment?

RQ2- How do students perceive the usefulness of self-assessment?
RQ3- What factors affect students’ perceived usefulness of self-assessment?
RQ4- What factors affect students’ implementation of self-assessment?
13
Method
To ensure the method was rigorous and reproducible, the procedures were developed
based on the guide of the systematic reviews (Petticrew & Roberts, 2006). To be
precise, there have been multiple steps involved in this review, including developing
research questions, identifying search strategies, conducting literature searches,
formulating inclusion criteria and selecting relevant articles, extracting the data, and
collating, summarising, and reporting the results.
Search Strategy and Inclusion Criteria
Six key terms were used for the literature search: perception, conception, attitude,
value, belief, and self-efficacy, all of which refer to the mental interpretations of
perceived stimuli and information (Bonner, 2016). These terms were combined with
self-assessment, or self-evaluation/monitoring/reflection/review/feedback/rating/
grading for the search. For maximum coverage of the literature, all studies that
addressed students’ perceptions about self-assessment were included, even if not the
central topic of the study.
The search was conducted in November 2021, using two databases, ERIC and
PsycINFO, for searching titles and abstracts. These databases were selected for this study
due to their extensive coverage of research in the fields of education and psychology.
Given the available filters, the search was conducted on peer-reviewed journal articles
written in English from all available years. Simultaneously, studies recommended by
authors and experts in this field were also added to the article pool generated from the
database search. Duplicates were removed prior to identifying whether the studies related
to the research questions. Four inclusion criteria were used in the screening, including (1)
the study examined students’ perceptions of self-assessment; (2) it presented empirical
results; (3) it was published in a peer-review journal; and (4) it was written in English.
Data Extraction
After removing duplicates, 1,864 publications were prepared for screening using
the four inclusion criteria. A two-step selection was then used to determine which
studies would be included. The first step was to screen the titles and abstracts
of the articles in accordance with the inclusion criteria. Two rounds of quality
checking were conducted. Firstly, two researchers independently screened
a random sample of 30 studies according to the inclusion criteria. The degree
of agreement was 87%, and a meeting was held to resolve discrepancies until a
mutual agreement could be reached. Secondly, the two researchers independently
screened another random sample of 30 studies. The degree of agreement
increased to 93%. The researchers further discussed the reasons underlying
discrepancies to ensure a consistent understanding of the inclusion criteria. The
main screening was then conducted on all identified records. A total of 1,797
studies were excluded for failure to meet the inclusion criteria, resulting in 67
records that proceeded to the next step.
13
In the second step, the full texts of the 67 studies were independently read by
two researchers. Each study was coded as include or exclude, and all discrepancies
between the two coders were resolved through mutual agreement. A total of 23 stud-
ies were excluded due to two reasons, i.e., not addressing RQs (N = 18) or not pre-
senting empirical data (N = 5). This yielded a total of 44 qualified studies for the
current review. Figure 1 illustrates the process of the literature search, screening,
and inclusion.
The selected studies were coded using a structured data extraction template
specifically developed for this review. A pilot coding was conducted with two
researchers independently coding 15 randomly selected studies using the template.
The inter-rater reliability was 0.91. A consensus was reached via discussion
on all disagreements, and the coding template was further clarified and refined
accordingly. An iterative approach was used for defining the categories of factors
in the data extraction. The final version of the data extraction form consisted of the
following sections: study title, author name, year of publication, abstract, country/
region, educational level (kindergarten through twelfth grade [K-12]/higher
education), research design, self-assessment operational definition, data collection
methods on self-assessment perception, sample size, subject area, characteristics
Fig. 1 The process of literature search and selection
13
of self-assessment, perceived usefulness and its influencing factors, and factors

influencing students’ implementation of self-assessment.
Results
In this section, results are reported against the four RQs. The characteristics of the
included studies (RQ1) are first described. Then, students’ perceived usefulness of
self-assessment (RQ2) and factors influencing it (RQ3) are reported. Finally, the
factors that affect students’ implementation of self-assessment (RQ4) are presented.
For RQs 2 to 4, included studies are mentioned only if they have presented empirical
data addressing that particular RQ.
RQ1‑ What Are the Characteristics of Studies on Students’ Perceptions

of Self‑assessment?
An overview of the basic information of the 44 included studies is provided in Table 1.

The research context, research design, sample size, and data collection method for
students’ perceptions are summarised in the table. The publication years of included
studies ranged from 1997 through 2021. Included studies were conducted in 22 different
countries/regions, with the UK (N = 7) and the USA (N = 7) appearing most frequently,
followed by Singapore (N = 4), Hong Kong (N = 3), and New Zealand (N = 3). Over 70%
of the included studies (N = 31) were conducted in higher education, while 13 studies
were carried out in the K-12 context. The studies covered a broad range of disciplines/
subjects, with language subjects being the most studied discipline (N = 9).
Various designs (i.e., quantitative, qualitative, and mixed) were employed in the
included studies. Regarding the methods for collecting data on students’ perceptions
of self-assessment, the three most frequently used methods were: survey (N = 26),
interview (N = 14), and focus group interview (N = 11). As some studies applied
multiple methods, the sum of different categorisations was larger than the total
number of studies. The survey sample sizes varied dramatically across studies,
ranging from 15 to 1,425. Most surveys consisted of close-ended questions, with
only three studies (i.e., Hill, 2016; Logan, 2015; Pidduck & Bauer, 2021) including
open-ended questions. The sample sizes for interviews/focus group interviews were
much smaller, ranging from five to 130. The frequency of data collection methods
slightly differed in the K-12 and higher education contexts. In K-12, survey and
interview had the same usage rate (N = 6, 42.9%), but focus group interview was
rarely used (N = 2, 14.3%). In higher education, the most popular method was
survey (N = 20, 55.6%), followed by focus group interview (N = 9, 25.0%) and
interview (N = 7, 19.4%). In addition, worksheets and reflective journals were
also used to explore students’ perceptions of self-assessment. In Hanrahan and
Isaacs’ (2001) study, data were collected through worksheets with an open-ended
question concerning the pros and cons of performing self-assessment on the essay
assignment. In Wang’s (2017) study, a reflective journal was used to understand
students’ beliefs about rubrics used in self-assessment.
13
Table 1 Overview of studies included in this systematic review
No Author(s) Year Context Research Design Sample size Data collection method for
self-assessment conception
Country/ region Education sector Subject
1 Adediwura 2012 Nigeria K-12 Math Quantitative 60 Survey

2 Al-Kadri et al 2012 Riyadh Higher education Medical Qualitative 37 Interview
3 Allen & Flippo 2002 USA Higher education Literacy Mixed 67 Survey
4 Andrade & Du 2007 USA Higher education Educational psychology Qualitative 14 Focus group
5 Babu & Barghathi 2020 UAE Higher education Accounting Qualitative 15 Survey
6 Bakx et al 2002 Germany Higher education Social communicative Quantitative 396 Survey
competence
7 Bourke 2016 New Zealand K-12 NA Qualitative 24 Interview

8 Brookhart 2001 USA K-12 English and anatomy Qualitative 50 Interview
9 Butler & Lee 2006 South Korea K-12 English oral performance Quantitative 151 Survey
10 Duque & Cuesta 2017 Colombia Higher education English Mixed 24 Survey
11 Evans et al 2005 UK Higher education Medical Qualitative 6 Interview
12 Gashi-Shatri & Zabeli 2018 Kosovo K-12 Education Quantitative 725 Survey
13 Handley & Cox 2007 UK Higher education Business Qualitative 29 Interview
14 Hanrahan & Isaacs 2001 Australia Higher education Health psychology Quantitative 233 Work sheet
15 Harris & Brown 2013 New Zealand K-12 Math or English Qualitative 99 Focus group
16 Hill 2016 South Africa Higher education Accounting Mixed 282 Survey (with open-ended
questions)
17 Hung 2019 Taiwan Higher education English Mixed 97 Survey (with open-ended
questions)
18 Irani & Telg 2002 USA Higher education Agricultural Mixed 31 Survey
19 Lau 2020 Singapore Higher education Laboratory Quantitative 52 Survey
20 Lew et al 2010 Singapore Higher education N/A Quantitative 936 Survey
21 Logan 2015 USA Higher education Education Qualitative 81 Survey (with open-ended
Page 9 of 28 81
13
questions)
Table 1 (continued)
13
81 Page 10 of 28
22 Ndoye 2017 USA Higher education Social Science Quantitative 31 Survey

23 Orsmond & Merry 2013 UK Higher education Biology Qualitative 36 Interview and focus group
24 Orsmond et al 1997 UK Higher education Biology Mixed 105 Survey
25 Perera et al 2010 Malaysia Higher education Medical Mixed 202 Survey and interview
26 Pidduck & Bauer 2021 South Africa Higher education Accounting and Financial Quantitative 389 Survey (with open-ended
Sciences questions)
27 Ramirez 2010 Chile Higher education Physiology Quantitative 47 Survey
28 Rees & Shepherd 2005 UK Higher education Medical Qualitative 130 Focus group
29 Restrepo & Nelson 2013 Colombia Higher education English Qualitative 9 Interview
30 Ross et al 1998 Canada K-12 English, Math, Art, Sci- Mixed 23 classes Survey and interview
ence, Social science
31 Ross et al 2002 Canada K-12 N/A Qualitative 71 Interview
32 Sadeghi &Abolfazli 2015 Iran Higher education ESL Mixed 82 Survey
Khonbi
33 Sargeant et al 2011 USA, UK Higher education Medical Qualitative 85 Focus group
34 Seifert & Feliks 2019 Israel Higher education Education Mixed 300 Survey and focus group
35 Sieber 2009 UK Higher education IT competence Mixed 400 Survey and focus group
36 Strobl 2015 Belgium Higher education Foreign language writing Mixed 38 Survey and focus group
37 Sullivan & Hall 1997 New Zealand Higher education Literature Qualitative 5 Interview
38 Tavsanli & Kara 2021 Turkey K-12 N/A Mixed 60 Interview
39 Wang 2017 Hong Kong Higher education N/A Qualitative 26 Focus group and reflective
journal
40 Wanner & Palmer 2018 Australia Higher education Social Science Mixed 154 Survey and focus group
41 Wong 2016 Singapore K-12 Math Mixed 75 Interview
Table 1 (continued)
42 Wong 2017 Singapore K-12 Math Quantitative 146 Survey

43 Yan, Brown, et al 2020 Hong Kong K-12 N/A Quantitative 1425 Survey
44 Yan, Chiu, et al 2020 Hong Kong K-12 NA Mixed 74 Focus group
Page 11 of 28 81
13
RQ2‑ How Do Students Perceive the Usefulness of Self‑assessment?
The studies included in this review indicate that students generally hold positive per-
ceptions of self-assessment. Among the 12 studies that provided quantitative data on
students’ perceived usefulness of self-assessment (e.g., 1, 3, 5, 16, 18, 19, 24, 27, 30,
32, 34, 44), the results suggested a positive perception, as indicated by an average
score higher than the midpoint of the Likert-type scale or more than 50% of positive
responses. A consistent finding in many studies is that students report that self-assess-
ment helps them understand their own abilities/performance, identify their weaknesses
or missing pieces in their learning, and inform the direction of the subsequent learn-
ing (1, 11, 12, 16, 17, 18, 22, 26). Students also regard self-assessment as a method to
take control of their learning (5). In addition, self-assessment can motivate students
to apply more adaptive learning strategies (11) and build their confidence in learn-
ing subjects (17). In students’ opinions, self-assessment is not only useful for learning
enhancement, but also a valuable tool for their future career/employment (8, 10).
Despite the generally positive perception, some studies revealed students’ suspicion
about the usefulness of self-assessment, especially when self-assessment was not
accompanied by external feedback. For example, Evans et al. (2005) reported that
medical postgraduates and trainees did not consider self-assessment useful if there
was no immediate feedback from trainers (11). Some students in Strobl’s (2015)
study felt unable to achieve progress without teacher feedback after self-evaluation
because of their doubt about self-assessment accuracy (36). In Al-Kadri et al.’s (2012)
study, medical students felt that self-assessment did not increase their learning and
motivation. For instance, one student said, “it looks like a good idea, but actually, in
real life, it is just a matter of formality … I don’t give it importance. It doesn’t change
the way I study or approach my patients” (2).
Some studies highlighted the diversity in students’ perceived usefulness of self-
assessment. For example, in Hanrahan and Isaacs’s (2001) study, some students
reported self-assessment might not be useful because “the assignments I have
handed in are usually the best that I can produce, so I would find it hard to mark
my own assignment”, others perceived it helpful in promoting critical thinking and
improving the quality of their assignments (14). Another study revealed that some
students perceived self-assessment as beneficial for learning, but not for impression
management (i.e., managing the tutor’s impression of their performance), while
other students held the opposite idea (i.e., self-assessment is helpful for impression
management instead of learning) (20).
RQ3‑ What Factors Affect Students’ Perceived Usefulness of Self‑assessment?
A total of 17 studies have examined factors influencing the students’ perceived

usefulness of self-assessment (1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 19, 22, 31, 33, 34, 36, 39, 40, 42).
These factors could be categorised into two groups, i.e., individual and self-assessment
design factors.
13
Individual Factors
Among the included studies, five investigated the influence of individual factors,
including gender, age, and educational level, on students’ perceptions of the
usefulness of self-assessment (1, 6, 7, 12, 31).
No study reported a significant difference in students’ overall perceived usefulness
of self-assessment across genders. For example, girls and boys from Grades 2, 4 and 6
showed similar attitudes toward self-evaluation (e.g., ‘do you think self-evaluation helps
you do better in school?’) (31). In Adediwura’s (2012) study, both male and female
students reported that self-assessment had a positive impact on their self-efficacy and
autonomy in learning mathematics (1).
Age is an important factor influencing students’ perceived usefulness of SA.
For example, Gashi-Shatri and Zabeli (2018) found that 1 0th—12th grade students
(15–18 years old) believed that self-assessment helped them more than 6th—9th
grade students (12–14 years old) (12). Similarly, Bakx et al. (2002) found that,
compared with first-year and second-year university students, fourth-year students
had a more positive perception of self-assessment (6).
Concerning educational level, a proxy variable of age, primary school students
noted that teacher-directed assessment helped them understand what they had
learned or how much they had learned, but self-assessment might be less useful
because it was hard for them to self-assess accurately. In contrast, secondary
school students had a more sophisticated conception of self-assessment in that
self-assessment can indicate learning based on determining learning goals and
predetermined criteria (7).
Instructional Factors
A total of 16 studies investigated factors related to self-assessment design

influencing students’ perceived usefulness of self-assessment (2, 6, 11, 12, 19, 22,
30, 31, 33, 34, 36, 39, 40, 42). The most frequently reported factors were external
feedback (2, 6, 11, 12, 22, 31, 33, 40), use of instruments (11, 34, 36, 39, 40, 42),
and self-assessment purpose (2, 4, 8, 40).
External Feedback Self-assessment with external feedback, mainly from teachers,

was perceived to be more valuable by students (2, 6, 11, 12, 22, 31, 33, 40). This
is because teacher feedback on the quality of self-assessment helps make clear
expectations of learning tasks and identify areas where they need to devote more
time (31). Medical students believed that the absence of supervisors’ formative
feedback was a barrier to informed self-assessments of clinical performance
(33). Additionally, Al-Kadri et al. (2012) found that undergraduate medical
students believed that self-assessment did not have a beneficial impact on learning
strategies or outcomes when it was not accompanied by supervisor feedback (2).
Timely feedback is particularly valued. In Ndoye’s (2017) study, students reported
that feedback helped them take advantage of self-assessment, especially for live
feedback that is given simultaneously with the work (22). Another study reported
13
that all the interviewed medical postgraduates and trainees (N = 6) did not consider
self-assessment useful due to a lack of immediate feedback from trainers (11). In
addition, 10th—12th grade students placed a higher value on the feedback on the
self-assessment process than 6 th—9th grade students (12) or multimedia assessment
with a self-assessment element (6). In addition to the lack of feedback, low-quality
feedback also has a negative impact. For example, Wanner and Palmer (2018) also
examined the role of peer feedback in self-assessment processes. They reported that
some participants felt the self-assessment did not help enhance their performance
due to poor or contradictory peer feedback (40).
Use of Instruments Students indicated that self-assessment instruments made self-

assessment more useful to their learning (11, 34, 36, 39, 40, 42). Students felt suspicious
of the usefulness of self-evaluation when they have to do it without an appropriate
reference of comparison (36). Compared with checklists and learning logs, students
regarded rubrics as the most helpful tool (42). Students perceived rubrics as a reference
for meaningful self-assessment (34). With the assistance of the rubric, students could
pinpoint errors in their essays (40). In Wang’s (2017) study, university students suggested
using rubrics in self-assessment to determine what and how they should do throughout
all three stages of self-regulated learning: a) in the forethought stage, rubrics assisted
them in setting goals and deciding learning strategies; b) in the performance stage, rubrics
facilitated their self-monitoring behaviours; and c) in the self-reflection stage, rubrics
guided them to identify the strengths and weakness as well as supporting the development
of self-feedback. Moreover, students reported five factors affecting the effectiveness of
rubrics during self-assessment in the EFL writing class, including the rubric’s coverage
and structure, descriptors of performance quality, score range, domain knowledge about
writing, and length of intervention (39). In addition to rubrics, other instruments are also
useful. For example, both the global rating scale and checklist scales were perceived to
be useful for self-assessment by medical trainees. Relatively, the global rating scale (i.e.,
a Likert-type scale to evaluate attributes relevant to the performance) was preferred to the
checklist scale (i.e., a list of certain tasks that had been performed correctly) because the
correct or incorrect options of the latter were too rigid (11). In sum, self-assessment was
perceived as more useful when instruments were available, and rubrics appeared as the
most popular instrument in self-assessment.
Self‑assessment purpose The purpose of self-assessment may influence students’

perceived usefulness. Although it is conventional to make a dichotomous classification
(i.e., formative vs. summative), doing so is not straightforward for empirical studies
due to the contextual complexity. Hence, we used two more explicit indicators
instead of arbitrarily classifying the purposes to be formative or summative. These
two indicators included (1) whether self-assessment scores were used for learning
improvement or account for students’ final grade; and (2) whether the self-assessment
results were reported in qualitative (i.e., written comments, reflective notes) or
quantitative approaches (i.e., marks, scores). There were eight studies (2, 3, 8, 14, 16,
27, 35, 40) found which incorporated self-assessment both for learning improvement
13
and final grade. In addition, 6 studies (1, 4, 36, 37, 41, 42) included both qualitative
and quantitative self-assessment. Surprisingly, only four studies explicitly discussed
students’ opinions regarding self-assessment with different purposes. Most studies
favoured self-assessment for learning improvement or those with qualitative methods.
For example, students appreciated that self-assessment could improve their learning
quality even if it did not necessarily result in better marks because the self-assessment
process provided additional space and time to reflect on their own work (40). Students
felt self-assessment with open-ended questions (qualitative approach) was more useful
than those with rubrics (quantitative approach) (4). In contrast, self-assessment within
a summative context appeared less useful in enhancing students’ learning quality
because students focused too much on their marks (2)..
RQ4‑ What Factors Affect Students’ Implementation of Self‑assessment?
A total of 21 studies have examined factors influencing the implementation of

self-assessment in students’ perceptions (4, 5, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 21, 23,
25, 28, 31, 33, 38, 39, 41, 42, 43, 44). These factors could be categorised into two
groups, i.e., individual and instructional factors.
Individual Factors
Perceived Usefulness The perceived usefulness of self-assessment refers to students’

perceptions about the effectiveness or consequences of performing self-assessment in
their learning. A total of four studies examined its relationship with the implementation
of self-assessment (5, 21, 38, 42). These studies have consistently shown that students’
motivation for and engagement in self-assessment were strongly influenced by the
perception of its positive impact, such as identifying their strengths and weaknesses,
monitoring their learning progress, and improving their learning confidence. Students
who found self-assessment beneficial for their learning were willing to use it
frequently and voluntarily (42). This finding applies to different subject areas, such as
mathematics (21, 42) and writing (38). In addition to learning, students perceived self-
assessment as a valuable capacity for their future careers (5).
Affective Attitude The affective attitude towards self-assessment is about whether

students like to implement it or not. This factor was investigated in two studies
(38, 44). It should be noted that students’ affective attitude towards self-assessment
is usually considered more a state than a trait, as it can change over time and is
influenced by students’ self-assessment experiences. For example, Yan, Chiu et al.
(2020) revealed that students initially liked the idea of self-assessment diaries,
but their interest diminished gradually after completing three to four diaries (44).
Students were happy to do self-assessment when their work was appreciated, while
13
those who made more mistakes in their work disliked self-assessment and were
unwilling to criticise in this way (38).
Self‑efficacy Self-assessment self-efficacy, referring to students’ confidence in their

skills and abilities in conducting self-assessment successfully, was found relevant to
self-assessment implementation in four studies (11, 18, 41, 43). Yan, Brown et al.’s
(2020) study explicitly demonstrated that students with higher self-efficacy in self-
assessment were more likely to conduct four self-assessment behaviours, including
seeking external feedback through monitoring, seeking external feedback through
inquiry, seeking internal feedback, and self-reflection (43). Additionally, the lack
of confidence in using self-assessment is associated with lower self-assessment
accuracy (18). However, high self-assessment self-efficacy does not necessarily
lead to desirable outcomes. For example, students who felt they were skilful at
self-assessment might overestimate their own performance more than others (11).
Students’ self-efficacy in their learning also influences their self-assessment. For
instance, Butler and Lee (2006) revealed that academic confidence influenced the
off-task self-assessment (i.e., a general and decontextualised self-assessment on
students’ overall performance) for 4th and 6th grade students (9).
Important Others The pressure exerted by important individuals, i.e., how people
who hold significance to students perceive self-assessment, can influence the
implementation of self-assessment by the students. This finding was reiterated in
four studies (4, 15, 31, 43). Yan, Brown et al. (2020) found that important others
(they used the term “subjective norms” according to the Theory of Planned
Behaviour) had a significant impact on students’ intentions to self-assess (43).
Andrade and Du (2007) reported that it was confusing for students to self-assess
when there was a clash between their own standards and teachers’ expectations
(4). It is also possible that some students self-assess just to ensure teachers and
parents can understand their perspectives, rather than for self-improvement (15).
Furthermore, both school and student expectations could influence the accuracy
of self-assessment. While students with high expectations for themselves might
overestimate their performance, students in schools with a high level of expectations
of students’ performance might underestimate themselves (31).
Psychological Safety Psychological safety is about whether students feel psychologically

safe in conducting self-assessment. This factor was discussed in 4 studies (5, 11, 15,
43). Psychological safety matters, especially occur when self-assessments involve
interpersonal interactions (e.g., students are required to discuss their self-assessment
results with peers). On the one hand, students are concerned about bias and inaccuracy
associated with self-assessment (5). On the other hand, they were anxious about
teachers’ negative responses if they gave honest (usually low) self-assessment results
(15). Some students perceived self-assessment as a source of unnecessary pressure or
stress for them; one of them said, “I do not think this should be done every time you do
a surgical because it involves some kind of stress with it, being assessed, it’s just like an
exam” (11). Yan, Brown et al. (2020) reported a positive relationship between students’
13
psychological safety and their self-assessment actions. The safer students feel about the
learning environment, the more likely they implement self-assessment, such as seeking
external feedback and internal feedback on their performance, and self-reflection (43).
Instructional Factors
Practice and Training A total of eight studies (4, 11, 14, 16, 25, 39, 41, 42) reported
practice and training on self-assessment as an important factor in determining stu-
dents’ self-assessment. In students’ opinion, more practice is necessary for them to
become confident in conducting self-assessment (41, 42). In particular, it is essential
for students to understand the assessment procedure and assessment criteria before
performing self-assessment (11). The absence of relevant experience or unfamiliar-
ity with assessment standards makes self-assessment much more difficult for many
students (14). Practice and training can significantly change students’ attitudes and
behaviour regarding assessment. For example, in Andrade and Du’s (2007) study,
before self-assessment practice, participants perceived themselves as unable to
self-assess, placing a low value on themselves as a source of feedback. However,
all the participants favoured self-assessment after extended practice (4). Wang
(2017) reported that a student initially resisted self-assess. However, repeated self-
assessment practices enhanced the student’s positive attitude and willingness to self-
assess (39). Perera et al. (2010) found that, after training, more than 90% of students
consistently or frequently did self-assessment, and approximately 85% of students
expressed interest in self-assessment in future learning programs (25). After com-
pleting the self-assessment assignment, the percentage of students planning to per-
form the self-assessment increased from 23.1% to 91% (16).
External Feedback External feedback in various forms from different sources is cru-
cial for self-assessment, which was revealed in five studies (13, 15, 23, 28, 33). From
the students’ perspective, it is a barrier for them to complete a self-assessment with-
out formative feedback from their supervisors. Furthermore, they perceived peer
feedback was beneficial for self-assessment (33). In addition, feedback from teach-
ers also increased the accuracy of self-assessment (28). Compared to low achiev-
ers, high-achieving students preferred tutor feedback and were more likely to use
it during self-assessment (23). Some students reported that it was helpful to view
other students’ work as an example and receive feedback from their peers during
self-assessment (15). E-feedback is also useful because it helps participants validate
and modify their way of thinking when doing the self-assessment tasks (13).
Use of Instruments Five studies (4, 31, 34, 39, 42) found that using instruments
was another important facilitator for self-assessment. Students used self-assessment
guidelines, checklists, and rubrics throughout the self-assessment process because
these instruments helped them set goals, check work quality, guide revision, or
reflect on the work (4, 39). The rubric was also perceived to be useful for developing
self-monitoring habits and/or abilities when it was used to track the learning pro-
cess (39, 42). Students believed rubrics helped them a lot in self-assessment because
13
rubrics pinpointed important parameters in the assessment (34). Interestingly, Ross

et al. (2002) found that girls intended to report rubrics more useful during their eval-
uation work than boys.
Environmental Support Whether or not students perceive support from the learn-
ing environment also influences the implementation of self-assessment. This factor
was gauged in four studies (4, 12, 16, 33). In Hill’s (2016) study, South African stu-
dents reported being more willing to self-assess in an environment with incentives
for self-assessment (i.e., 5% of the final marks was allocated for the self-assessment
accuracy and the quality of the reflection) (16). Students also reported that competi-
tion with friends or other classes encouraged them to do more self-assessments (12).
Sargeant et al. (2011) found that emotional support from peers plays a crucial role
in implementing self-assessment (33). In Andrade and Du’s (2007) study, most stu-
dents believed that their low motivation to carry out self-assessment was largely due
to a lack of support in the class. (4).
Discussion
This review aimed to advance the understanding of students’ perceptions of self-

assessment. In this section, the findings of 44 empirical studies were synthesised
against four research questions and the implications of the findings are discussed.
RQ1‑ What are the Characteristics of Studies on Students’ Perceptions

of Self‑assessment?
Included studies have been primarily conducted in developed countries/regions,

indicating more attention to student self-assessment in these countries/regions. The
number of studies conducted in the context of higher education is much larger than
in K-12. Although past studies tend to show that self-assessment accuracy increases
with students’ age or academic ability (e.g., Brown & Harris, 2013; Topping, 2003),
it does not mean that self-assessment is appropriate only at the developmental stage
when students can make accurate self-assessment. This is because, theoretically,
students can develop metacognition from engaging in self-assessment, regardless
of accuracy (Panadero et al., 2016; Yan, 2022) and, empirically, self-assessment
interventions in K-12 consistently demonstrate a positive impact (e.g., Bond & Ellis,
2013; Nikou & Economides, 2016). Furthermore, as self-assessment processes can
be learned and optimised (Boud, 1995; Harris & Brown, 2018; Yan, 2022), sufficient
training for students can increase self-assessment accuracy over time (Li & Zhang,
2020; Wong, 2016). Given the importance of self-assessment for student learning
in K-12 contexts, and the fact that students’ perceptions about assessment influence
their learning behaviours and the effects of assessment (Brown, 2011; Brown &
Hirschfeld, 2008), more studies are needed to explore K-12 students’ perceptions of
self-assessment and how to embed it into K-12 curriculum.
13
Researchers have utilised both quantitative (e.g., surveys) and qualitative (e.g.,
interviews, focus group interviews, worksheets, reflective journals) data collection
methods to investigate students’ perceptions of self-assessment. Surveys are the
most commonly employed method, likely due to their ability to expedite the data
collection process when working with large sample sizes. However, more than 20%
of survey studies (N = 6) included in this review had a small sample (less than 50),
leaving their results likely unreliable and ungeneralisable.
Furthermore, the quality of the questionnaires used in survey studies is crucial as
it influences the usefulness of the data collected. Unfortunately, there are no widely-
used, standardised instruments assessing students’ perceptions of self-assessment.
Most survey studies used ad-hoc questionnaires or modified questionnaires from
previous studies without reporting reliability and validity information. Thus, it is
almost impossible to meaningfully compare results from different studies.
In some studies, researchers included open-ended questions in the questionnaire
survey to gather detailed information about students’ perceptions. With open-ended
questions, students can reflect more deeply and freely on self-assessment without
being bounded by standard answers (Wong, 2017). Nevertheless, the analysis of
open-ended responses requires more time and effort.
Interview methods (both individual and focus group interviews) were also fre-
quently used. Compared to surveys, interview methods allow researchers to gain
more detailed and in-depth insights into students’ perceptions of self-assessment.
Interview methods are especially useful for small sample sizes so that researchers
can spend more time with participants and encourage them to speak more (Restrepo
& Nelson, 2013). However, the shortcoming of interview methods is that the find-
ings may not be generalisable due to the small sample size.
RQ2‑ How Do Students Perceive the Usefulness of Self‑assessment?
There are inconclusive findings regarding students’ perceptions of the usefulness of self-
assessment in facilitating their learning. Although most studies reported that students
hold a generally positive perception of the usefulness of self-assessment (e.g., Evans
et al., 2005; Hung, 2019), some studies found mixed results (e.g., Hanrahan & Isaacs,
2001; Lew et al., 2010), or even negative perceptions (e.g., Al-Kadri et al., 2012; Strobl,
2015). This finding is an interesting coincidence with the results of the meta-analysis
on the effect of self-assessment on academic performance (Brown & Harris, 2013; Yan
et al., 2022). Brown and Harris (2013) reviewed 22 studies and found that some self-
assessment interventions had nil to small effects, although most studies reported posi-
tive effects. A more recent meta-analysis (Yan et al., 2022) found that, despite the over-
all positive effect of self-assessment, negative effects were observed in almost a quarter
of self-assessment intervention studies in the meta-analysis. These findings, on the one
hand, indicate that both the perceived and actual usefulness of self-assessment is promis-
ing among most students. On the other hand, the usefulness varies across samples and
contexts. Hence, it is crucial to better understand possible factors influencing the useful-
ness of self-assessment. Such an understanding has the potential to inform the design of
self-assessment and optimise its positive impact on learning.
13
RQ3‑ What Factors Affect Students’ Perceived Usefulness of Self‑assessment?
The findings of the review showed that factors influencing students’ perceived use-
fulness of self-assessment include individual factors (i.e., age) and instructional
factors (i.e., external feedback, use of instruments, self-assessment purpose). Older
students tend to have a more positive attitude towards self-assessment than their
younger counterparts (1, 6, 7). This is probably because older students have par-
ticular characteristics, such as higher academic abilities, better self-regulation skills,
and more sophisticated self-assessment strategies, which might result in a stronger
belief in self-assessment (Brown & Harris, 2013). External feedback, mainly
from teachers, is a crucial factor in enacting the benefits of self-assessment (2, 6,
11, 12, 22, 31, 33, 40). Having external feedback in the self-assessment process
makes learning expectations clear, enhances self-assessment accuracy, and helps
students to identify areas where they need to devote more time. Whether the self-
assessment is conducted with instruments is also vital for perceived usefulness. In
students’ perceptions, using instruments made self-assessment easier and more use-
ful to their learning (11, 34, 36, 39, 40, 42). Among various instruments, rubrics
attract the most attention and are regarded as the most helpful, which is congruent
with previous studies reporting that the use of specific and clearly-described criteria
leads to more accurate and realistic self-assessment judgements (e.g., Brantmeier
et al., 2012; Kostons et al., 2012). Regarding self-assessment purposes, past studies
(e.g., Andrade, 2019) advocate the formative use of self-assessment for its advan-
tage in providing improvement opportunities. Similarly, some included studies (e.g.,
2, 4, 40) reported that students placed more value on self-assessment for learning
improvement or with qualitative methods.
RQ4‑ What Factors Affect Students’ Implementation of Self‑assessment?
Individuals’ perceptions of behaviour can determine whether or not an individual

carries out the behaviour (Ajzen, 1991), especially when the behaviour, such
as self-assessment, is largely under the individual’s control. Hence, it is vital to
understand what factors influence the implementation of self-assessment from the
student’s perspective. With such an understanding, teachers who intend to promote
student self-assessment are aware of the support that needs to be provided and can
develop appropriate instructional contexts to facilitate student self-assessment.
This review showed that students perceived two groups of factors influencing their
self-assessment implementation, i.e., individual and instructional factors.
Individual factors identified in this review include perceived usefulness (5,
21, 38, 42), affective attitude (38, 44), self-efficacy (11, 18, 41, 43), important
others (4, 15, 31, 43), and psychological safety (5, 11, 15, 43). Students who
possess a high level of perceived usefulness, positive affective attitude, and high
self-efficacy, as well as feel pressure from important others are more likely to
implement self-assessment. The important role of perceived usefulness, affective
attitude, important others, and self-efficacy identified in this review is congruent
with classic psychological frameworks (e.g., the Theory of Planned Behaviour,
13
Ajzen, 1991) that link perceptions and behaviours. It also echoes previous
studies (e.g., Mendoza et al., 2023; Yan, Brown et al., 2020) that emphasised
the psychological mechanism determining students’ self-assessment behaviour.
Psychological safety is also crucial, especially when self-assessments involve
interpersonal interactions, such as seeking external feedback or disclosing the self-
assessment results to others. The psychologically safe environment encourages
students to be open and honest in self-assessment activities (Brown & Harris,
2013). In a safe learning environment, students are more likely to interpret self-
assessment results, whether satisfying or not, as learning opportunities rather than
summative evaluations (Yan, Brown et al., 2020). These findings indicate that
students’ individual beliefs about self-assessment need to be considered in any
attempt to enhance their engagement in self-assessment activities. Teachers can
use various strategies to enhance students’ positive beliefs about self-assessment.
For example, they can explicitly communicate the benefits of self-assessment
to students and help them understand how it can support their learning and
development. Additionally, teachers can provide students with opportunities to
practice self-assessment under clear guidance in a safe and supportive environment
to help them improve their self-assessment skills and self-efficacy.
In addition to individual factors, students also regard instructional factors (i.e.,
practice and training, external feedback, use of instruments, and environmental
support) as crucial for their implementation of self-assessment. Practice and
training were crucial due to their dual roles in influencing self-assessment. On
the one hand, practice and training directly impact self-assessment. For example,
relevant training or more experience in self-assessment can enhance students’
understanding of self-assessment criteria and familiarise them with the process,
making self-assessment easier and more rewarding (11, 14). On the other hand,
practice and training can indirectly impact self-assessment implementation by
altering students’ attitudes towards (4, 39) or self-efficacy of self-assessment
(41, 42). Scaffolds for self-assessment (e.g., external feedback and instruments)
are important. External feedback matters in the self-assessment process because
it helps clarify the learning expectations and increase the self-assessment quality
(15, 28, 33). A purely introspective self-assessment process without external
feedback, is vulnerable to idiosyncratic heuristics and bias (Joughin et al., 2019;
Yan, 2022). To minimise the potential bias and maximise the desirable learning
gains in the self-assessment process, students should be encouraged to seek and
use external feedback to aid their self-assessment (Boud, 1999; Butler & Winne,
1995). Similarly, various instruments, such as guidelines, checklists, and rubrics,
can facilitate self-assessment practices (4, 31, 34, 39, 42). This is likely because
self-assessment instruments offer a framework of reference or an important
comparator that enables generating useful internal feedback (Nicol, 2021). Apart
from scaffolds for self-assessment, a supportive and psychologically safe learning
environment is vital. The environmental support could be incentives for self-
assessment (16), emotional support from peers (33), or a learning setting that
values and encourages self-assessment (12). Overall, creating a supportive and
encouraging learning environment is essential for students to better engage in
self-assessment.
13
Implications for Future Self‑assessment Studies
A significant challenge associated with research on students’ perceptions of self-

assessment is the diverse implementations that are labelled under this concept,
from purely summative practices to formative ones (see Panadero et al., 2016).
Yan (2016) summarised that studies have operationally conceptualised self-assess-
ment as an ability/skill for evaluating one’s own work, an assessment method, or a
learning/instruction process. Even within the learning process perspective, which is
dominant in current literature, researchers describe the self-assessment process in
many different ways (Andrade, 2019; Panadero et al., 2016; Yan, 2022). A lack of
consensus on conceptualising self-assessment makes it challenging to interpret and
compare students’ perceptions in different contexts. To address this challenge, we
encourage researchers to clearly define the type of self-assessment they are employ-
ing, as this facilitates interpretations of the results and replication of successful self-
assessment designs. Some studies have done so fairly well, but others have not.
Another challenge is the lack of common theoretical frameworks that could guide
the inclusion and organisation of factors relevant to students’ perceptions of self-
assessment. Such a deficit results in fragmented information, rather than a holistic
understanding, of students’ perceptions of self-assessment. Based on the findings of
the current review, we proposed a model, as shown in Fig. 2, that covers frequently-
studied factors related to student perceptions of self-assessment.
This model summarises influencing factors available in the literature, but it might
not represent a comprehensive list of all possible factors when more studies in this
field are emerging. The inclusion of both individual and instructional factors echoes
the ecological perspective on class-based assessment (Chong & Isaacs, 2023). That
is, self-assessment is a complex process happening in a dynamic learning environ-
ment. Students’ engagement in self-assessment is an outcome of alignment between
students’ cognitive-psychological needs and learning contexts. Furthermore, an inte-
grative approach should be adopted when investigating these factors, as there might
be interactions within and across individual and instructional factors. For instance,
training and practice (instructional factor) may enhance students’ positive attitudes
towards and self-efficacy in self-assessment (individual factor). It is also possi-
ble that environmental support (instructional factor) influences students’ attitudes
toward self-assessment and psychological safety (individual factor).
Limitations
There are several limitations in this review. First, although we used multiple key
terms in the literature search, it is possible that we did not identify all relevant pub-
lished literature. Perceptions have been studied in diversified terms and self-assess-
ment consists of various forms, so it is difficult to include every relevant study. As
students’ perceptions of self-assessment are often investigated together with other
topics, some studies that treat this topic as a minor part of their research agenda may
be missed in this review. Second, among all predictors that affect students’ imple-
mentation of self-assessment, the current review examined only one of them, i.e.,
13
Fig. 2 A model for studying students’ perceptions of self-assessment

Page 23 of 28 81
13
the perceived usefulness of SA, in terms of its influencing factors. Thus, future stud-
ies could explore other predictors in detail in a similar way. A nuanced picture of
each predictor will provide more insights into the design of personal scaffoldings
and instructional settings for promoting meaningful self-assessment.
Conclusion
This review addressed two key aspects of students’ perceptions of self-assessment.

First, it depicted students’ perceived usefulness of self-assessment and its influenc-
ing factors. Second, it identified two groups of factors (i.e., individual and instruc-
tional factors) that affect students’ implementation of self-assessment. This review
contributed to a nuanced understanding of students’ perceptions of self-assessment.
Since self-assessment is a student-directed process, such an understanding can not
only help increase students’ engagement in self-assessment, but also inform the
design of self-assessment activities to maximise its positive impact on learning.
Acknowledgements The first author was supported by a General Research Fund from the Research
Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China (Project No. EDUHK
18609321).
The second author was funded by contribution of the Basque Government (Ref. IT1624-22) to the
group Education Regulated Learning and Assessment.
Declarations
The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which
permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give
appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence,
and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the
article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is
not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory
regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright
holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
References
References marked with an asterisk indicate studies included in the review
*Adediwura, A. A. (2012). Effect of peer and self-assessment on male and female students’ self-efficacy
and self-autonomy in the learning of mathematics. Gender and Behaviour, 10(1), 4492-4508.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organisational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
*Al-Kadri, H., Al-Moamary, M. S., Al-Takroni, H., Roberts, C., & van der Vleuten, C. P. (2012).
Self-assessment and students’ study strategies in a community of clinical practice: A qualitative
study. Medical Education Online, 17(1), 11204.
13
*Allen, D. D., & Flippo, R. F. (2002). Alternative assessment in the preparation of literacy educators:
Responses from students. Reading Psychology, 23(1), 15-26.
Andrade, H. L. (2019). A critical review of research on student self-assessment. Frontiers in Educa-
tion, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00087
*Andrade, H., & Du, Y. (2007). Student responses to criteria-referenced self-assessment. Assessment
& Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(2), 159–181.
*Babu, A., & Barghathi, Y. (2020). Self-assessment and peer assessment in accounting education:
Students and lecturers perceptions. Corporate Ownership and Control, 17(4), 353-368.
*Bakx, A. W., Sijtsma, K., Van der Sanden, J. M., & Taconis, R. (2002). Development and evaluation
of a student-centred multimedia self-assessment instrument for social-communicative compe-
tence. Instructional Science, 30, 335-359.
Bonner, S. M. (2016). Teachers’ perceptions about assessment: Competing narratives. In G. Brown
& L. Harris (Eds.), Handbook of human and social conditions in assessment (pp. 21–39).
Routledge.
Bond, J. B., & Ellis, A. K. (2013). The effects of metacognitive reflective assessment on fifth and
sixth graders’ mathematics achievement. School Science and Mathematics, 113(5), 227–234.
Boud, D. (1995). Enhancing learning through self-assessment. Routledge.
Boud, D. (1999). Avoiding the traps: Seeking good practice in the use of self-assessment and reflec-
tion in professional courses. Social Work Education, 18(2), 121–132. https://doi.org/10.1080/
02615479911220131
Bourke, R. (2014). Self-assessment in professional programmes within tertiary institutions. Teaching
in Higher Education, 19(8), 908–918.
*Bourke, R. (2016). Liberating the learner through self-assessment. Cambridge Journal of Educa-
tion, 46(1), 97-111.
Brantmeier, C., Vanderplank, R., & Strube, M. (2012). What about me? Individual self-assessment
by skill and level of language instruction. System, 40, 144–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.
2012.01.003
*Brookhart, S. M. (2001). Successful students’ formative and summative uses of assessment informa-
tion. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 8(2), 153-169.
Brown, G. (2011). Self-regulation of assessment beliefs and attitudes: A review of the Students’ Con-
ceptions of Assessment inventory. Educational Psychology, 31(6), 731–748.
Brown, G. T. L., & Harris, L. R. (2013). Student self-assessment. In J. H. McMillan (Ed.), The SAGE
handbook of research on classroom assessment (pp. 367–393). Sage.
Brown, G. T. L., & Wang, Z. (2013). Illustrating assessment: How Hong Kong university students
conceive of the purposes of assessment. Studies in Higher Education, 38(7), 1037–1057. https://
doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.616955
Brown, G. T., & Hirschfeld, G. H. (2008). Students’ conceptions of assessment: Links to outcomes.
Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 15(1), 3–17.
*Butler, Y. G., & Lee, J. (2006). On‐task versus off‐task self‐assessments among Korean elementary
school students studying English. The Modern Language Journal, 90(4), 506-518.
Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis.
Review of Educational Research, 65(3), 245–281. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543065003245
Cho, H. J., Yough, M., & Levesque-Bristol, C. (2020). Relationships between beliefs about assess-
ment and self-regulated learning in second language learning. International Journal of Educa-
tional Research, 99, 101505.
Chong, S. W., & Isaacs, T. (2023). An Ecological Perspective on Classroom-Based Assessment.
TESOL Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3201
*Duque Micán, A., & Cuesta Medina, L. (2017). Boosting vocabulary learning through self-assess-
ment in an English language teaching context. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education,
42(3), 398–414.
*Evans*, A. W., McKenna, C., & Oliver, M. (2005). Trainees’ perspectives on the assessment and self‐assessment
of surgical skills. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(2), 163-174.
*Gashi-Shatri, Z. F., & Zabeli, N. (2018). Perceptions of students and teachers about the forms and stu-
dent self-assessment activities in the classroom during the formative assessment. Journal of Social
Studies Education Research, 9(2), 28-46.
Gjicali, K., & Lipnevich, A. A. (2021). Got math attitude?(In) direct effects of student mathematics atti-
tudes on intentions, behavioral engagement, and mathematics performance in the US PISA. Con-
temporary Educational Psychology, 67, 102019.
13
*Handley, K., & Cox, B. (2007). Beyond model answers: Learners’ perceptions of self-assessment mate-
rials in e-learning applications. ALT-J, 15(1), 21-36.
*Hanrahan, S. J., & Isaacs, G. (2001). Assessing self-and peer-assessment: The students’ views. Higher
Education Research & Development, 20(1), 53-70.
*Harris, L. R., & Brown, G. T. (2013). Opportunities and obstacles to consider when using peer-and self-
assessment to improve student learning: Case studies into teachers’ implementation. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 36, 101-111.
Harris, L. R., & Brown, G. T. L. (2018). Using self-assessment to improve student learning. Routledge.
*Hill, T. (2016). Do accounting students believe in self-assessment?. Accounting Education, 25(4),
291-305.
*Hung, Y. J. (2019). Bridging assessment and achievement: Repeated practice of self-assessment in col-
lege english classes in Taiwan. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(8), 1191-1208.
*Irani, T., & Telg, R. (2002). Gauging distance education students’ comfort level with technology and
perceptions of self-assessment and technology training initiatives. Journal of Applied Communica-
tions, 86(2), 45-55.
Joughin, G., Boud, D., & Dawson, P. (2019). Threats to student evaluative judgement and their manage-
ment. Higher Education Research & Development, 38(3), 537–549.
Kostons, D., Van Gog, T., & Paas, F. (2012). Training self-assessment and task-selection skills: A cogni-
tive approach to improving self-regulated learning. Learning and Instruction, 22(2), 121–132.
*Lau, P. N. (2020). Enhancing formative and self-assessment with video playback to improve critique
skills in a titration laboratory. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 21(1), 178-188.
*Lew, M. D., Alwis, W. A. M., & Schmidt, H. G. (2010). Accuracy of students’ self‐assessment and their
beliefs about its utility. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(2), 135-156.
Li, M., & Zhang, X. (2020). A meta-analysis of self-assessment and language performance in language
testing and assessment. Language Testing, 38(2), 189–218.
*Logan, B. (2015). Reviewing the value of self-assessments: Do they matter in the classroom? Research
in Higher Education Journal, 29, 1-11.
Mendoza, N. B., Yan, Z., & King, R. B. (2023). Supporting students’ intrinsic motivation for online
learning tasks: The effect of need-supportive task instructions on motivation, self-assessment, and
task performance. Computers & Education, 193, 104663.
*Ndoye, A. (2017). Peer/Self Assessment and Student Learning. International Journal of Teaching and
Learning in Higher Education, 29(2), 255-269.
Nicol, D. (2021). The power of internal feedback: Exploiting natural comparison processes. Assessment
and Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(5), 756–778. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.
1823314
Nikou, S. A., & Economides, A. A. (2016). The impact of paper-based, computer-based and mobile-
based self-assessment on students’ science motivation and achievement. Computers in Human
Behavior, 55, 1241–1248.
*Orsmond, P., & Merry, S. (2013). The importance of self-assessment in students’ use of tutors’ feed-
back: A qualitative study of high and non-high achieving biology undergraduates. Assessment &
Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), 737-753.
*Orsmond, P., Merry, S., & Reiling, K. (1997). A study in self‐assessment: tutor and students’ percep-
tions of performance criteria. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 22(4), 357-368.
Panadero, E., Brown, G. T., & Strijbos, J. W. (2016). The future of student self-assessment: A review of
known unknowns and potential directions. Educational Psychology Review, 28(4), 803–830.
Panadero, E., Lipnevich, A. A., & Broadbent, J. (2019). Turning self-assessment into self-feedback. In D.
Boud, M. D. Henderson, R. Ajjawi, & E. Molloy (Eds.), The Impact of Feedback in Higher Educa-
tion: Improving Assessment Outcomes for Learners (pp. 147–163). Springer.
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.
*Perera, J., Mohamadou, G., & Kaur, S. (2010). The use of objective structured self-assessment and peer-
feedback (OSSP) for learning communication skills: evaluation using a controlled trial. Advances in
Health Sciences Education, 15, 185-193.
Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Black-
well Publishing.
*Pidduck, T. M., & Bauer, N. (2021). Perceptions of online self-and peer-assessment: accounting stu-
dents in a large undergraduate cohort. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 14(4),
1480–1495.
13
*Ramirez, B. U. (2010). Effect of self-assessment on test scores: student perceptions. Advances in Physi-
ology Education, 34(3), 134–136.
*Rees, C., & Shepherd, M. (2005). Students’ and assessors’ attitudes towards students’ self‐assessment of
their personal and professional behaviours. Medical education, 39(1), 30-39.
*Restrepo, A., & Nelson, H. (2013). Role of Systematic Formative Assessment on Students’ Views of
Their Learnin. Profile Issues in TeachersProfessional Development, 15(2), 165-183.
*Ross, J. A., Rolheiser, C., & Hogaboam-Gray, A. (1998). Skills training versus action research in-
service: Impact on student attitudes to self-evaluation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(5),
463-477.
*Ross, J. A., Rolheiser, C., & Hogaboam-Gray, A. (2002). Influences on student cognitions about evalua-
tion. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 9(1), 81-95.
*Sadeghi, K., & Abolfazli Khonbi, Z. (2015). Iranian university students’ experiences of and attitudes
towards alternatives in assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 40(5), 641-665.
*Sargeant, J., Eva, K. W., Armson, H., Chesluk, B., Dornan, T., Holmboe, E., & van der Vleuten, C. P.
(2011). Features of assessment learners use to make informed self-assessments of clinical perfor-
mance. Medical Education, 45(6), 636–647.
*Seifert, T., & Feliks, O. (2019). Online self-assessment and peer-assessment as a tool to enhance stu-
dent-teachers’ assessment skills. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(2), 169-185.
*Sieber, V. (2009). Diagnostic online assessment of basic IT skills in 1st‐year undergraduates in the
Medical Sciences Division, University of Oxford. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2),
215-226.
Siow, L. F. (2015). Students’ Perceptions on Self-and Peer-Assessment in Enhancing Learning Experi-
ence. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 3(2), 21–35.
Sitzmann, T., Ely, K., Brown, K. G., & Bauer, K. N. (2010). Self-assessment of knowledge: A cognitive
learning or affective measure? Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9(2), 169–191.
*Strobl, C. (2015). Attitudes towards online feedback on writing: Why students mistrust the learning
potential of models. ReCALL, 27(3), 340-357.
*Sullivan, K., & Hall, C. (1997). Introducing students to self‐assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in
Higher Education, 22(3), 289-305.
*Tavsanli, Ö. F., & Kara, Ü. E. (2021). The effect of a peer and self-assessment-based editorial study on
students’ ability to follow spelling rules and use punctuation marks correctly. Participatory Educa-
tional Research, 8(3), 268-284.
Topping, K. (2003). Self and peer assessment in school and university: Reliability, validity and utility.
In M. Segers, F. Dochy, & E. Cascallar (Eds.), Optimising new modes of assessment: In search of
qualities and standards (pp. 55–87). Kluwer Academic Publisher.
van der Kleij, F. M., & Lipnevich, A. A. (2021). Student perceptions of assessment feedback: A critical
scoping review and call for research. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 33,
345–373.
van Helvoort, A. J. (2012). How adult students in information studies use a scoring rubric for the devel-
opment of their information literacy skills. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 38(3), 165–171.
*Wang, W. (2017). Using rubrics in student self-assessment: student perceptions in the English as a for-
eign language writing context. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(8), 1280-1292.
*Wanner, T., & Palmer, E. (2018). Formative self-and peer assessment for improved student learning: the
crucial factors of design, teacher participation and feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher
Education, 43(7), 1032-1047.
Wolffensperger, Y., & Patkin, D. (2013). Self-assessment of self-assessment in a process of co-teaching.
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(1), 16–33.
*Wong, H. M. (2016). I can assess myself: Singaporean primary students’ and teachers’ perceptions of
students’ self-assessment ability. Education 3–13, 44(4), 442–457.
*Wong, H. M. (2017). Implementing self-assessment in Singapore primary schools: Effects on students’
perceptions of self-assessment. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 12(4), 391–409.
Yan, Z. (2016). The self-assessment practices of Hong Kong secondary students: Findings with a new
instrument. Journal of Applied Measurement, 17(3), 335–353.
Yan, Z. (2022). Student self-assessment as a process for learning. Routledge.
Yan, Z., & Brown, G. T. L. (2017). A cyclical self-assessment process: Towards a model of how stu-
dents engage in self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(8), 1247–1262.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1260091
13
*Yan, Z., Brown, G. T. L., Lee, C. K. J., & Qiu, X. L. (2020). Student self-assessment: Why do they do
it? Educational Psychology, 40(4), 509–532. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2019.1672038
*Yan, Z., Chiu, M. M., & Ko, P. Y. (2020). Effects of self-assessment diaries on academic achievement,
self-regulation, and motivation. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 27(5),
562–583. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2020.1827221
Yan, Z., Lao, H., Panadero, E., Fernández-Castilla, B., Yang, L., & Yang, M. (2022). Effects of self-
assessment and peer-assessment interventions on academic performance: A meta-analysis. Educa-
tional Research Review, 37, 100484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100484
Zekarias, A. P. (2023). Contributions and controversies of self-assessment to the development of writing
skill. Journal of Research in Instructional, 3(1), 13–30.
Zhan, Y., Yan, Z., Wan, Z. H., Wang, X., Zeng, Y., Yang, M., & Yang, L. (2023). Effects of online peer
assessment on higher-order thinking: A meta-analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology,
54(4), 817–835. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13310
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps
and institutional affiliations.
13

Students' Perceptions of SA

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Students' Perceptions of SA

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Students' Perceptions of SA

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Educational Psychology Review (2023) 35:81

A Systematic Review on Students’ Perceptions

Zi Yan1 · Ernesto Panadero2,3 · Xiang Wang4 · Ying Zhan1

Accepted: 18 July 2023 / Published online: 4 August 2023

Keywords Self-assessment · Perception · Perceived usefulness · Implementation

Self-assessment has drawn increasing interest among researchers and practitioners

There are diversified descriptions of self-assessment in the literature (e.g., Andrade,

The Importance of Student Beliefs

It is generally accepted that learning belief significantly affects learning behaviours

Students’ Perceived Usefulness of Self‑assessment

Students’ perceived usefulness of self-assessment is crucial because it could be a

Students’ Perceived Factors Influencing the Implementation of Self‑assessment

Factors influencing self-assessment implementation in students’ perceptions are

Prior Review of Students’ Perceptions of Self‑assessment

As the empirical studies on self-assessment accumulate with time, there is an increasing

The Current Review

RQ1- What are the characteristics of studies on students’ perceptions of self-assessment?

Search Strategy and Inclusion Criteria

Fig. 1 The process of literature search and selection

of self-assessment, perceived usefulness and its influencing factors, and factors

RQ1‑ What Are the Characteristics of Studies on Students’ Perceptions

An overview of the basic information of the 44 included studies is provided in Table 1.

1 Adediwura 2012 Nigeria K-12 Math Quantitative 60 Survey

7 Bourke 2016 New Zealand K-12 NA Qualitative 24 Interview

22 Ndoye 2017 USA Higher education Social Science Quantitative 31 Survey

42 Wong 2017 Singapore K-12 Math Quantitative 146 Survey

RQ2‑ How Do Students Perceive the Usefulness of Self‑assessment?

RQ3‑ What Factors Affect Students’ Perceived Usefulness of Self‑assessment?

A total of 17 studies have examined factors influencing the students’ perceived

A total of 16 studies investigated factors related to self-assessment design

External Feedback Self-assessment with external feedback, mainly from teachers,

Use of Instruments Students indicated that self-assessment instruments made self-

Self‑assessment purpose The purpose of self-assessment may influence students’

RQ4‑ What Factors Affect Students’ Implementation of Self‑assessment?

A total of 21 studies have examined factors influencing the implementation of

Perceived Usefulness The perceived usefulness of self-assessment refers to students’

Affective Attitude The affective attitude towards self-assessment is about whether

Self‑efficacy Self-assessment self-efficacy, referring to students’ confidence in their

Psychological Safety Psychological safety is about whether students feel psychologically

rubrics pinpointed important parameters in the assessment (34). Interestingly, Ross

This review aimed to advance the understanding of students’ perceptions of self-

RQ1‑ What are the Characteristics of Studies on Students’ Perceptions

Included studies have been primarily conducted in developed countries/regions,

RQ2‑ How Do Students Perceive the Usefulness of Self‑assessment?

RQ3‑ What Factors Affect Students’ Perceived Usefulness of Self‑assessment?

RQ4‑ What Factors Affect Students’ Implementation of Self‑assessment?

Individuals’ perceptions of behaviour can determine whether or not an individual

Implications for Future Self‑assessment Studies

A significant challenge associated with research on students’ perceptions of self-

Fig. 2 A model for studying students’ perceptions of self-assessment

This review addressed two key aspects of students’ perceptions of self-assessment.

References marked with an asterisk indicate studies included in the review

You might also like