▎Key Characteristics of Formative Assessment:

1. Purpose: The main goal of formative assessment is to enhance the educational process. It helps identify students' strengths and weaknesses and adjust teaching approaches accordingly.

2. Process: Formative assessment includes various methods such as observations, surveys, quizzes, discussions, and self-assessments.

3. Feedback: An important aspect is providing feedback that helps students understand what they are doing well and where they need to improve.

4. Frequency: Formative assessment is conducted regularly throughout the learning process, allowing for the tracking of student progress.

▎History of Formative Assessment:

- Early 20th Century: Ideas of formative assessment began to develop with the emergence of constructivist theories of learning. Educators started to recognize the importance of active student participation in the learning process.

- 1960s: During this time, various assessment methods aimed at supporting students began to be actively used. Research highlighted the significance of feedback and its role in learning.

- 1970s: The concept of formative assessment gained widespread recognition. Educators began developing strategies that encouraged active student involvement in the assessment process.

- 1990s and 2000s: Formative assessment became an integral part of educational standards in many countries. Research demonstrated its positive impact on student achievement.

- Present Day: In recent decades, formative assessment continues to evolve, incorporating technology and digital tools for data collection and progress analysis.

Formative assessment has become an essential part of educational practice, allowing for a more personalized and effective approach to learning.

outcomes once at the end of a course in order to make decisions about the students' ability to

transition to other courses or the next grade level (Anthony and Susan, 2005). Much like with

formative assessment, the person to solidify the term was Michael Scriven in 1967. These terms

were presented in the context of instructional design and education theory, but are just as

valuable for any sort of evaluation-based industry.

Early Forms of Standardized Examinations:

The first step towards the development of summative assessment is linked to the introduction of standardized examinations. In England in the 19th century, systems of exams such as the "Cambridge Local Examinations" and "Oxford Local Examinations" emerged, which were used to assess the outcomes of schooling. These exams became early examples of summative assessment, where the results were used to make final judgments about students' knowledge.

   - Description: These questions provide a set of possible answers where students must select the correct one.

   - Justification: MCQs assess a wide range of knowledge efficiently and are useful for evaluating students' understanding of specific concepts and facts.

1. Essays

   - Description: Students write a detailed response to a specific question, demonstrating their ability to articulate their thoughts and support their arguments.

   - Justification: Essays evaluate critical thinking, coherence, and the ability to organize and present arguments, making them ideal for assessing deeper understanding and analytical skills.

1. Case Studies

   - Description: Students analyze a real or hypothetical case, applying theoretical knowledge to solve problems or evaluate scenarios.

   - Justification: Case studies test the ability to apply knowledge in practical situations and to think critically about complex issues

The roots of summative assessment go back to ancient China, about 2,500–3,000 years ago, with the Imperial examination system. This system used standardized tasks to select talented individuals for government service, which was seen as fairer than choosing people based on recommendations or connections. The exams became progressively harder, with the highest grade reserved only for the Emperor. Success in these exams brought social and economic benefits. Because of the high stakes, there were also methods for cheating, and officials were placed to monitor the process.

Key Highlights:

    Evolution of Purpose: Summative assessment has moved from primarily focusing on knowledge retention to assessing skills, critical thinking, and real-world applications.

    Focus on Authenticity: Modern summative assessments are increasingly designed to measure how students apply their knowledge and skills in authentic contexts.

    Technological Advancements: Technology is enabling personalized learning and personalized assessments, leading to more adaptive and data-driven approaches.

1. Unification and Standardization: These exams helped establish a unified assessment system, allowing for objective comparison of students' achievements across different schools and regions. This contributed to a more consistent level of education nationwide and facilitated access to higher education.

2. Transparency and Objectivity: Standardized exams introduced an element of transparency and objectivity into the assessment process. Before their introduction, student success was often judged based on the subjective opinions of teachers, which could lead to biased results.

3. Increased Expectations: The advent of these exams led to higher expectations for students and teachers. This motivated educational institutions to improve the quality of education, leading to an overall rise in the level of knowledge.

Negative Outcomes and Criticism:

1. Focus on Memorization: Standardized exams were often criticized for encouraging the mechanical memorization of facts and knowledge rather than the development of critical thinking and creative abilities.

2. Inequality of Opportunities: Despite efforts to standardize, these exams sometimes exacerbated inequalities among students from different social backgrounds. Children from more affluent families had access to better schools and additional resources for exam preparation.

3. Stress and Pressure on Students: The introduction of standardized exams increased pressure on students and teachers, sometimes leading to negative consequences such as stress, anxiety, and an excessive focus on exam preparation at the expense of other aspects of education.

In Europe, the assessment system developed differently. It began in schools connected to churches and monasteries. Over time, with the rise of education during the Renaissance, assessments included oral debates and written tasks, which were evaluated by senior scholars. Like in China, the results were based on the judgment of more experienced experts.

He is best known for his work in program evaluation and educational research. His writings often focus on the methodology and philosophy of evaluation, as well as critiques of scientific methods and research. Scriven also developed a model of "formative" and "summative" evaluation that has had a significant impact on the fields of education and evaluation.

Michael Scriven coined the terms formative and summative evaluation in 1967, and emphasized their differences both in terms of the goals of the information they seek and how the information is used.

Feedback is the central function of formative assessment

performance, but most often, it is not provided in a timely fashion to provide opportunities for revision or

modification of instructional strategies while the teaching and learning is still in progress. Because summative

assessments are usually higher-stakes than formative assessments, it is especially important to insure that the

assessment is corresponding with the goals and expected outcomes of the instruction. To achieve this, Nicol and

Macfarlane-Dick (2007) outlined five approaches that can guide instructors as follows:

 Use a Rubric or Table of Specifications - Instructors can use a rubric to lay out expected performance

criteria for a range of grades. Rubrics will describe what an ideal assignment looks like, and

“summarize” expected performance at the beginning of term, providing students with a trajectory and

sense of completion.

 Design Clear, Effective Questions - If designing essay questions, instructors can insure that questions

meet criteria while allowing students freedom to express their knowledge creatively and in ways that

honour how they digested, constructed, or mastered meaning.

 Assess Comprehensiveness - Effective summative assessments provide an opportunity for students to

consider the totality of a course’s content, making broad connections, demonstrating synthesized skills,

and exploring deeper concepts that drive a course’s ideas and content.

 Make Parameters Clear - When approaching a final assessment, instructors can insure that parameters

are well defined (length of assessment, depth of response, time and date, grading standards); knowledge

assessed relates clearly to content covered in course; and students with disabilities are provided required

space and support.

 Consider Blind Grading - Instructors may wish to know whose work they grade, in order to provide

feedback that speaks to a student’s term-long trajectory. If instructors wish to provide truly unbiased

summative assessment, they can also consider a variety of blind grading techniques.

▎1. Observation

▎2. Short Tests and Quizzes

▎3. Self-Assessment

▎4. Peer Assessment

▎5. Discussions and Surveys

▎6. Project Work

▎7. Journals and Reflective Writing

▎8. Electronic Tools

▎9. Knowledge Mapping

▎10. Formative Assignments

These methods of formative assessment help create a more dynamic and supportive educational environment, promoting active student engagement in the learning process.

Danel

Milana G

Milana Z

Saaniya

Nargiz

Veronika

Водопьянов Дамир

Умурбекова Анель

Набикулова Алтынжан

Айткужинова Томирис

Серикжанова Дарина

Токенова Тамила

Сагынбек Адина

Бейсембаева Аида

Советова Альмира

In Europe, the assessment system developed differently. It began in schools connected to churches and monasteries. Over time, with the rise of education during the Renaissance, assessments included oral debates and written tasks, which were evaluated by senior scholars. Like in China, the results were based on the judgment of more experienced experts.