Can Formative and Summative Assessment Coexist?

 An interesting question regarding Formative Assessment (FA) and the assignment of numerical grades is that, essentially, they are two different—indeed, even contradictory—approaches. However, they can converge or coexist, since the difference between summative and formative assessment lies in the rigor and depth of specialization. In fact, summative assessment requires the very elements and tools that belong to FA in order to culminate in a number that synthesizes a learning parameter.

To give proper weight to FA, it is necessary for the report card to include a written evaluation section, where the student’s opportunities and strengths are qualitatively described—as has been implemented in the 2023–2024 school year report cards.

This qualitative description should be the most relevant and important element for students and their families, rather than focusing solely on the numerical score. The latter, at best, only infers a supposition or predisposition, as the National Education System (NES) has long instilled as part of its evaluative school culture.

It is very difficult to eradicate this evaluative culture. Parents often demand a number rather than a description, which creates resistance and discomfort when governmental education institutions, classroom teachers, and school administrators attempt to account for the teaching–learning process through qualitative means. For this reason, in order to move toward a fully descriptive report card, it is necessary to deepen society’s understanding of the essence of FA itself.

However, in today’s fast-paced, information-driven context, when enrolling or diagnosing a new student, Díaz Barriga, Castillo, and Martínez Rizo all conclude that grades are still necessary because they provide a concrete measure of performance. They emphasize that the key lies in using grades not as an end in themselves, but rather as a synthesis that reflects the student’s progress throughout the formative process.