Formative and Summative Evaluation

There are many different types of evaluations depending on the object being evaluated and the
purpose of the evaluation. Perhaps the most important basic distinction in evaluation types is that
between formative and summative evaluation. Formative evaluations strengthen or improve the
object being evaluated -- they help form it by examining the delivery of the program or technology, the
quality of its implementation, and the assessment of the organizational context, personnel,
procedures, inputs, and so on. Summative evaluations, in contrast, examine the effects or outcomes
of some object -- they summarize it by describing what happens subsequent to delivery of the
program or technology; assessing whether the object can be said to have caused the outcome;
determining the overall impact of the causal factor beyond only the immediate target outcomes; and,
estimating the relative costs associated with the object.
Summative assessment - Summative assessment is generally carried out at the end of a course or
project. In an educational setting, summative assessments are typically used to assign students a
course grade.

 Formative assessment - Formative assessment is generally carried out throughout a course or

project. Formative assessment, also referred to as "educative assessment," is used to aid learning. In
an educational setting, formative assessment might be a teacher (or peer) or the learner, providing
feedback on a student's work, and would not necessarily be used for grading purposes.
Educational researcher Robert Stake explains the difference between formative and summative
assessment with the following analogy:
" When the cook tastes the soup, that's formative. When the guests taste the soup, that's
summative. "

Formative assessment

Formative evaluation includes several evaluation types:

needs assessment determines who needs the program, how great the need is, and what might work
to meet the need

 evaluability assessment determines whether an evaluation is feasible and how stakeholders

can help shape its usefulness
 structured conceptualization helps stakeholders define the program or technology, the
target population, and the possible outcomes
 implementation evaluation monitors the fidelity of the program or technology delivery
 process evaluation investigates the process of delivering the program or technology,
including alternative delivery procedures

Summative assessment
Summative assessment (or Summative evaluation) refers to the assessment of the learning and
summarizes the development of learners at a particular time. After a period of work, e.g. a unit for two
weeks, the learner sits for a test and then the teacher marks the test and assigns a score. The test
aims to summarize learning up to that point. The test may also be used for diagnostic assessment to
identify any weaknesses and then build on that using formative assessment.
Summative assessment is commonly used to refer to assessment of educational faculty by their
respective supervisor. It is imposed onto the faculty member, and uniformly applied, with the object of
measuring all teachers on the same criteria to determine the level of their performance. It is meant to
meet the school or district's needs for teacher accountability and looks to provide remediation for sub-
standard performance and also provides grounds for dismissal if necessary. The evaluation usually
takes the shape of a form, and consists of check lists and occasionally narratives. Areas evaluated
include classroom climate, instruction, professionalism, and planning and preparation.[1]
Summative assessment is characterized as assessment of learning and is contrasted with formative
assessment, which is assessment for learning.
It provides information on the product's efficacy (its ability to do what it was designed to do). For
example, did the learners learn what they were supposed to learn after using the instructional
module. In a sense, it does not bother to assess "how they did," but more importantly, by looking at
how the learners performed, it provides information as to whether the product teaches what it is
supposed to teach.
 Characteristics

1. It tends to use well defined evaluation designs. [i.e. fixed time and content]
2. It provides descriptive analysis. [i.e. in order to give a grade, all the activities done throughout
the year are taken into account]
3. It tends to stress local effects.
4. It is unoppressive and not reactive as far as possible.
5. It is positive, tending to stress what students can do rather than what they cannot.

Summative evaluation can also be subdivided:

 outcome evaluations investigate whether the program or technology caused demonstrable

effects on specifically defined target outcomes
 impact evaluation is broader and assesses the overall or net effects -- intended or unintended
-- of the program or technology as a whole
 cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analysis address questions of efficiency by
standardizing outcomes in terms of their dollar costs and values
 secondary analysis reexamines existing data to address new questions or use methods not
previously employed
 meta-analysis integrates the outcome estimates from multiple studies to arrive at an overall or
summary judgement on an evaluation question

Formative versus Summative Evaluation

Formative evaluation is a process of ongoing feedback on performance. The purposes are to identify
aspects of performance that need to improve and to offer corrective suggestions. Be generous with
formative evaluation. Share your observations and perceptions with the student. You might simply
share your observation and then ask the student if (s)he can think of a better approach for the next
time. Formative evaluation need not make a judgment. When giving formative feedback, offer some
alternatives to the student, e.g., "That procedure will be more comfortable for the patient if you?." If
you observe unsafe or questionable practices, address those directly and immediately with the
student.
Use the student's patient management documentation as well as your observations of performance to
offer formative evaluation. The student's charting

reveals organizational skills, priorities, thought process, and judgment. Over the duration of the
student's experience with you, point out improvement to the student.
Summative evaluation is a process of identifying larger patterns and trends in performance and
judging these summary statements against criteria to obtain performance ratings. The faculty
assumes responsibility for completing the summative evaluation at the end of the course. However,
faculty rely upon your evidence and perceptions to justify ratings.
The table below compares formative and summative evaluation according to the kind of information
provided and the timing.

Formative Evaluation  Summative Evaluation 

What Specific description of daily events General trends based on specific descriptions
information

Organizational skills Overall attitude

Needs assessment Comparison with evaluation tool

When to give At the time of the incident Mid-point in the course

End of the day End of the course

Weekly re: progress

Give both formative and summative evaluation to the student in private as a general rule. However,
formative evaluation is needed if safety concerns arise in a student's practice while with a patient.
Also, at times you will lose a learning opportunity if you do not give the student a chance to practice
an alternative approach at the time, but reserve your suggestions for a later conversation. Use your
judgment and employ tact and sensitivity to avoid embarrassing the student.
Formative v.s. Summative Evaluation

Formative Evaluation Summative Evaluation

Formative Evaluation is a bit more complex than Summative evaluation provides information on the
summative evaluation. It is done with a small group of product's efficacy ( it's ability to do what it was
people to "test run" various aspects of instructional designed to do). For example, did the learners learn
materials. For example, you might ask a friend to look what they were supposed to learn after using the
over your web pages to see if they are graphically instructional module. In a sense, it lets the learner
pleasing, if there are errors you've missed, if it has know "how they did," but more importantly, by
navigational problems. It's like having someone look over looking at how the learner's did, it helps you know
your shoulder during the development phase to help you whether the product teaches what it is supposed to
catch things that you miss, but a fresh set of eye might teach.
not. At times, you might need to have this help from a
target audience. For example, if you're designing learning Summative evaluation is typically quantitative, using
materials for third graders, you should have a third grader numeric scores or letter grades to assess learner
as part of your Formative Evaluation. achievement.

Here are some different author's definitions of Formative So what is the difference between a Summative
Evaluation that will help you understand the difference. Evaluation and Learner Assessment?

Scriven, (1991) Although both might look at the same data, a Learner
Assessment generally looks at how an individual
Formative evaluation is typically conducted during the learner performed on a learning task. It assesses a
development or improvement of a program or product (or student's learning -- hence the name Learner
person, and so on) and it is conducted,often more than Assessment. For example, you might assess an entire
once, for in-house staff of the program with the intent to class of students, but you are assess them
improve. The reports normally remain in-house; but individually to see how each did.
serious formative evaluation may be done by an internal
or an external evaluator or preferably, a combination; of A Summative Evaluation, on the other hand, looks at
course, many program staff are, in an informal sense, more than one learner's performance to see how well
constantly doing formative evaluation. a group did on a learning task that utilized specific
learning materials and methods. By looking at the
Weston, Mc Alpine, and Bordonaro, (1995) group, the instructional designer can evaluate the
learning materials and learning process -- hence
The purpose of formative evaluation is to validate or the name Summative Evaluation. For example, here
ensure that the goals of the instruction are being achieved you may find that, as a group, all of the students did
and to improve the instruction, if necessary, by means of well on Section A of some instructional materials,
 identification and subsequent remediation of problematic but didn't do so well on Section B. That would
aspects. indicate that the designer should go back and look at
the design or delivery of Section B.
Worthen, Sanders, and Fitzpatrick, (1997)
 
Formative evaluation is conducted to provide program
staff evaluative information useful in improving the  
program.

Robert Stakes

"When the cook tastes the soup, that’s formative; when

the guests taste the soup, that’s summative."

Scriven, (1996)

 "is research-oriented vs. action-oriented"

 "evaluations are intended - by the evaluator - as a
basis for improvement"
 "the summative vs. formative distinction is
context dependent"

 
Formative & Summative Evaluations in Teaching
By Marysia Walcerz, eHow Contributor
Evaluations provide essential information about student progress.

Formative and summative evaluations are two methods of testing that are used in the classroom to
determine how students are progressing and whether changes should be made to teaching methods.
Summative evaluations are periodic student evaluations that take the forms of tests, quizzes and
state assessments. Formative evaluations are ongoing student evaluations that are incorporated
into classroom practice to provide the teacher with a constant stream of information about the
efficacy of their instruction.
Other People Are Reading

 How to Create a Rubric Formative Evaluation

 Formative & Summative Assessment Techniques

 Print this article

1. Summative Evaluations

o Summative evaluations are the most commonly thought of type of evaluation- tests,
quizzes and assessments that check the academic progress of a group of students. Summative
evaluations can be state assessments, such as standardized tests or teacher-created evaluations that
reflect a recent topic covered in class. These types of evaluations are useful for determining grades
and modifying future curriculum, although they are not helpful in modifying curriculum as it is being
taught, since they only test students at the end of a particular lesson.

Formative Evaluations

o Formative evaluations, in contrast to summative evaluations, occur continuously in the

classroom. Formative evaluations happen as the student is learning and practicing new skills, often
taking the form of in class worksheets, homework assignments, practice problems, and on going
assignments. Teachers use formative evaluations to not only evaluate the student's ongoing progress,
but also their own efficacy as educators. Formative evaluations provide the information necessary to
change curriculum and teaching methods if necessary, resulting in a better prepared, higher scoring
class.
 o Sponsored Links
 Top Telemarketing Centers
Compare Telemarketers & Save Money World Class Call Center Outsourcing
www.WorldwideCallCenters.com
Using Each

o Formative and summative evaluations are meant to be used in tandem, each fulfilling a
role that results in an accurate impression of students' progress. If formative evaluations have been
successfully helping the teacher do the best job possible to prepare students for testing, the
summative evaluations should reflect the student's successful grasp of knowledge. Relying solely on
either summative or formative evaluations can seriously hamper a teacher's ability to effectively reach
their students and impart information.

In the Classroom

o While summative evaluations are fairly easy to implement in the classroom, formative
evaluations are less intuitive. Although worksheets and homework can tell a great deal about a
student's progress, teachers should be including regular evaluations into their lessons. A simple "Does
everyone understand the material I just covered?" at the end of a lesson can provide valuable insight
into one's teaching strategies. Teachers should remember that one of the major points of evaluations
should be to reconsider their own teaching methods to be the most effective educator they can be.

Comprehensive Evaluation Model for Nursing Education

By Elly Turner, eHow Contributor
Regular evaluation of training programs helps to ensure effectiveness and relevance.

With a nursing shortage in full swing since the turn of the millenium and a more recent shortage in
nursing school faculty, the need for comprehensive evaluation of nursing education programs is
urgent. Evaluative models provide guidelines for effective data collection and analysis.
Other People Are Reading

 Hospital Nurse Training

 Importance of Nursing Education Evaluation Programs

 Print this article

1. Evaluating a Nursing Education Program in its Academic Community Context
o

Multiple methods and models of comprehensive evaluation are available for studying the effectiveness
of a nursing school with its constituents, often including students, alumni, faculty, employers and
community partners. Evaluation may include study of distance-learning effectiveness, nursing
curriculum impact or data collection methods. Comprehensive evaluation models should take into
account whether care theories are being learned, implemented and used in society.

2. The Neuman Systems Model

The Neuman Systems Model of comprehensive nursing education evaluation is a multi-disciplinary

approach to measuring nursing education. It specifically integrates physiological, psychological and
other concerns as part of patient care. Developed by Dr. Betty Neuman, it emphasizes teaching theory
and serves as a system for instructing nursing students.

Stake's Countenance Evaluation Model

Robert E. Stake's Countenance Evaluation Model supports formal rather than informal evaluation
and utilizes judgment and description of the evaluated program. Using the matrix of description and
the matrix of judgment, information can be collected and studied. Stake's evaluation model has been
seen as a fundamental resource for evaluating complex organizations, particularly academia.