Formative Assessment with Video: A Practical Guide

Formative assessment with video is not a quiz placed before the final test. It is a short decision cycle. You ask for evidence while learning is still in progress, interpret what the response may mean, make a specific adjustment, and check again.

The adjustment is the important part. It may be immediate feedback for the viewer, a clearer explanation in the video, different practice for a group, or a change to the next lesson. If nobody uses the response, the question has measured something, but it has not completed a formative process.

Formative assessment is a decision process

The Council of Chief State School Officers describes formative assessment as a process used during instruction to provide feedback that adjusts ongoing teaching and learning. Black and Wiliam make the same distinction in their theoretical work: evidence must be elicited, interpreted, and used to inform a better next decision.

That definition prevents a common mistake. A multiple-choice question is not automatically formative. Neither is a dashboard, a score, or an exit ticket. Any of them can support formative assessment, but only when the evidence changes what the learner or teacher does next.

The four-step video loop

The loop can operate at different speeds. Automated feedback can support the individual learner within seconds. A teacher may review a class pattern after the assignment and adjust tomorrow's lesson. A training team may revise a video after several groups reveal the same obstacle. The timescale changes, but the logic stays the same.

Start with the instructional decision

Before choosing a question type, name the decision the evidence should support. “Check understanding” is too vague. An actionable decision is closer to one of these:

• Continue because learners can distinguish the two concepts.
• Replay or clarify because one misconception is still common.
• Give another example because learners know the rule but cannot apply it.
• Move a subgroup to extra practice while others begin the next task.
• Revise the question because the evidence is ambiguous.

Then work backward. What response would help you choose among those actions? What should a successful response contain? Which wrong response would reveal a known misunderstanding? When has the video supplied enough evidence for a fair answer?

This is also the point to define a threshold. The threshold need not be a pass score. It might be “most viewers distinguish isolation from merely stopping the machine” or “the explanation names both cause and effect.” Write the threshold before seeing the data so that the next action is not improvised around a convenient result.

Choose a question that exposes the gap

Use the lightest response format that reveals the thinking you need. A harder-to-answer question is not necessarily more informative.

• Multiple choice works well when each wrong option can represent a distinct misconception or procedural error.
• True or false checks one precise claim quickly, but it reveals little about the reason behind the choice.
• Fill in the blank or numeric input can check precise retrieval or calculation when wording is not the main evidence.
• Free text reveals explanation and reasoning, but useful interpretation may require human review.
• Polls and rating scales can collect predictions, confidence, or preference. Keep them ungraded when there is no defensible correct answer.

A prediction can be especially useful before a demonstration. Ask what learners expect, show the result, and ask them to explain any difference. Do not score the initial prediction as though the content had already been taught.

Build the loop in Interakly

Interakly can place response questions on a supported, embeddable public or unlisted YouTube video or on an uploaded video. The authoring steps are simple, but the formative purpose should guide every setting.

Interakly can grade objective responses from configured answer keys. Open responses that need human judgment can remain pending until they are finalized in Reviews. A learner's result should remain provisional while required work is still awaiting review.

Read the evidence without overclaiming

The Interakly analytics page includes a per-question breakdown. Depending on the interaction and available responses, it can show response totals, answer distribution, correct rate for graded questions, the most common wrong answer, and the authored timestamp. The same page also provides overall completion and average-score summaries. Detailed CSV export includes time spent and answered-at timestamps for individual responses, which supports deeper analysis outside the dashboard.

Read those signals with clear limits:

• Correct rate describes performance on the authored item. It does not prove durable learning or transfer.
• Response distribution can reveal a repeated pattern, but the cause may be the teaching, question, answer key, or context.
• Response time from the detailed export may reflect careful reasoning, long wording, distraction, access needs, or uncertainty.
• Completion and aggregate retention can identify an area to inspect. They do not identify the exact reason a viewer stopped.
• A small response count is unstable evidence. Avoid redesigning instruction around one or two attempts.

Turn response patterns into teaching moves

A response pattern becomes useful when it leads to a proportionate action. The table below offers starting hypotheses, not automatic rules.

Notice that “reteach everything” is rarely the first move. Begin with the smallest explanation that fits the evidence. If the dominant wrong answer confuses two similar procedures, add a direct contrast. If responses are scattered, inspect the item before adding instruction. If the question is nearly always correct, replace it only when it produces no useful evidence or practice.

Adjust feedback, video, or follow-up instruction

Formative action does not always require re-editing the source video. Choose the level that matches the gap and the time available.

Feedback is the fastest level to change. Hattie and Timperley's review organizes useful feedback around the goal, current progress, and the next step. Shute's review similarly emphasizes feedback that is specific, supportive, and focused on the task rather than the learner's worth.

In a video question, that means replacing “Incorrect” with a concise explanation such as: “Stopping motion is not the same as isolating stored energy. Check the lockout step shown just before this question, then try the decision again.” The message names the gap and points to a useful next action.

Three worked examples

Safety training: stopping versus isolating

A multiple-choice question asks which action makes maintenance safe. Most wrong responses choose “wait until the machine stops moving.” That pattern matches a known misconception. Add feedback that contrasts visible motion with stored energy, show the isolation step again, then ask a new scenario with different equipment.

Software onboarding: knowing where, not knowing why

Learners can identify the export button, but free-text responses do not explain which format fits the customer's need. The issue is not navigation. Add a short comparison of the formats and follow it with a customer case that requires a choice and explanation.

Science lesson: correct answer, low confidence

Most learners answer the phase-change question correctly, yet a separate ungraded confidence rating remains low. Keep the correct-answer feedback specific, add one varied example, and ask learners to predict the next case. Do not convert confidence into points.

Run a clean improvement cycle

Improvement becomes difficult to interpret when the video, question, feedback, and assignment all change at once. Use a short change cycle:

This is practical inquiry, not a controlled experiment. Differences between groups, assignments, and contexts can affect the result. Record enough context to avoid crediting one edit for every change you observe.

Formative video checklist

Research sources

These sources support the assessment cycle and feedback guidance above. Most examine classroom practice rather than interactive video software, so they inform the instructional process rather than prove that any particular video feature improves learning by itself.

• Council of Chief State School Officers (2008). Formative Assessment: Examples of Practice. An authoritative definition and set of practice examples centered on using evidence during instruction to adjust teaching and learning.
• Black, P., and Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21, 5–31. A theoretical account of eliciting, interpreting, and using evidence to improve instructional decisions.
• Hattie, J., and Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. A review of how feedback connects goals, current performance, and next steps.
• Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189. A review of task-focused, specific, supportive feedback and design cautions.
• Anders, J., Foliano, F., Bursnall, M., Dorsett, R., Hudson, N., Runge, J., and Speckesser, S. (2022). The effect of Embedding Formative Assessment on pupil attainment. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 15(4), 748–779. A randomized evaluation of a school-wide professional development program, not a test of interactive video itself.

FAQ

What is formative assessment with video?

Formative assessment with video uses a question or reflection during learning to collect evidence about current understanding. The evidence then informs feedback, a change to the video, or the next teaching activity. A video quiz is not formative merely because it appears before a final test.

Is every interactive video question a formative assessment?

No. A question becomes part of a formative process when someone interprets the response and uses it to improve the next learning step. A scored question that is recorded but never reviewed may be useful for measurement, but it does not complete the formative loop.

Which video question type is best for formative assessment?

Choose the format that reveals the decision you need to make. Multiple choice can expose a known misconception, free text can reveal reasoning, a poll can collect a prediction, and a rating scale can show confidence. Keep predictions, opinions, and confidence checks ungraded when there is no defensible correct answer.

Should formative video questions count toward a grade?

They can, but low-stakes or ungraded questions often make it easier to focus on improvement. In Interakly, objective questions can use answer keys and points, while polls and reflective prompts can remain ungraded. Open responses that need human judgment should not be presented as having a final score before review.

How should I use wrong-answer data from a video quiz?

Look for a repeated reasoning pattern, then inspect the question and the source explanation before blaming the learner. A common wrong option may reveal a misconception, but it may also expose an ambiguous stem, an unfair timestamp, or a misleading answer key. Change one likely cause and collect new evidence.

Can I use formative questions with YouTube and uploaded video?

Yes. Interakly supports standard response questions on supported, embeddable public or unlisted YouTube videos and on uploaded videos. Uploaded media also supports spatial interaction types that are not available for new YouTube authoring. Preview the complete learner path for the source you use.