Assessment is a means of evaluating and expressing progress in learning. Typically, we see two forms of assessment: formative and summative.
Formative assessments focus primarily on informal evaluation and usually are not connected to a numerical or letter grade. Feedback (written or oral) is often given to the learner to help them understand what they need to improve on and what they are strong with. Formative assessments can be conducted simply from teacher observation and listening in on student discussions, or some form of ungraded submitted work.
Summative assessments are what most of us were used to when we were in grade school, especially in mathematics courses. Exams, tests, quizzes – whatever you want to label them as – are the most common form of summative assessment. These types of assessments are almost always taken individually and with some sort of time restraint. They are given some type of grade, whether this be a percentage, letter grade, or a 4-point scale rubric of sorts, and is counted toward the student’s final grade in the course.
The aim of assessment is to paint a picture of the learner’s current understandings. Now, whether the assessment is summative or formative is what affects the overall quality and detail of this painting. The aim of summative assessment is mainly for teacher benefit. It enables the teacher to assign a grade that is intended to represent the level of understanding that the learner has reached. But does it truly represent this well? What does 85% tell us about what they do (and do not) understand? What does 60% tell us about what they need to work on? What is the difference between a person with a 73% and a person with a 74%? Numerical grades are so prominent in our current society for the convenience it lends to post-secondary applications and scholarships. They supposedly tell us about who deserves to be accepted to university or other programs and who deserves funding for their schooling based on their intelligence. But if these numerical grades really do not tell us much about the learner’s skills, then are we even sure that this system is valid? On the other hand, formative assessments are drastically more student-oriented. The aim is to inform both the teacher and the learner about the learner’s progress. Formative assessments give students more opportunity to improve and gain a deeper understanding of what their strengths are.
The way we assess our students tells a lot about the classroom environment that we create, and vice versa. Environments that embrace mistakes and failure, that encourage reflection and positive growth, and that recognize learning as a journey rather than a destination often lead to much more formative assessment rather than summative. Instructional practices that stray away from lecture-based direct instruction and lean into collaborative learning often promote formative assessments as well.
When designing assessments for the classroom, we must think about what it is we are trying to get out of the assessment. We need to consider: who is this for? Is this for me to be able to assign a grade to Haley’s report card, or is this for me to inform myself and Haley about where she is at in her learning journey so that she can grow from her past mistakes? We also have to be cognizant of what we are assessing: process or product? Knowledge or understanding? Ability or growth? If we, as teachers, better understand the purpose of our assessments, we will be of more help to our students in guiding them through their learning journeys.
Haley Begrand 