Formative vs Summative Assessment in Early Years: When Does Each Matter?

In March, a four-year-old at the sand tray counts seven shells. She touches each one, loses her place at five, starts again, and gets it right. Her teacher jots a short note. In June, the term report asks one thing: Counts objects to 10 Secure

Is the June tick a new piece of assessment? Or is it just the March note, three months older and without its story?

That small gap is where most confusion about formative vs summative assessment in early years sits. Schools know both words. The harder part is knowing what each one should look like when the learners are three to six years old and learn mostly through play.

The difference is about use, not the tool

What is the difference between formative and summative assessment in early years?

Formative assessment is evidence gathered during learning and used straight away to shape teaching. Summative assessment is a periodic summary of what a child has learned over a longer period, such as a unit or term. In early years, both should come mainly from observation, conversation and children’s work, not formal tests.

This matters because the same piece of evidence can serve both purposes. Citing UC Berkeley researchers Dixson and Worrell, HMH notes that the line between formative and summative is mostly about how results are used, since many assessments built for one purpose can serve the other. The shell-counting note is formative when it changes tomorrow’s maths table. It becomes part of a summative picture when it joins other notes to support an end-of-term judgement. (hmhco)

For curriculum teams, this changes the design question. The question is not “which assessments are formative and which are summative?” It is “how does everyday evidence travel from the classroom into a fair summary?”

Why the school model does not transfer cleanly

In most school settings, summative assessment means tests. HMH describes it as state tests, final exams, reports and projects, usually scored against set criteria and reported as a scale score, percentage or grade. Brightwheel, writing for childcare providers, goes further and frames summative assessment as usually high stakes because it is graded and can have consequences if a child has not mastered key concepts.

That framing is common, but it sits uneasily with early childhood guidance. The NAEYC and NAECS/SDE joint position statement says decisions about young children should not rest on a single assessment, and formal standardised testing should be limited to situations where it is appropriate and useful, such as identifying possible disabilities. It also asks that assessment evidence come from real classroom or family contexts that fit children’s culture, language and experience.

Look at what many digital assessment tools are built around. ProProfs’ 2026 roundup highlights auto-grading, real-time analytics, proctoring, anti-cheating and tab-lock features. These make sense for older students. None of them help you see how a four-year-old solves a problem. (proprofs)

So a fair question for any preschool: if a summative task asks a child to sit still, wait their turn and perform on cue, are we measuring the skill or measuring compliance?

Formative assessment in preschool: the daily work

Source: Buza & Bicaj, International Journal of Instruction, 2022

Formative assessment in preschool is less a set of tasks and more a way of paying attention. Dunphy’s review of early learning assessment explains that when an educator makes judgements about supporting a child’s learning based on observation and interaction, the assessment counts as formative. She lists the main processes as observing, communicating, interviewing, documenting and reflecting, compiling portfolios, and building narratives about learning.

For young children, much of this evidence is not spoken. Dunphy points to research showing three-year-olds build meaning with adults through gaze, facial expression and body movement, not only words. A child who points to the heavier stone, or who quietly widens the base of a falling tower, is showing you something. The teacher’s job is to notice it and ask what it means for the next step.

This is why observation-based assessment sits at the heart of any formative approach, and why collecting evidence of learning through play matters more than adding extra worksheets.

Summative assessment in early childhood: a summary, not a sitting

Summative assessment in early childhood works best as a periodic summary judgement drawn from evidence already collected. It answers questions such as: Where is this child now, compared with the start of the unit? Which learning goals are secure, emerging or not yet seen?

Timing varies. Brightwheel notes that most early childhood programmes run summative assessments quarterly or twice a year. The more important point is what the summary focuses on (mybrightwheel). NAEYC advises that when child assessment is used for programme evaluation, the main focus should be children’s gains over time, shown through observations and classroom work samples, not just scores at exit.

That points summative work towards growth, not ranking. Approaches like pre- and post-unit observation and a well-built preschool portfolio give the summary something real to stand on.

Formative vs summative assessment in early years: side by side

Dimension	Formative assessment (early years)	Summative assessment (early years)
Main purpose	Guide the next teaching move	Summarise learning over a unit or term
Timing	Continuous, during play and lessons	Periodic (end of unit, term or year)
Typical evidence	Observation notes, conversations, gestures, drawings, work in progress	Portfolio selections, rubric judgements, pre/post comparison, progress reports
Who uses it most	Teacher, in the moment	Teacher, leaders, families
What it should change	Tomorrow’s activity, grouping, questions	Next term’s planning, support, family conversations
Risk if misused	Notes pile up but never inform anything	Becomes a one-off “test week” that disrupts play

Where the balance usually breaks

The checklist drift. Dunphy names a real tension: educators may choose the less demanding checklist over time-consuming learning stories. Checklists are not wrong. But when they become the whole system, the “how” of learning disappears and only the “yes/no” remains.

The test week. Some settings keep formative practice rich all term, then pause learning for a week of one-to-one tasks before reports. The summary ends up based on a single performance rather than the term’s evidence.

Evidence that never travels. Teachers write good notes that nobody reads at report time. The summative judgement is then made from memory.

The comparability problem. School groups want results they can compare across campuses. The Winkler study shows the trade-off clearly: tight criteria make comparison easier, while open frameworks fit context better. The practical answer is usually shared, observable descriptors, such as those discussed in four-point developmental scales.

Which leads to a harder question:

If formative notes never reach the report, and the report never changes next term’s planning, which part of the system is actually working?

Questions curriculum teams should ask

• Can every summative judgement be traced back to at least two or three pieces of everyday evidence?
• Are descriptors clear enough that two teachers would reach the same judgement from the same evidence?
• Does the summary show growth from a starting point, not only a final level?

Where KODEIT Pre-K fits

KODEIT Pre-K treats formative and summative work as parts of one structure rather than separate events. Its curriculum materials describe 270+ formative and summative evaluations, including observations, portfolio tasks and milestone tracking, alongside 90+ structured rubrics for tracking developmental progress.

Formative checks are built into the lesson itself. The “Yield” stage of the PLAY Framework closes each lesson with simple assessment such as thumbs up/down, drawing responses and exit-ticket questions, and the lesson flow ends with a stress-free visual review. Each Teacher Book includes an Assessment & Observation section with rubrics, checklists and reflection tools, plus formative and summative assessment guides and progress-tracking tools aligned with developmental milestones. The intent is simple: teachers gather evidence while children play and learn, and the summary grows out of that evidence.

FAQs

Q: Can early years settings use only formative assessment?
A: Formative assessment should be the main activity, but most settings still need a periodic summary for families, transitions and planning. The key is that the summary draws on formative evidence instead of adding a separate test.

Q: Is summative assessment in preschool the same as testing?
A: No. In early years, a summative judgement can come from portfolios, rubric descriptors and pre/post observation. NAEYC guidance limits formal standardised testing to specific, justified situations.

Q: How often should summative assessment happen in preschool?
A: Many programmes summarise progress once a term or twice a year. Frequency matters less than whether each summary shows growth and leads to a planning decision.

Q: What counts as formative evidence for children who cannot yet read or write?
A: Observation notes, photos of work, drawings, gestures, pointing, picture choices and short conversations all count, as long as they connect to a clear learning objective.

Q: Should we use checklists or narrative notes?
A: Both have a role. Checklists are quick for specific skills; narrative notes capture context and strategy. A good system uses checklists for coverage and narratives for depth.