A major development in Kazakhstani education was the implementation of an updated curriculum for secondary education. This initiative began with a program for gifted students in 2008, leading to the creation of Nazarbayev Intellectual Schools (NIS) in 2009. These schools pioneered modern management to test innovative programs before spreading practices to mainstream schools (Yakavets, 2014). In 2016, the Ministry of Education and Science (MoES) introduced nationwide reforms encompassing curriculum, teaching methods, and assessment. A key component was replacing the traditional five-point grading system with criteria-based assessment (CBA). By the 2021-2022 academic year, the reform affected all grade levels. This research aims to uncover secondary school students’ views on CBA and how it influences their motivation.

The introduction of CBA marks a significant shift from traditional systems. It aimed to modernize practices through a transparent and developmental approach. Despite ambitious goals, implementation has faced challenges. Students transitioned from five-point grades to a system emphasizing specific criteria and continuous feedback. This shift was intended to foster an engaging environment. However, early observations suggest mixed reactions, with some experiencing a decline in motivation due to the lack of conventional grades. There is limited empirical research on how CBA affects student motivation in the Kazakhstani context. This study fills that gap by investigating students' views on CBA's effectiveness. The guiding question is: What are mainstream secondary school students’ perspectives on and experiences with criteria-based assessment?

CBA evaluates students based on specific criteria provided beforehand, allowing for a focused process. Clear criteria move focus from a teacher-led system to a student-centered approach (Otter, 1995). CBA fosters development through constructive feedback (Carlson et al., 2000). Feedback is crucial, helping students improve and assess academic levels. Assessment serves three purposes: for, as, and of learning. Summative assessment (SA) captures knowledge at a point in time. Formative assessment (FA) identifies needs and gaps to adjust teaching. FA is highly effective in raising standards. Key forms include peer and self-assessment, where students judge their work quality using explicit criteria (Andrade et al., 2010).

Motivation is a dynamic process propelling individuals toward action (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996; Dörnyei, 1998a). This study is grounded in Ryan and Deci’s (2000a) Self-Determination Theory (SDT). SDT distinguishes between autonomous (intrinsic) motivation and controlled (extrinsic) motivation. Intrinsic motivation is supported when three basic psychological needs are met: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Autonomy involves feeling in control of decisions. Relatedness involves a sense of belonging (Martens et al., 2004). Competence involves mastering tasks. Motivation exists on a continuum. External regulation occurs when students are driven by rewards or fear. Introjected regulation involves internal pressures like guilt.

FA is a tool for boosting motivation (Cauley & McMillan, 2010). Effective FA helps students internalize mastery goals—focusing on understanding rather than outperforming others. Involving students in goal-setting makes them active participants. Teachers play a key role in choosing assessments that inspire effort and reduce anxiety. FA helps students understand strengths and weaknesses. In Kazakhstan, existing studies focus on theoretical foundations. Little research examines CBA's direct impact on student motivation. Findings indicate students' motivation to prepare has declined. Teachers and parents attribute this to the absence of traditional grades. Some students stopped completing homework without failing grades ("2") or top grades ("5") (Ixanova, 2018). Students also struggled to understand the purpose of FA. Some resorted to dishonest practices for SA, which led teachers to lower scores, often backfiring and diminishing motivation (Turganalina, 2020).

This research follows a constructivist approach, acknowledging that reality is shaped by the interactions between the researcher and participants (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005). Given the limited literature on students' perspectives of Criteria-Based Assessment (CBA) in Kazakhstan, a qualitative research design was chosen as it is best suited for exploring the central phenomenon in depth (Creswell, 2014). Specifically, the study employs a phenomenological design to describe the "lived experiences" of the participants regarding the new assessment system (Patton, 2015). The research site comprises mainstream secondary schools in urban southern Kazakhstan, excluding pilot schools to focus on standard implementation contexts. The study involved 20 students selected through homogeneous purposive sampling, a strategy that involves choosing individuals based on shared defining characteristics—in this case, experience with CBA (Creswell, 2014). Snowball sampling was utilized to recruit participants, helping to maintain confidentiality and encourage open responses (Creswell, 2014). Data were collected via individual semi-structured interviews. This method allows for direct, flexible interaction and real-time clarification. Conducting interviews one-on-one fosters a trusting atmosphere, conducive to obtaining genuine responses (Lopez & Whitehead, 2013). The interview protocol consisted of "broad and general" open-ended questions to allow participants to articulate their own understandings (Creswell, 2007). For data analysis, interviews were transcribed and translated into English. The data were coded and organized into themes using NVivo software. This process involved labeling and categorizing data to identify recurring themes (Creswell, 2014) and analyzing these patterns to cluster shared experiences (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2007). Ethical considerations were paramount; fully informed consent was obtained from all participants and their parents (Cropley, 2015) , and pseudonyms were used to ensure anonymity.

This study demonstrates that the transition to Criteria-Based Assessment in Kazakhstani mainstream schools has generated profound disconnect between the reform's developmental goals and the students' established learning habits. The investigation revealed that the removal of the traditional five-point grading system created a significant "motivational vacuum" for students who had been historically conditioned to rely on external validation. Participants consistently indicated that without the immediate reinforcement of daily marks, they struggled to perceive the value of ongoing classwork, often categorizing ungraded formative tasks as "optional" or inconsequential. This reliance on extrinsic rewards resulted in a notable decline in lesson preparation and homework completion, confirming that the shift in assessment structure disrupted the students' traditional mechanisms for self-regulation. Furthermore, the data highlighted a critical misalignment in how students conceptualized the purpose of assessment. Rather than viewing Formative Assessment (FA) as a tool for "assessment for learning" to guide improvement, students predominantly associated value only with high-stakes Summative Assessments (SA). This perception fostered a paradox where the absence of daily pressure led to disengagement during the learning process, which in turn spiked anxiety during summative periods. In several instances, this pressure to perform without adequate preparation drove students toward academic dishonesty, prioritizing the final grade over content mastery. However, the findings also suggest that this "motivation gap" is not an inherent failure of the CBA model itself, but rather a symptom of its partial implementation. In classrooms where educators successfully substituted grades with high-quality, actionable feedback, students reported a restored sense of competence and autonomy. The study concludes that the implementation of CBA requires more than a structural change to grading criteria; it demands a cultural shift where feedback becomes the primary driver of motivation. Consequently, future policy must prioritize teacher training to effectively bridge the gap between policy intent and student engagement.

Andrade, H. L., Du, Y., & Mycek, K. (2010). Rubric-referenced self-assessment and middle school students' writing. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 17(2), 199-214. Carlson, T., Macdonald, D., Gorely, T., Hanrahan, S., & Burgess-Limerick, R. (2000). Implementing criterion-referenced assessment within a multi-disciplinary university department. Higher Education Research & Development, 19(1), 103-116. Cauley, K. M., & McMillan, J. H. (2010). Formative Assessment Techniques to Support Student Motivation and Achievement. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83(1), Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education. New York: Routledge. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Creswell, J. (2014). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research: International edition (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson. Cropley, A. (2015). Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods. Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005) Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research, in: N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds) Handbook of qualitative research (3rd edn) (Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage Publications). Dörnyei, Z. (1998a). Motivation in second and foreign language learning. Language teaching, 31(3), 117-135. Ixanova, U. (2018). Fifth and seventh grade mainstream schoolteachers' perceptions of the renewed curriculum: a qualitative single case study in Central Kazakhstan (Unpublished Master's thesis), Nazarbayev University Graduate School of Education, Astana. Lopez, V., & Whitehead, D. (2013). Sampling data and data collection in qualitative research. Nursing and Midwifery Research: Methods and critical appraisal for evidence-based practice, 124-140. Martens, R., Gulikers, J., and Bastiaens, T. (2004). The impact of intrinsic motivation on e-learning in authentic computer tasks. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 20, 368-376. Otter, S. (1995). Assessing competence: the experience of the enterprise in higher education initiative. Assessing competence in higher education. London: Kogan Page, 43-64. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (1996). Motivation in education: theory, research, and applications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000a). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: classic definitions and new directions. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 25, 54-67. Turganalina, Z. (2020) Criteria-Based Assessment in Kazakhstani Mainstream Schools: Teachers' Perspectives and Experiences, Nazarbayev University Graduate School of Education, Astana. Yakavets, N (2014) Educational Reform in Kazakhstan: The First Decade of Independence. In Educational reform and internationalization: The case of school reform in Kazakhstan, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.