Formative assessment with digital rubrics in natural sciences: impact on inquiry‑based learning in 7th–10th grade general basic education (EGB)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.64747/emgnq411Keywords:
school climate, academic performance, resilience, public education, Ecuador, correlational analysisAbstract
This study examines the impact of formative assessment mediated by digital rubrics (e‑rubrics) on inquiry‑based learning in Natural Sciences among 7th–10th grade students in Ecuador’s General Basic Education (EGB) in Guayaquil. We implemented a quasi‑experimental, non‑equivalent groups design (pretest–posttest). The intervention group embedded e‑rubrics into feedback cycles (criteria co‑construction, self‑ and peer‑assessment, two revision iterations), while the comparison group retained traditional assessment practices. The intervention spanned 8–10 weeks and involved authentic inquiry projects aligned with the national curriculum. The primary outcome was inquiry performance (0–100), assessed through e‑rubrics across dimensions: posing researchable questions, planning/controlling variables, analyzing/representing data, arguing from evidence, and communicating findings. Secondary outcomes included self‑regulation and science self‑efficacy; hierarchical data structures (student–class–school) and baseline covariates were modeled and controlled. Findings (template with method‑consistent simulated data to be replaced by empirical results) indicate a moderate effect favoring the intervention on inquiry posttest scores (adjusted difference ≈ +4 points; g ≈ 0.46), alongside gains in self‑regulation and self‑efficacy. Effects were robust to alternative specifications (PSM, multilevel models) and displayed heterogeneity by institutional connectivity: larger in high/medium connectivity contexts and positive yet attenuated under low connectivity. Inter‑rater consistency was high (ICC≥0.80), and Many‑Facet Rasch adjustments mitigated severity/leniency differences. We conclude that e‑rubrics, when embedded within strong formative cycles (explicit criteria + anchor exemplars + iteration + student participation), provide a cost‑effective strategy to enhance inquiry learning in basic education. Implications for district‑level policy (open repositories, protected feedback time) are discussed, and future work is outlined (cluster trials, longitudinal follow‑up, learning analytics, and equity‑oriented adaptations).
References
Ahlström, F., & Sherwin, K. (2024). Technology‑enhanced collaborative inquiry in K–12 classrooms: A systematic review of empirical studies. Science & Education, 34(3), 1731–1773. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-024-00538-8
Álvarez Guamán, D. L., Fuentes Cabrera, E. M., Guamán Pilataxi, N. I., & Verdezoto Paredes, P. R. (2025). Prácticas inclusivas y su impacto en el aprendizaje de estudiantes con discapacidad en instituciones fiscales. Horizonte Científico International Journal, 3(2), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.64747/stkywx58
Caicedo Sevilla, B. G., Flores De la Cruz, Y. A., Flores Morán, A. de los A., & Vallejo Andrade, C. G. (2025). Inclusión educativa en la educación general básica: estrategias y desafíos para garantizar la equidad escolar en Guayaquil. Horizonte Científico International Journal, 3(2), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.64747/5ksbzy71
Chen, F., & Chen, G. (2024). Technology‑enhanced collaborative inquiry in K–12 classrooms: A systematic review of empirical studies. Science & Education, 34(3), 1731–1773. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-024-00538-8
Fine, C. G. M. C., & Furtak, E. M. (2025). A call to reimagine science formative assessment systems through translanguaging. Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.70008
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Huang, H.‑W., Mills, D. J., & Tiangco, J. A. N. Z. (2024). Inquiry‑based learning and technology‑enhanced formative assessment in flipped EFL writing instruction: Student performance and perceptions. SAGE Open, 14(2), 21582440241236663. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241236663
Jonsson, A. (2025). Using rubrics for formative purposes: Identifying factors that may affect the success of rubric implementations. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2025.2486947
Koksalan, S., & Ogan‑Bekiroglu, F. (2024). Examination of effects of embedding formative assessment in inquiry‑based teaching on conceptual learning. Science Insights Education Frontiers, 20(2), 3223–3246. https://doi.org/10.15354/sief.24.or512
Mang, H. M. A., Chu, H.‑E., Martin, S. N., & Kim, C.‑J. (2023). Developing an evaluation rubric for planning and assessing SSI‑based STEAM programs in science classrooms. Research in Science Education, 53(6), 1119–1144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-023-10123-8
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane‑Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self‑regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090
Pancorbo, G., Primi, R., John, O. P., Santos, D., & De Fruyt, F. (2021). Formative assessment of social‑emotional skills using rubrics: A review of knowns and unknowns. Frontiers in Education, 6, 687661. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.687661
Panadero, E. (2025). Analysis of online rubric platforms: Advancing toward erubrics. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2024.2345657
Panadero, E., & Jönsson, A. (2013). The use of scoring rubrics for formative assessment purposes revisited: A review. Educational Research Review, 9, 129–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.01.002
Parmigiani, D., Nicchia, E., Pario, M., Murgia, E., Silvaggio, C., Ambrosini, A., Pedevilla, A., Sardi, I., & Ingersoll, M. (2025). Formative assessment in upper secondary schools: Ideas, concepts, and strategies. Education Sciences, 15(4), 438. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15040438
Sam, R., & Aditomo, A. (2024). Systematic review of inquiry‑based learning: Assessing impact and best practices in education. F1000Research, 13, 1045. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.144548.1
Sortwell, A., Trimble, K., Ferraz, R., Geelan, D. R., Hine, G., Ramirez‑Campillo, R., Carter‑Thuiller, B., Gkintoni, E., & Xuan, Q. (2024). A systematic review of meta‑analyses on the impact of formative assessment on K‑12 students’ learning: Toward sustainable quality education. Sustainability, 16(17), 7826. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177826
Staberg, R. L., Febri, M. I. M., Gjøvik, Ø., Sikko, S. A., & Pepin, B. (2023). Science teachers’ interactions with resources for formative assessment purposes. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 35(1), 5–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-022-09401-2
Vo, D. V., & Mooney Simmie, G. (2025). Assessing scientific inquiry: A systematic literature review of tasks, tools and techniques. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 23, 871–906. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-024-10498-8
Zemel, Y., Shwartz, G., & Avargil, S. (2021). Preservice teachers’ enactment of formative assessment using rubrics in the inquiry‑based chemistry laboratory. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 22(4), 1074–1092. https://doi.org/10.1039/D1RP00001B
Duarte Ortiz, J. del C., Gordillo Ronquillo, A. M., Orellana Romero, B. P., & Vera Letechi, J. E. (2025). Tecnología, modelos pedagógicos y desempeño académico: Análisis en instituciones educativas de Loja y Guayaquil. Horizonte Científico International Journal, 3(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.64747/aj9hhg57
Chen, F., & Chen, G. (2025). Learning analytics in inquiry‑based learning: A systematic review. Educational Technology Research and Development. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-025-10507-9
