Preservice Teachers’ Views on Summative and Formative Assessments in the Czech Context


  • Abdülkadir Kabadayı Necmettin Erbakan University A.K. Faculty of Education
  • Martin Skutil Arts, Charles University


Assessment; School Assessment; Summative Assessment; Formative Assessment; Teacher Training; Preservice Teacher


Assessment is an integral part of every educational process. The summative assessment focuses more on the current performance of students, on a summary of previous results. The formative assessment is more continuous, providing feedback on the progress made by the pupils. The paper aims to find out how preservice teachers perceive to study the field of teaching for younger primary school level of quantitative form of assessment, on the example of summative and formative assessment, and it focuses on how both these models, one traditional and the other innovative, are perceived by students in the field of young primary school teaching, i.e. preservice teachers. 129 preservice teachers participated in the study in Czech Republic. The target group was deliberately chosen because preservice teachers do not receive much attention in this area so far. A quantitative and qualitative approach was chosen to describe the current situation, and a questionnaire of our design was used as a research tool. Results show, that as the most suitable option, respondents choose a combination of quantitative and qualitative assessment, which can cover both of the above aspects. The fact that preservice teachers are aware of the strengths and weaknesses of both assessment types and consider this fact when applying them in pedagogical practice can be described as positive.


Author Biography

Abdülkadir Kabadayı, Necmettin Erbakan University A.K. Faculty of Education

I work as a full prof. Dr. in Necmettin Erbakan University A.K. Faculty of Education in Konya  Turkey.



Akçay, A. O., Güven, U., & Karahan, E. (2021). The Views of Pre-Service Elementary Teachers about Online and Traditional Peer Assessment. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 8(2), 409-422.

Andrade, H. L. & Cizek, G. J. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of Formative Assessment. New York and London:


Blenkin, G. M. & Kelly, A.V. (1992). Assessment in Early Childhood Education. London: Paul Chapman


Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (1999). How People Learn. Washington D.C.: National

Academy Press.

Broadband, J., Panadero, E., & Boud, D. (2017). Implementing summative assessment with a formative flavour:

a case study in a large class. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(2), 307-322.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research Methods in Education. New York: Routledge.

Finamor, A. C., Santos, A. M., Nunes, B. P., & Pacheco, A. (2016, September). Case Study: Improving Students’

Performance with Formative Assessment. 3rd Workshop on Technology-Enhanced Formative

Assessment (TEFA), France, Lyon.

Gardner, J. (2014). Assessment in Education. London: SAGE.

Gardner, J., Harlen, W., Hayward, L., & Stobart, G. (2010). Developing Teacher Assessment. Glasgow:


Gijbels, D. & Dochy, F. (2006). Students' assessment preferences and approaches to learning: Can formative

assessment make a difference?, Educational Studies, 32(4), 399-409.

Glazer, N. (2014). Formative Plus Summative Assessment in Undergraduate Science Courses: Why Both? The

International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 26(2), 276-286.

Gorard, S. (2001). Quantitative Methods in Educational Research. London: Continuum.

Hanefar, M. S., Anny, B. N., & Rahman, S. (2022). Enhancing teaching and learning in higher education

through formative assessment: Teachers’ Perceptions. International Journal of Assessment Tools in

Education, 9(1), 61-79.

Harro-Loit, H. & Neeme, M. (2017). School assessment – The past within us. Trames Journal of the Humanities

and Social Sciences, 21(71/66), 313–326.

Kilmen, S. (2021). Assessing Measurement Invariance of Achievement Emotions Questionnaire for Teachers in

Prospective Teacher Sample. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 8(4), 842-854.

Kolář, Z. & Šikulová, R. (2009). Hodnocení žáků. Praha: Grada Publishing.

Laufková, V. (2017). Formativní hodnocení v praxi české základní školy. Pedagogika, 67(2), 126-146.

Laufková, V., & Novotná, K. (2014). Školní hodnocení z pohledu žáků. Orbis Scholae, 8(1), 111-127.

Ling, M. K. (2016). The Use of Academic Portfolio in the Learning and Assessment of Physics Students from a

Singapore Private College. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 3(2), 151-160.

Looney, J. W. (2011). Integrating Formative and Summative Assessment: Progress toward a Seamless System?.

France: OECD Publishing.

Mitchel, R. (1992). Testing for Learning. New York: The Free Press.

Murphy, P. (Ed.). (1999). Learner, learning & assessment. London: SAGE.

Opstad, L. (2021). Performance and Differences in Grading Practices among Undergraduates at Business

Schools, International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 8(4), 785-800.

Osadebe, P. U. & Nwabeze, C. P. (2018). Construction and Validation of Physics Aptitude Test as an

Assessment Tool for Senior Secondary School Students. International Journal of Assessment Tools in

Education, 5(3), 461-473.

Özalp, U. & Çetin, M. (2022). Academic Intellectual Capital Scale: A Validity and Reliability Study. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 9(1), 138-164.

Özdemir, G., Özdemir, A., & Gelbal, S. (2021). Determination of cyber accessibility of teacher made

tests/exams. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 8(3), 553-569.

Pastore, S. & Pantassuglia, M. (2016). Teachers’ and students’ conceptions of assessment within the Italian

higher education system. Practitioner Research in Higher Education Journal, 10(1), 109-120.

Şahin, M. (2020). Classroom Response Systems as a Formative Assessment Tool: Investigation into Students’

Perceived Usefulness and Behavioural Intention. International Journal of Assessment Tools in

Education, 6(4), 693-705.

Shepard, L. A. (2006). Classroom assessment. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.

Skutil, M. (2020). Školní hodnocení z pohledu studentů učitelství 1.stupně ZŠ. Praha: FF UK.

Skutil, M. & Maněová, M. (2021). Current Forms of Assessment in Primary Education with a Focus on

Formative Assessment in 7th International Conference on Education Vol.7 Issue 1 (pp.629-639).

Sri Lanka: TIIKM Publishing.

Slavin, R. E. (2000). Educational Psychology. Boston: Ally Bacon.

Stiggins, R. J. (2005). Student-involved assessment for learning. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Taşkın, E., Demirhan, F. S., Kara, İ. & Ekici, E. (2016). Fen Bilgisi Öğretmenlerinin Bilişim Teknolojilerini

Kullanma Sıklıkları ve Karşılaştıkları Engeller. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education,

(1), 26-46.

Vališová, A. & Kasíková, H. (Eds). (2011). Pedagogika pro učitele. Praha: Grada Publishing.

Woolfolk, A. (2010). Educational Psychology. New Jersey: Pearson.

Wyse, D., Wayward, L., & Pandya, J. (2016). Curriculum, Pedagogy and Assessment. London: SAGE.

Yan, Z. & Cheng, E. C. K. (2015). Primary teachers' attitudes, intentions and practices regarding formative

assessment. Teaching and Teacher Education, 45, 128-136.

Yaşar, M. & Erol, A. (2016). Determination of Relationship between the Empathic Tendency Levels and

Thinking Styles of Preschool Teacher Candidates. International Journal of Assessment Tools in

Education, 2(2), 38-65.

Yolerı, S. (2020). Factors Affecting Level of Children Resilience and Teachers’ Opinions about Resilience.

International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 7(3), 361-378.