{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023986765922249794, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006617038875103391, 'mean_word_length': 5.54054054054054, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
‘Formative good, summative bad?’ – A review of the dichotomy in assessment literature

The debate between summative and formative assessment is creating a situation that increasingly calls to mind the famous slogan in George Orwell’s (1945) Animal Farm – ‘Four legs good, two legs bad’. Formative assessment is increasingly being portrayed in the literature as ‘good’ assessment, which tutors should strive towards, whereas summative assessment is ‘bad’ assessment on which tutors should minimise their focus, instead moving towards formative assessment (Taras 2005). By revisiting the origins of formative assessment, this article aims to bring back to light that summative and formative assessment are connected at their inception. It highlights how research in the literature has unintentionally created a harmful dichotomy between summative and formative assessment, and it identifies some attempts in the literature to re-connect formative and summative assessment. This paper challenges the dichotomy in the literature and invites those in higher education to consider the fundamental idea that formative and summative assessment need to work in harmony and should not be seen as contrary to each other.