Assessment is a procedure that analyzes a program critically. It requires the collection and analysis of information on the actions, features, and consequences of a program. Its objective is to evaluate a program, improve its efficiency, and guide programming decision-making. According to McCain, “evaluation is about quality and making learning better” (2016, p. 1). A well-planned and well-conducted assessment will benefit all stakeholders more than an assessment quickly and retrospectively combined. Even if people may believe they have little time, money, and competence to conduct an assessment, early assessment learning and proper preparation will assist them in steering the process.
Summative and Formative Assessment
The goal of the formative evaluation is to monitor the students’ learning and give staff and students continuous feedback. Formative evaluation has long been an element of excellent teaching (2017, p. 279). With a proper design, students may detect their strengths and limitations and enable them to develop their self-regulatory abilities to be less haphazardly involved in their training than is usually the case. Formative evaluations are low in value and typically do not carry a grade, which might discourage or include students entirely.
The summative evaluation is intended to evaluate learning outcomes by comparing them to some standard or benchmarks at the end of the education unit. Kibble wrote that “summative assessments are usually applied at the end of a period of instruction to measure the outcome of student learning” (2017, p. 110). Summative evaluations are typically very involved and are considered as a priority over formative evaluations by students.
Dependence on a summative evaluation at the end of the study phase gives students a degree. A balance is necessary between formative and summative evaluations, even if one is not always completely understood and taken seriously by pupils. Formative evaluations provide an extremely productive, risk-free environment for pupils to learn and experiment. They are also a great way to conduct summative assessments, provided feedback is supplied.
Internal and External Assessment
Internal assessments offer several advantages, including their cheap cost. Badyal and Singh think that “internal assessment is a continuous form of assessment based on day‑to‑day activities and performance during the course” (2018, p. 1). Furthermore, internal evaluators tend to be more familiar with the organization itself, with the reviewed program and related policies, with different stakeholders, and the target populations. Its actual and perceived complexity is the main drawback of conducting an internal review. Natural partialities exist because it is human for organizational members via their everyday experience to identify program defects. Internal assessments are considered biased because the subsequent results will always be suspicious for the exact reasons previously stated for the natural biases.
External assessments offer numerous advantages, namely the reduction of biases, at least internal biases. External checks are commonly performed to enhance care quality (Hovlid et al., 2020). The vital advantage of external evaluation is that it is considered unbiased because assessors are not required to participate in the assessment result. The goal is to reduce bias and be aware of its existence when assessments are produced, and the following data are analyzed. Another advantage of hiring external assessors is that they are not part of the organization’s culture, program, or policy. They may give a new viewpoint in identifying the problem and its remedies with their professionalism, past experiences, training, beliefs, and perspectives.
One of the crucial downsides of external assessors is that it is expensive. External assessments take longer because evaluators must immerse themselves as widely as possible in an organization or program to learn about the organization, programs, and policies they assess. Finally, stakeholders who have something to lose may not absorb the findings of external assessments well, or the results may be deemed shallow because they have little grasp of the program or the policy.
Objectivist and Subjectivist Approach to Evaluation
In an objective approach, the instructor controls the learning process. It also indicates that techniques, such as education policies, are clearly defined and selected by area and learning goals. Irwin said that “critical thinking aids students in finding their identity, building character, and it aids in creating compassionate and action-oriented individuals, all seen as vital for a functional society” (2019, p. 81). With respect to the learning environment, the teacher or class designer puts forth aims and goals, which are effectively planned, suitably sequenced. Finally, an objectivist method is assessed according to the strategies and vision stated by the educator at the end of the course.
Subjectivist programs are centered on the self-study of organizations, programs, and staff. According to Popescu et al., “The human resource performance assessment represents a positive, mainly constructive action, which is oriented towards accomplishing the organizational objectives” (2018, p. 704). They depend upon the insights, experience, and skills of competent persons that utilize set directives to evaluate if the applicant has specific duties authorized to execute. This technique can allow others to perceive programs in a new light, but finding a skilled and impartial connoisseur is not simple.
Assessment is a procedure that analyzes a program critically. The goal of the formative evaluation is to monitor the students’ learning and give staff and students continuous feedback. The summative evaluation is intended to evaluate learning outcomes by comparing them to some standard or benchmarks at the end of the education unit. Both assessment methods will improve the organization of the school in the best possible way, as they will outperform a permanent assessment system that will help eliminate errors. Both assessment methods will be helpful in medical school, as all actions should be assessed during operations and after. External evaluators should be used for a more professional approach as they are not biased to provide a higher quality of healthcare.
Badyal, D. K., & Singh, T. (2018). Internal assessment for medical graduates in India: Concept and application. Chrismed journal of health and research, 5(4), 253.
Hovlid, E., Braut, G. S., Hannisdal, E., Walshe, K., Bukve, O., Flottorp, S.,… & Frich, J. C. (2020). Mediators of change in healthcare organizations subject to external assessment: A systematic review with narrative synthesis. BMJ open, 10(8), e038850.
Irwin, J. (2019). Student critical thinking objectivism. Journal of advanced research in social sciences and humanities, 4(3), 80-89.
Kibble, J. D. (2017). Best practices in summative assessment. Advances in physiology education, 41(1), 110-119.
McCain, D. V. (2016). Evaluation basics. Association for training development.
Popescu, C., Georgescu, A. R., & Grapa, B. G. (2018). Assessment of human resource performances between positive action and subjectivism. In proceedings of the international management conference. Faculty of management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, 12(1), 704-712.
Shepard, L. A. (2017). Formative assessment: Caveat emptor. In the future of assessment. Routledge, 279-303.