Educational institutions are considered a keystone for the establishment of a meritocratic
society. They supposedly serve two functions: an educational function that promotes learning
for all, and a selection function that sorts individuals into different programs, and ultimately
social positions, based on individual merit. We study how the function of selection relates to
support for assessment practices known to harm vs. benefit lower status students, through the
perceived justice principles underlying these practices. We study two assessment practices:
normative assessment-focused on ranking and social comparison, known to hinder the
success of lower status students-and formative assessment-focused on learning and
improvement, known to benefit lower status students. Normative assessment is usually
perceived as relying on an equity principle, with rewards being allocated based on merit and
should thus appear as positively associated with the function of selection. Formative
assessment is usually perceived as relying on corrective justice that aims to ensure equality of
outcomes by considering students' needs, which makes it less suitable for the function of
selection. A questionnaire measuring these constructs was administered to university students.
Results showed that believing that education is intended to select the best students positively
predicts support for normative assessment, through increased perception of its reliance on
equity, and negatively predicts support for formative assessment, through reduced perception
of its ability to establish corrective justice. This study suggests that the belief in the function
of selection as inherent to educational institutions can contribute to the reproduction of social
inequalities by preventing change from assessment practices known to disadvantage lowerstatus
student, namely normative assessment, to more favorable practices, namely formative
assessment, and by promoting matching beliefs in justice principles.