Teachers’ proficiency in utilizing formative instructional strategies, particularly formative assessments, is not only a fundamental teacher skill but a potent tool that can significantly elevate the quality of teaching and learning (Black & Wiliam, 1998 a, b; Wiliam et al., 2004). While formative instructional strategies have been increasingly recognized as essential teacher competencies (Trumbull & Lash, 2013), the same literature documents the significant challenges and insufficient implementation of such strategies (e.g., effective formative assessment practices) as demonstrated by teachers (Bond et al., 2020). This is partly due to the field’s confusion on definitions of formative instructional strategies, including formative assessment, its weak links with learning theories, and its generic nature (Baird et al., 2015; Black & Wiliam, 2018). The obstacles to assisting teachers in developing effective formative-based instruction require immediate attention. These challenges span from the need to clarify what constitutes effective, valid, reliable, and fair instructional strategies to whether teachers are equipped to comprehend and implement formative instructional strategies. We define these as formative assessments in class, in-class discussions, and responsive formative instruction.

We use TIMSS 2019 mathematics data to explore across-national representative samples of 4th and 8th-grade classrooms in 64 countries:
(a) The frequency and type of teacher’s use of formative instructional strategies such as classroom discussion, feedback on assignments and homework, responsive teaching (aka instructional clarity), and formative instructional activities such as observing, questioning, and assessing.
(b) The relationship between a teacher’s use of formative instructional strategies with students’ learning (aka mathematics score in the test) and dispositions toward mathematics, including liking, valuing, and feeling confident in mathematics
(c) The degree to which teachers’ use of formative strategies and pupils’ mathematics knowledge is mediated by (c1) school contexts, teachers’ qualifications, expertise, and self-reported competence, and (c2) students’ socioeconomic status, curriculum learning opportunities, and home support
Our analysis is still in progress, and we hope that by engaging in a conversation with the group, we can improve the article and make important contributions to the field.