This paper wishes to clarify the definitions of the central terms relating to assessment. It argues that all assessment begins with summative assessment (which is a judgement) and that formative assessment is in fact summative assessment plus feedback which is used by the learner.

No abstract

This paper examines the case for a variation of student self-assessment which has been used across a wide range of subject areas and different types of assessment in higher education in Britain. It argues that three key features will allow students increased access to assessment procedures and protocols and that consequently, they will be better placed to carry out self-assessment from an informed position. These three features are rst, to use summative, graded work for self-assessment; second, to receive tutor feedback in order to help them identify and understand their errors prior to self-assessment; and third, it is proposed that students should receive their grade or mark only after they have completed the formative, learning aspect of the self-assessment exercise. It is argued that this process will go some way towards giving students real access to power sharing in assessment.

Extensive research (Black & Wiliam, 1998) notes the importance of feedback for learning. It is posited that even final-year undergraduate students will benefit from feedback and would thus value tutor feedback as an integral part of the student self-assessment process. At a British university, students were trained to carry out self-assessment of two types: firstly, self-assessment prior to peer and tutor feedback and secondly, self-assessment which integrated feedback as part of the process. Students overwhelmingly favoured the latter. In addition, analysis of student errors showed that, contrary to expectations, the majority of students' errors in translation were principally caused by their native language. Furthermore, discussion and questions on criteria revealed that students' expectations of their grades were closely related to the amount of time and effort which they had invested in their work. This was external to the actual standard of their work and their awareness of this.

Assessment for learning is increasingly part of accepted orthodoxy, with massive government funding in England, is central to national assessment in Wales, and an export to the USA. Black et al.'s Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice (2003), the 'bible' of assessment for learning, is set reading for trainee teachers across the UK, and this text is increasingly a staple diet for all interested in assessment for learning. As such it has an important impact on all involved in the teaching and learning process. Despite this, there has been little discussion of either the paradigm or the definitions which inform it. This article examines the definitions of formative assessment and the theoretical premises of assessment for learning exemplified here and how they impact on the practices described. It finds a lack of alignment and coherence in the rationale of the theory, and contradictions which ensue in the practice. One solution is a paradigm shift basing definitions of formative and summative assessment on processes of assessment and not on functions. Functions remain as a basic epistemological premise of assessment.