FORMATIVE AND SUMMATIVE EVALUATION

← Back to document page

1 #euSMARTmap Sally Randles, Mohammad Hajhashem, Monica Gonzales, Eniko Demeny, Peter Kakuk Deliverable (D ) of the H2020 SMART-Map Project FORMATIVE AND SUMMATIVE EVALUATION FINAL REPORT 2 Contents 1. RATIONALE: The Role and Contribution of FORMATIVE / SUMMATIVE EVALUATION ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ........4 2. 3. FINDINGS ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ .........43 4. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS ........................................ ......................................55 5. 6. 7. List of Tables: Table 1 Definition of each actor group Table 2 Merged dataset: 6 countries, 3 technologies, and total analyzed by stakeholder category Table 3 Schedule of the SMART-Map Industrial Dialogues Table 4 Actor categories in the sample Table 5 Technology Table 6 De-facto responsible research by actor group Table 7 De-facto responsible research by technology area Table 8 De-facto responsible innovation by actor group Table 9 De-facto responsible innovation by technology area Table 10 Awareness and recall of RRI 3 Table 11 Awareness and recall of RRI by actor category Table 12 Awareness and recall of RRI by technology area Table 13 Awareness a

Whilst summative evaluation by contrast, provides ‘judgements’ by evaluating end-point performance against pre-set criteria and has a focus on supporting out-turn decision making. A comparison of summative and formative assessment methods in education highlights the key differences1: Summative Assessment Formative Assessment

  Assessment, Formative assessment, Formative, Summative, Summative assessment formative assessment