Assessment is an inseparable and central element of educational process (Black, 1993). According to the Cambridge Dictionary, assessment is “the act of judging or deciding the amount, value, quality, or importance of something, or the judgment or decision that is made” (Cambridge University Press, 2019). Historically, the main role of assessment has been to determine and provide grades for promoting students to the next level (Moon, 2005). Scriven noticed that “evaluation is itself a methodological activity which is essentially similar whether we are trying to evaluate coffee machines or teaching machines, plans for a house or plans for a curriculum” (Scriven, 1967). Thus, assessment has the same conditions, no matter the area of assessment. Assessment is used to discover what students (people) know and what they can do (Baird, Andrich, Hopfenbeck, & Stobart, 2017). Two fundamental types of assessment can be distinguished: summative assessment and formative assessment. Summative assessment (SA) sums up evidence, therefore is applied usually at the end of a certain part of the educational process. It provides information about students’ progress in relation to the selected population (Harlen, 2000; Olson & Loucks-Horsley, 2000; Taras, 2005) and is mostly based on tests (Baird et al., 2017). The highest increase in the summative assessment importance was observed at the beginning of the 21st century when educational institutions (schools and universities) emphasized standardization of assessment (Lau, 2016). Formative assessment (FA), on the other hand, means ongoing evaluation during an educational process that provides extended feedback (Scriven, 1967). Many researchers emphasized fitting together summative and formative assessments (Barnett, 2007; Sambell, McDowell, & Montgomery, 2012; Taras, 2005). Sambell et al. (2012) highlighted the importance of balancing summative and formative assessments and point out that both should be a source of learning. Taras (2005) also proffered the vision of learning process based on both summative and formative assessments but sees SA as a judgment which is followed by feedback, thus, formative assessment follows summative one. On the other hand, Siweya and Letsoalo (2014) suggested that formative assessment can Abstract. Assessment in many Centraland Eastern-European countries is dominated by summative assessment (SA). Simultaneously, researchers and educators from western Europe and the US proclaim the formative assessment (FA) as an important element of the educational process and advise including it into curricula and everyday teachers’ practice. The research presented herein reports an introduction of formative assessment classroom techniques (FACTs) during chemistry lessons at K7 level in Slovakia. In total 202 students participated in the research. They were divided randomly into a control (n=97) and an experimental (n=105) group, and the intervention covered 10 successive lessons. After the intervention, the student’s outcomes were compared using the test checking student’s knowledge and skills according to various domains of Bloom’s revised taxonomy. The results suggested a statistically significant increase in the score of the experimental group, and a detailed analysis revealed that the increase was significant in both lowerand higher-order cognitive skills area. Finally, the students’ reaction on the introduction of formative assessment was studied and showed their positive attitude towards the introduced method.

中文翻译：

---

形成性评估课堂技巧（事实）对中学化学学生成绩的影响

评估是教育过程中不可分割的核心要素（Black，1993）。根据剑桥词典，评估是“判断或决定某事物的数量、价值、质量或重要性的行为，或者做出的判断或决定”（剑桥大学出版社，2019 年）。从历史上看，评估的主要作用是确定和提供成绩，以将学生提升到一个新的水平（Moon，2005）。Scriven 注意到“评估本身是一种方法论活动，无论我们是试图评估咖啡机还是教学机器、房屋计划或课程计划，它本质上都是相似的”（Scriven，1967）。因此，无论评估领域如何，评估都具有相同的条件。评估用于发现学生（人）知道什么以及他们能做什么（贝尔德、安德里奇、霍芬贝克、和斯托巴特，2017 年）。可以区分两种基本类型的评估：总结性评估和形成性评估。总结性评估 (SA) 总结证据，因此通常在教育过程的某个部分结束时应用。它提供了与所选人群相关的学生进步信息（Harlen，2000；Olson & Loucks-Horsley，2000；Taras，2005），并且主要基于测试（Baird 等，2017）。在 21 世纪初，当教育机构（学校和大学）强调评估的标准化时，总结性评估的重要性增幅最大（Lau，2016）。另一方面，形成性评估 (FA) 意味着在提供扩展反馈的教育过程中进行持续评估 (Scriven, 1967)。许多研究人员强调将总结性评估和形成性评估结合起来（Barnett，2007 年；Sambell、McDowell 和 Montgomery，2012 年；Taras，2005 年）。萨姆贝尔等人。(2012) 强调了平衡总结性和形成性评估的重要性，并指出两者都应该是学习的源泉。Taras (2005) 还提出了基于总结性和形成性评估的学习过程的愿景，但将 SA 视为一种判断，然后是反馈，因此，形成性评估遵循总结性评估。另一方面，Siweya 和 Letsoalo（2014）建议形成性评估可以抽象。许多中欧和东欧国家的评估以总结性评估 (SA) 为主。同时地，来自西欧和美国的研究人员和教育工作者将形成性评估 (FA) 视为教育过程的重要组成部分，并建议将其纳入课程和日常教师实践中。本文介绍的研究报告了在斯洛伐克 K7 级别化学课程中形成性评估课堂技术 (FACTs) 的介绍。共有202名学生参与了研究。他们被随机分为对照组（n=97）和实验组（n=105），干预包括连续 10 节课。干预后，根据布鲁姆修订后的分类法的各个领域，使用测试检查学生的知识和技能来比较学生的成绩。结果表明实验组的得分有统计学意义的增加，详细的分析表明，在低阶和高阶认知技能领域都有显着的增长。最后，研究了学生对引入形成性评估的反应，并表明他们对引入的方法持积极态度。