Understanding Evaluation.

Copyright © ISRG Publishers. All rights Reserved. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17383104 25 ISRG PUBLISHERS Abbreviated Key Title: isrg j. multidiscip. Stud. ISSN: 2584-0452 (Online) Journal homepage: https://isrgpublishers.com/isrgjms/ Volume – III, Issue - X (October) 2025 Frequency: Monthly Understanding Evaluation. Patricia Peratto INET, CFE, ANEP. Montevideo, Uruguay | Received: 09.10.2025 | Accepted: 15.10.2025 | Published: 18.10.2025 *Corresponding author: Patricia Peratto INET, CFE, ANEP. Montevideo, Uruguay 1. Introduction. There have appeared in the last time, different didactic currents, together with different evaluation methods, called formative. Between the didactic currents we have didactic sequences, program based learning, project based learning, case analisis, constructivism. Between the evaluation methods there are rubrics, checklists and appreciation scales. Usually is criticized the summative evaluation as non-constructive, between other reasons because was the kind of evaluation used before the appearance of new methods of teaching, of learning, and of evaluating. 2. Methodology. We suggest to add to the rubrics, checklists and appreciation scales, mention of the themes that form the curriculum, in a “typed” way that makes more easy for the students to find their mistakes, and facilitates the retroalimentation. We can give, by example in a rubric, an opinion about the work of the student, with adjectives that apply to different aspects to be considered, in a general evaluation, applicable to the work of the student all along the time that the course lasts. Why not to add to the rubric an indication of the themes in which the student is better or worst? Which areas has to study, in which areas has failed and in which areas didn't fail. Abstract It is said summative is not formative, but we need the summative evaluation. Formative evaluation gives an opinion of the work of the students in natural language, using categories that explain why the work is useful, correct, aceptable, incomplete or wrong (or any other descriptions with which can be qualified the work of students, as can be a numerical scale). Formative evaluation combines with summative evaluation, is usual for a matrix for evaluation to use numerical scales. Beside this, summative evaluation allows to computerize the information of qualification of the students, so we need the summative evaluation too. Keywords: didactics, formative evaluation, typed rubrics, summative evaluation, self-assessment. Copyright © ISRG Publishers. All rights Reserved. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17383104 26 3. Formative and Summative evaluation If we think in formative and summative evaluation, both approaches are right and complementary (Leymonie, J, 2008.; Peratto, P., 2024). In case of using rubrics, checklists and appreciation scales one can use a multidimensional matrix, where the categories include the theme to which apply. 3.1 Formative evaluation Finds new aspects, related with the area that is teached, or generals, metacognitive. New aspects to evaluate, in a consideration of didactics methods, questioning students learning, what and also the how. Formative evaluation, tries to identify weaknessess and strengths in student learning while summative evaluation judges and qualifies results (Anijovich, R., 2011). Evaluation serves to credit and diagnose, to feedback, reflect and improve learning. Self-assesment makes the student aware of its weakness and strengths, makes they think about the course, about his advances, his doubts, his mistakes and his understanding. Learns to study, to share with their mates, sharing with others, seeing himseft in the other, accepting ideas of other, learning to progress with others, progressing with himself. Retroalimentation includes to identify and comprehend previous ideas as well as to see the doubts, the mistakes made, in a progress from the unknown to the known, of why some things are in some way. The mistakes of the students suggest to the professor what seems to be an obstacle for their learning allowing the professor to design strategies to help the students to overcome their doubts. Formative evaluation guides the students during learning process, before any exam, allowing them to better their knowledge along the course, when there is yet time to progress, to acquire knowledge. Formative evaluation is characterized by: continuity in the process of improvement of student's learning, increase in the provability that all the students learn (Anijovich, R., 2011). By example, students have to question why to work in pairs is better than to work alone. There are who likes to work with others and who does it because is suggested by the professor. When the professor gives to the students a matrix in which is evaluated his work with their partners, the students have to ask themselves about their work with their mates enabling the retroalimentation and selfassestment. When student show how are using their knowledge in different contexts, by example solving an exercise in front of their mates or together, giving an answer to a question of other student, asking why something is in some way, questioning themselves and their professor, questioning how to apply a definition, in an alternative evaluation, before or instead of an exam, we got an authentic evaluation (Anijovich, R., 2011). This evaluation considers that is necessary to evaluate disciplinar knowledge situated in the particular context of our course, to not loose legitimacy. The main goal of formative assessment is as an evidence of student learning, for the teachers in their classroom. In Black, P. & Dylan Wiliam, 1998, formative evaluation is interpreted as encompassing the activities realized by teachers and/or their students, to be used as feedback to improve the teaching and learning activities in which are involved. They make assumptions about the psychology of learning, explicit and fundamental. For formative evaluation to be formative we have to use feedback information what means that a significative aspect will be the differential treatments that are realized as an answer to the feedback. Assumptions about learning and about the structure and nature of learning will be significant. For this the mental, psychological approach to thinking, the innate reasoning abilities, expressed in our metacognitive abilities, are of importance. Rubrics and Checklists. The scales or rubrics consist in criteria used to evaluate students performance and is a way of giving information to the students to better their learning; being involved in their learning process. Some advantages of using rubrics are the following: 1. objective and consistent evaluation 2. allows professors to clarify their criteria 3. shows to the student how will be evaluated and what is expected from their work 4. allows the student to have a more clear idea about possible criterias to apply in their self-assessment. 5. gives useful, efective retroalimentation 6. gives a guide to measure the progress of students 7. allows the students to focus their attention in important aspects of their performance Scales can be constructed in many forms, nevertheless all must share some indispensable components: must focus on measuring if are reached the goals of content, procedure, attitude, must use a range to measure performance, must count with specific criteria ordered in levels that indicate in which degree fulfills what was planified. Besides, must include all that is important to evaluate, the used range must be mutually different, comprensible and descriptive, must be clear for the students and provide information about the different aspects that compose the performance (Alfaro, 2010). Example: consider the next “typed” rubric used to evaluate a one semester course: Aspect to consider Achieved In process Missing Shows interest by team work In inductive definitions In propositional logic In predicate logic Relates properly with their mates All along the course Respects ideas an opinions of the others In inductive definitions, and propositional logic In predicate logic Shows an apropriate management of working procedures All along the course Results are well organized, clearly presented and complete. In propositional logic In inductive definitions and predicate logic Copyright © ISRG Publishers. All rights Reserved. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17383104 27 Results analysis is well-developed in agreement with what was discussed in class. All along the course But there are some drawbacks in the evaluation. We can question: if we are professors of an specific subject, corresponds to ourselves to explain what is a rubric, or is teached in a didactics course?. If I teach a course of first semester, the students didn't have time to learn how to interpret a rubric. In a past course, we have used a checklist as a way of evaluation. Can be said a checklist is a particular kind of rubric; both are matrix. I can give a checklist of the kind shown below, in which the student "accepts" it, interpretes it, in an intuitive matter, knowing is a kind of evaluation (because is said) but without more explanation. The next checklist uses three-valued qualification: true, intermediate or false. It combines formative with summative evaluation and is typed. Usually checklist is used with two columns, as achieved or not achieved. We have chosen to write a three column evaluation checklist together with a column with a maximal score. It can be global, to evaluate the complete course, or to evaluate a section of the course. For the qualification of the complete course, in our institution there are three levels of qualification: exonerates, has to give complementary exam or has to give global exam. Complementary exam means needs to complent their formation, global exam means will be evaluated in all the curriculum. We apply the three levels also to evaluate the different sections of the course. Is an example of combination of summative and formative evaluation. Example: we present below other example of typed checklist used in a course of logic, we qualify combining summative and formative evaluation. Issue Concept Points assigned T I F Natural Deduction Understand how to use the rules 4 Structures Knows how to define a structure 2 Similarity type Knows how to define and interpret when something is a correct similarity type. 2 Term (definition) Knows what is a term if is open or closed. 2 Formulas (definition) Knows what is a formula, if is atomic or not atomic. 2 Term (interpretation) Knows how to interpret terms 2 Formulas (interpretation) Knows how to interpret formulas 2 Quantifiers Understand quantifiers. 4 But when we have to evaluate, to give an explanation of the qualification given to the student by their work, to say if the student saves, gives a complementary exam or a global exam we need to explain to the student in which way we qualify their work. 3.2 Sumative evaluation As was said before, if our subject is specific does not correspond to us to teach what is a rubric or checklist, this is a matter of professors of didactic. We have then to find the way of evaluating the students applying methods that they understand. It is then necessary to coordinate the professors of specific matters and the ones of didactic in such a way that students understand the way in which are being evaluated. One possibility is to define a function that associates to each definition in the matrix, in the case of the formative evaluation, a numerical value i.e. a summative scale, that qualifies the work of the students. This forms a bijective function between formative and summative evaluation. Nevertheless, there is the possibility of saying to the student: "you have to obtain a qualification of useful or correct to revalidate, of aceptable to give complementary exam and to give global exam in case of incomplete or wrong". But this way of qualifying is one into many possible ones. In the formative evaluation the professor has to create themselves the rubric or checklist for evaluation, each professor defines it own evaluation and when we have to computerize the results we have to be in agreement with a kind of evaluation which can be applied to all the courses. We see that we need the summative evaluation. We have to define a correspondence between the formative evaluation and the summative. The explanation of why to each category corresponds a qualification, depends on the professor, the curriculum, the area. When we have to give the final note to the student, the qualification given to him can not be different for each professor of each subject, this is to much information to record in a computer system; different matters and different professors give rise to different evaluations. So, we have to have a correspondence from the formative evaluation to a summative one, and this last has to be common to all the professors of all the subjects to allow the mechanization. Then the use of summative evaluation continue being necessary and we have to add an step in which we define a correspondence from the formative evaluation that we use to a summative evaluation. It is said a qualification is not formative if uses numbers instead of propositions, but the numerical qualification is necessary by what was said before. Copyright © ISRG Publishers. All rights Reserved. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17383104 28 4. Discussion There has been in the last time an advance in didactic methods and together to it of evaluation methods. But the last involves the intervention of the students. For this to be possible the student has to know the didactic methods of evaluation. This has to be studied by the student in the courses of didactic. For this, the courses of didactic have to teach these methods conceivably before. It happens that after a change in the plans of study the professors of specific matters have to use didactic methods that the students have to know. For this, the methods have to be studied before than being used. It remains to put in agreement between the professors where are teached the didactic methods that the students need to know to apply formative evaluation. 5. Conclusion It can happen that after a change in plans of study misses to consider previews. Is put the enfasis in formative didactics that includes formative assessments and is not seen that the students does not know how to do this. Is implemented the new plan before defining the previews, or after but is not seen that there are themes inside the matters that have to be studied before than others. I suggest that the professors say the themes that needs to be studied before than their matter and find the way of working on theses themes in the corresponding matter. This can involve to change matters of place inside the curriculum, or to add themes to certain course taking they out from their actual place. Didactic methods are necessary to apply in formative assessment. Bibliography 1. Alfaro, Lilia Ana, 2010, Segundo Congreso de Educación Formando Formadores “Hay Talento 2010”. Taller. Elaboración de rúbricas para la evaluación basada en proyectos. 2. Anijovich Rebeca y Gonzalez Carlos, 2011, Evaluar para Aprender, Conceptos e Instrumentos., AIQUE Educación. 3. Black, P. & Dylan Wiliam, 1998, Assesment and Classroom Learning, School of Education, King's College London. Carfax Publishing Ltd. 4. Leymonie Sáenz, 2008. Nuevas formas de Enseñar, Nuevas formas de Evaluar. Paginas de Educación, UCU (Universidad Católica del Uruguay), Departamento de Educación, Vol 1, Num 1. 5. Peratto Patricia, 2024. Another Learning Sequence for a Course of Logic. ISRG Journal of Education, Humanities and Literature. Volume I, Issue V, September-October 2024.