Education Theories: Formative and Summative Evaluations Essay

Exclusively available on Available only on IvyPanda® Made by Human No AI

Assessments are necessary for teachers to observe the progress of students in achieving the set objectives, and they are important for students to reflect on the learning experience. Such different types of assessments as diagnostic assessment, formative assessment, and summative assessment provide different types of information on the students’ progress and achievements.

As a result, a teacher receives the opportunity to adapt the instructions and evaluations to the students’ needs and address the school, district, and state standards (Epstein, Schweinhart, DeBruin-Parecki, & Robin, 2004, p. 2).

Thus, it is necessary to focus on the discussion of using different formative and summative evaluations in K-3 and Birth-Pre-K learning environments; on the importance of informal evaluation; on the role of diagnostic evaluation; and on the strategies and specific tests used by teachers in classrooms because diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments provide the major information on the students’ successes, achievements, strengths, and weaknesses which should be addressed by the teacher in the future.

Formative and summative evaluations are used in the classroom for different purposes because they intend to assess the students’ knowledge and progress in relation to different criteria. Therefore, formative evaluations are used as the ongoing assessment in order to help teachers decide about the readiness of students to the other types of assessment.

Formative evaluations are used during the learning sessions and instruction periods to demonstrate the students’ progress and to state the area for the improvement. Thus, teachers can use tests, quizzes, and interviews for formative assessment (Paris & Hoffman, 2004, p. 199).

If the formative assessment supports the teaching-learning process, summative evaluations are used in the classroom at the end of the course or unit in order to state the students’ competence according to the local, district, and state standards (Epstein et al., 2004, p. 4).

This evaluation is the final assessment which helps decide about the student’s grade. Summative assessments are used when teachers decide on the students’ competence and achievement of the learning goals.

While discussing K-3 and Birth-Pre-K learning environments, it is important to note that different variants of formative and summative evaluations are used in the classroom to respond to the students’ age and needs. In Birth-Pre-K learning environments, the focus is on such formative evaluations as observations, oral demonstrations, and discussions because of the necessity to address a student’s developmental needs.

In K-3 learning environments, students can be assessed with the help of standardized tests and interviews. Summative evaluations are performed in Birth-Pre-K learning environments with the help of performance tasks and rubrics, when students in K-3 learning environments are assessed with the help of portfolios, unit tests, and state-mandated tests (Frager & Frye, 2010, p. 57).

Teachers usually use informal evaluation methods in order to assess the progress of preschool and primary children because these assessments are connected with the real-life contexts, they do not provoke the children’s anxiety, help assess not only competence and skills but also students’ motivation and attitudes. Informal evaluation is often interactive in its nature and stimulates students’ engagement into activities (Epstein et al., 2004, p. 4).

As a result, students become more interested in assessments, their concentration increases, and teachers receive the opportunity to observe and assess different aspects of the students’ academic performance and personal development.

In its turn, a diagnostic evaluation is necessary for instructional planning because it provides information about the students’ existing competence and a current level of the skills’ development.

To develop a learning plan for students and to prepare adequate instructions, it is necessary to conduct the diagnostic evaluation based on the standardized tests (Wolfe Korngold & Korngold, 2014, p. 32). As a result, there is the opportunity to classify students according to their prerequisite skills and to focus on the appropriate instructional planning.

Early childhood teachers use different strategies to assess students in relation to formative and summative evaluations. These strategies are divided into formal and informal ones. Thus, working with young students, it is possible to use informal assessments based on naturalistic observation and everyday discussions for formative evaluation.

In spite of the fact that this approach can be time-consuming, teachers receive the great opportunity to assess the students’ everyday progress. Standardized testing is effective to screen all the students, and it is a kind of the formal strategy which is often used by teachers in order to conduct the summative assessment at the end of the unit or course (Epstein et al., 2004, p. 5).

From this point, early childhood teachers can choose between formal and informal strategies, time-consuming, standardized, group, and individual assessments which can be used to promote learning and affect instruction or conclude about the young students’ competence.

While discussing types of formative and summative evaluation, it is possible to name certain assessments used by teachers in K-3 and Birth-Pre-K learning environments. There is a variety of standardized tests which are used to assess the students’ achievements in relation to different fields of knowledge. Thus, the Kaufmann Educational Achievement Tests (KTEA) is used to assess the students’ abilities and skills in relation to a list of areas.

This test can be used for students of different ages. In order to assess the students’ competence in relation to the basic subjects and fields of knowledge, teachers also use the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (WIAT). Moreover, early childhood teachers pay much attention to using such tests as the Test of Phonological Awareness (TOPA) in order to assess the development of young students’ phonological awareness.

Standardized tests are also effective to assess competence in reading and language development. For instance, the Woodcock Reading Mastery Test-Revised (WRMT-R) assesses the young students’ reading capacity (Types of educational tests page, 2014).

The main advantage of standardized specific tests which can be used for formative and summative assessment is the focus on certain criteria according to which students’ skills and abilities are evaluated. These tests can serve to save time and efforts and provide the concrete data on the students’ progress in the definite field.

Formative, summative, and diagnostic assessments are actively used in K-3 and a Birth-Pre-K learning environments in order to evaluate the students’ progress and their results in developing certain skills. Early childhood teachers should pay more attention to using different strategies while assessing young students because of the necessity to find the balance in using formal and informal strategies and methods.

Early children can be effectively evaluated with the help of informal methods because of the opportunity to focus on the naturalistic setting and interactive nature of assessments. Formal assessments are more effective for summative evaluations. Specific standardized tests can be used to for formative and diagnostic assessment necessary to revise and improve instructional planning.

References

Epstein, A., Schweinhart, L., DeBruin-Parecki, A., & Robin, K. (2004). Preschool assessment: A guide to developing a balanced approach. Web.

Frager, A., & Frye, E. (2010). Focus on the essentials of reading instruction. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(2), 56-58.

Paris, S., & Hoffman, J. (2004). Reading assessments in kindergarten through third grade: Findings from the Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement. The Elementary School journal, 105(2), 199-217.

(2014).

Wolfe Korngold, C., & Korngold, K. T. (2014). The toddler years: A time of exuberance and joy. Montessori Life, 5(1), 32-35.

More related papers Related Essay Examples
Cite This paper
You're welcome to use this sample in your assignment. Be sure to cite it correctly

Reference

IvyPanda. (2020, March 17). Education Theories: Formative and Summative Evaluations. https://ivypanda.com/essays/education-theories-formative-and-summative-evaluations/

Work Cited

"Education Theories: Formative and Summative Evaluations." IvyPanda, 17 Mar. 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/education-theories-formative-and-summative-evaluations/.

References

IvyPanda. (2020) 'Education Theories: Formative and Summative Evaluations'. 17 March.

References

IvyPanda. 2020. "Education Theories: Formative and Summative Evaluations." March 17, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/education-theories-formative-and-summative-evaluations/.

1. IvyPanda. "Education Theories: Formative and Summative Evaluations." March 17, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/education-theories-formative-and-summative-evaluations/.


Bibliography


IvyPanda. "Education Theories: Formative and Summative Evaluations." March 17, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/education-theories-formative-and-summative-evaluations/.

If, for any reason, you believe that this content should not be published on our website, please request its removal.
Updated:
This academic paper example has been carefully picked, checked and refined by our editorial team.
No AI was involved: only quilified experts contributed.
You are free to use it for the following purposes:
  • To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
  • As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
  • As a template for you assignment
1 / 1