School evaluation and its influences on the teaching-learning process

DOI: 10.32749/
5/5 - (4 votes)



ROSA, Nelma Simone Santana [1], PIRES, Jorge da Silva [2]

ROSA, Nelma Simone Santana. PIRES, Jorge da Silva. School evaluation and its influences on the teaching-learning process. Revista Científica Multidisciplinar Núcleo do Conhecimento. Year. 07, Ed. 02, Vol. 03, pp. 186-206. February 2022. ISSN: 2448-0959, Access link:, DOI: 10.32749/


School evaluation should be considered an activity of monitoring and transformation of the teaching-learning process and that, therefore, cannot be generated as a precast or restricted act or only through exams and tests that will define the intellectual capacity of students. Thus, considering the implications that the evaluation presents in the educational process, it emerges as a guiding question: what is the influence of school evaluation on the teaching and learning process? The main objective of the study is to discuss the evaluation and what it can influence in the teaching-learning process in the school environment. This is qualitative research, which has as an approach the dialectical method, which prescribes the various changes in the evaluation process, since the analysis of the material is deepened within an interpretative and social perspective, in order to produce information, discoveries and new questions on the subject. The results and conclusions presented emphasize the idea that the evaluation, when well worked and understood, in a continuous and integrated way when teaching the teacher, serves as a foundation and contributes to the teacher’s efficient ly interfering in the student’s learning.

Keywords: Evaluation; Tests; Process; Teaching-learning.

1. INTRODUCTION         

Evaluation is a phenomenon that involves multiple factors, both conceptual and methodological, because from a long time it has passed through several definitions until reaching the educational field. It is a complex activity that is part of the daily life of the student, the teacher and school relations. Of the student, because only he becomes the target of the system in being considered fit or not of his intellectual capacities and his levels of study. The teacher, because it permeates his teaching practices and curricular skills. And finally, the relationships that are generated between these subjects during and after each cycle of application of the most varied evaluation instruments established by the educational system, with the view that “(…) helps the student learn and the teacher to teach” (PERRENOUD, 1993, p. 173)

Therefore, evaluating is essential for the educational process, especially for the teacher “(…) reflect and analyze on (…) how efficient their work is (…)” (LUCKESI, 2003, p. 83). For a long time, it was believed that the evaluation arose to analyze the learning of students in schools, however, it emerged as a system of social-intellectual control and went through several concepts such as: exams, proof, tests until reaching the definition that we have today.

According to Hoffmann (1996), it is important that students have “the accompaniment (…) at all possible times, to observe their individual results step by step” (HOFFMAN, 1996, p. 55). However, in the midst of this path, the evaluation has been seen as an exclusionary process in the face of inclusive education. This is because it has not yet achieved a level of excellence with regard to the evaluation practices, both of the students, who are evaluated, and of the teachers, who are responsible for performing this task. Given this premise, this study has as main objective to incite about the evaluation and its influences on the teaching-learning process within the school environment with the following question: what is the influence of school evaluation on the teaching and learning process?

Thus, discussions resumed throughout the work on the subject, in order to reflect on the development of the student’s learning with teachers through the evaluation process. In addition, it aims to understand that the evaluation has often been used as a way to retain or approve in the classificatory sense and that part of the teachers continues to use the same procedures. It is important to consider that the act of evaluating is part of the teaching-learning process and, consequently, of the students’ school life. This is a qualitative research, which has as an approach the dialectical method, based on the theoretical contributions of Hoffmann, Luckesi, Perrenoud and other scholars of the subject.


According to Santos (2008), throughout history, the evaluative practice was carried out based on a single objective: control. This was done both through the examination, test or evaluation (SANTOS, 2008, p. 02). In China, in 2205 B.C., the Chinese emperor Shun examined his officers for the army using criteria to select them, in order to promote or fire them by means of classification exams (CHUERI, 2008, p. 54). Other similar information was brought by Weber in 1,200 B.C., where the evaluation was used to “select, among male subjects, those who would be admitted to the public service” (ESTEBAN, 2003, p. 30) or those who had the possibility of achieving positions of prestige and power. The intention to use this method was to maintain the control and social maintenance of individuals, not being used as an educational action instrument.

As described by Luckesi (2003), the examination was carried out by oral or written tests, both in the early sixteenth century, with the pedagogy of the Jesuits for the dissemination of the faith and through education, as at the end of the 17th century, where the Protestant bishop John Amos Comenius, in 1657, published the Didactic Magna and[3] began to defend the exam as a space for learning, always in the intention of the practice of memorization, in which students had to reproduce their results.

(…) tem a função de exame, pois valoriza os aspectos cognitivos com ênfase na memorização; a verificação dos resultados se dá através de provas orais ou escritas, nos quais, os alunos devem reproduzir exatamente aquilo que lhe foi ensinado. A tradição dos exames escolares que conhecemos hoje, em nossas escolas, foi sistematizada nos séculos XVI e XVII, com as configurações da atividade pedagógica produzida pelos padres Jesuítas (séc. XVI) e pelo Bispo John Amós Comênio (fim do séc. XVI e primeira metade do séc. XVII). (LUCKESI, 2003, p. 16).

The term educational evaluation appeared in the 1940s with Ralph Tyler. In Tyler’s conception (1976), the evaluation of learning aims to generate behavior changes in students and should be linked to the elaboration of a curriculum with a planning control. However, the pedagogical consequence of this model is summed up solely in the verification of the changes that have occurred and established by the curriculum, without any connection to the educational development and without meaning of pedagogical proposals and the quality of teaching, where Vasconcelos (1995) makes an observation that “the practice of school evaluation reaches a frightening degree of pressure on students, leading to physical and emotional disorders: malaise, headache, “white”, fear, anguish, insomnia, anxiety, disappointment, negative self-image introjection” (VASCONCELOS, 1995, p. 37)

The term evaluation emerged and became mandatory for all social and educational programs, being part of other areas of knowledge. However, the practice of tests and examinations has not changed since the 16th century, being considered as an instrument of verification and measurement.

Avaliar o aluno deixa de significar fazer um julgamento sobre a aprendizagem do aluno, para servir como momento capaz de revelar o que o aluno já sabe os caminhos que percorreu para alcançar o conhecimento demonstrado, seu processo de construção de conhecimentos, o que o aluno não sabe o que pode vir, a saber, o que é potencialmente revelado em seu processo, suas possibilidades de avanço e suas necessidades para que a superação, sempre transitória, do não saber, possa ocorrer. (ESTEBAN, 2003, p. 19).

According to Luckesi (2005, p. 93), “the Brazilian school operates with verification and not with the evaluation of learning”. Thus, it is understood that the idea of formative evaluation in relation to curricula emerged through Scrive in 1967 and was expanded by Bloom in 1971 by positivist thinking, bringing a conception of evaluation by instructional decisions and techniques aimed at the cognitive and affective objectives of students (FERRAZ; BELHOT, 2010). However, the evaluation still continued to measure knowledge and raise numerous discussions about pedagogical practice.

In Brazil, in the decades of 60 to 80 Freire originated the liberating pedagogy and proposed an evaluation with a democratic vision with the participation of the student in the process as a transforming agent. Freire (1991) states that “a teaching-learning space will then be a center of debates of ideas, solutions, reflections, where the popular organization is systematizing its own experience” (FREIRE, 1991, p. 16). All these historical facts have shaped the field of evaluation and, to this day, are discussed. There are still its influences, creating a conflict between quantitative or qualitative methods in the actual discussion about evaluation. Lima (2004, p. 109) considers that “the situation of the examination is presented by Ferrer as an inflexible court, where the student suffers tremendous interrogation”.


When evaluating, the teacher needs to look at the various techniques and instruments to enable diagnosis in the classroom. It is necessary to understand what the student responds to and how he responds, considering that the final average is not enough to define his knowledge. It is essential to work in search of new instruments that can “characterize” the learning of this student and reflect to what extent this is collaborating with his performance, that is, what he knows or does not know about a given subject. Considering that the evaluation is part of the process and implies it, it remains the instrument used by the teacher, who needs to change his posture in search of new dilemmas to evaluate him in the classroom, without making learning selective.

As práticas rotineiras da avaliação, a superficialidade teórica no tratamento dessas questões e as críticas de subjetividade possíveis inerentes ao próprio processo provocaram, na maioria das escolas, o retorno ao uso das notas nos sistemas de classificação do estudante. (HOFFMANN, 2001, p. 49).

It is important to consider that schools still cannot see students in the face of knowledge and the ability to learn in proportion to their skills – knowledge acquired in their social and school life and, their skills – how these skills can be worked to enrich learning.

According to Perrenoud (1999), the evaluation should take place throughout the teaching and learning process, not only at the end of tests. For the author “the evaluation when it is continuous provides a significant investment in both school and students and, it is possible to achieve excellence.” (PERRENOUD, 1999, p. 43). Thus, the evaluation needs to be understood and has its significance in two important aspects: an instrument that seeks to know how much the student has learned (or not) in view of the contents worked in the classroom and during his/her period of schooling and, on the other hand, an instrument that should support the teacher with elements for reflection to his practice and thus define priorities in the face of educational actions that need greater attention, because from the evaluation the teacher can ascertain the needs of the students individually and thus promote the necessary pedagogical interventions, not as a means of classification, which for a long time was done, since the school is not the same as in the old days, after all, the students are already part of the process, participating in pedagogical actions.

Considering the legal aspects, LDB[4] 9,394/96, which establishes the principles and purposes of Brazilian education, contemplates education issues broadly regarding the details of the functioning of the educational system. And in this way, article 24 in item V concerns the evaluation with relevance to qualitative points to the student’s performance and their advances in learning.

Art. 24. A educação básica, nos níveis fundamental e médio, será organizada de acordo com as seguintes regras comuns:

V – A verificação do rendimento escolar observará os seguintes critérios:

a) avaliação contínua e cumulativa do desempenho do aluno, com prevalência dos aspectos qualitativos sobre os quantitativos e dos resultados ao longo do período sobre os de eventuais provas finais;

b) possibilidade de aceleração de estudos para alunos com atraso escolar;

c) possibilidade de avanço nos cursos e nas séries mediante verificação do aprendizado;

d) aproveitamento de estudos concluídos com êxito;

e) obrigatoriedade de estudos de recuperação, de preferência paralelos ao período letivo, para os casos de baixo rendimento escolar, a serem disciplinados pelas instituições de ensino em seus regimentos. (BRASIL, 2005, p. 15).

Based on the proposals proposed by the National Curriculum Parameters (PCNs) it is necessary to overcome the traditional conception that has long persisted in history, as restricted “… to the judgment about successes or failure of the student”, and today, aims to understand it as an integral and intrinsic part of the educational process,” “… which has the function of feeding, sustaining and guiding pedagogical intervention…” (BRASIL, MEC, 1997, p. 55), in the most diverse variations of learning.

As for the evaluation criteria, they raise to learning expectations, being based on the objectives and organization of contents consistent with the discipline or for the course or for the cycle, with its particularities in each stage of the process and according to a given situation, providing for establishing structural and cognitive conditions, in which students can have good experiences to be led to the progression of socialization in the context of their abilities.

Therefore, it is worth mentioning that the evaluation can only be efficient if it is consclose to or is related to “… didactic situations proposed to the students’ previous knowledge and the challenges they are able to face” (BRASIL, 1999, p. 81), aiming at learning the social, cognitive and intellectual issues of this subject in the school environment and ensuring their right to learn as governed by the law.


The need to evaluate will always be present in the school space, although it can, with effective effect in what can be proposed, the improvement of the entire educational process. Perrenoud (1993) considers that evaluation is a reciprocal process between the student and the teacher, where he teaches and learns, and “(…) learning is never linear, they proceed by trials, by trial and error, hypotheses, setbacks and advances.” (PERRENOUD, 1993, p. 173). However, Luckesi (2005) reinforces that “educational action centered on the teacher’s person was the foundation of traditional pedagogy”. (LUCKESI, 2005, p. 22). According to the author, in traditional pedagogy, teaching is centered on the role of the teacher, and it is up to the student to be the passive receiver of information.

This relationship established for many years has always placed the teacher as the responsible for transmitting the contents and classifying students according to their performance in the tests, tests or evaluations. “A fairly common feature of teaching is the use and abuse of memorization. Schools with this characteristic are often called traditional.” (MORETTO, 2005, p. 13). Evaluation, therefore, is not a ready and finished matter, it should be directed to learning and doing it, and vice versa.

For Haydt (2004):

A avaliação é um processo contínuo e sistemático, portanto, ela não pode ser esporádica nem improvisada, mas, ao contrário, deve ser constante e planejada. Nessa perspectiva, a avaliação faz parte de um processo mais amplo que é o processo ensino-aprendizagem. (HAYDT, 2004, p. 13)

In this sense, what is outlined is that the evaluation has to assume a reflective role, where the teacher has the possibility of returning to what has been accomplished, opportunistizing new dimensions to stand out the essential aspects of efficiency and effectiveness. However, if it is not well planned it may be effective, but not efficient. Thus, declares Moretto (2005):

A avaliação é eficaz quando o objetivo proposto pelo professor foi alcançado. A eficiência está relacionada ao objetivo e ao processo desenvolvido para alcançá-lo. Diremos que a avaliação é eficiente quando o objetivo proposto é relevante e o processo para alcançá-lo é racional, econômico e útil. Portanto, para que a avaliação seja eficiente, é preciso que seja também eficaz. (MORETTO, 2005, p. 100).

Despite so many changes in society, it can be observed, within schools, latent postures of a traditional education seen in the sixteenth century, in which evaluation is used as an instrument of punishment, classification and exclusion, where the teacher’s practice in this opinion assumes a decisive role. Just like the school, the students are no longer the same as they were in the old days. Today they have the freedom to expose opinions, power of speech, raise hypotheses and build paths that lead them to challenge their knowledge, that is, to change a posture within the educational paradigm is to conceive a dialectical process of construction and above all social, in which the student is part. Luckesi (2004) clarifies:

O ato de avaliar a aprendizagem implica em acompanhamento e reorientação permanente da aprendizagem. Ela se realiza através de um ato rigoroso de diagnóstico e reorientação da aprendizagem tendo em vista a obtenção dos melhores resultados possíveis, frente aos objetivos que se tenha à frente. E, assim sendo, a avaliação exige um ritual de procedimentos, que inclui desde o estabelecimento de momentos no tempo, construção, aplicação e contestação dos resultados expressos nos instrumentos; devolução e reorientação das aprendizagens ainda não efetuadas. Para tanto, podemos nos servir de todos os instrumentos técnicos hoje disponíveis, contanto que a leitura e interpretação dos dados seja feita sob a ótica da avaliação, que é de diagnóstico e não de classificação. (LUCKESI, 2004, p. 4).

In this way, it is reiterated that it is necessary to be open to changes that have occurred in the world and consequently in the educational context. In the midst of all this transformation, there are subjects capable of promoting and establishing learning relationships.

Attention to the quality of teaching requires knowing the types of evaluation and how much they predominantly influence pedagogical action, which is a crucial point within the educational process.


The educational system has often been retained in the evaluation “(…) disciplinarian, punitive and discriminatory, as a result, essentially, of the corrective action of the teacher” (HOFFMANN, 1998, p. 87), since she is claiming to verify what the student has learned during his/her school period. Thus, it is assumed that the student learns in the same way, at the same time and acquires sufficient knowledge to face the following years, otherwise he will be disapproved for the next stage of teaching, thus repeating a series until he recovers what is taught in the room. The influence of this summative conception includes contents, objectives and grades attributed that determine the student’s approval of the studied learning. This type of evaluation is also called classificatory, is based on two aspects: the classification, which determines at what level of knowledge the student has reached up to the final stage of his studies with his/her grades and, the approval, which determines whether or not he is able to move forward in his level of use.

A avaliação escolar, nessa perspectiva excludente, seleciona as pessoas, suas culturas e seus processos de conhecimento, desvalorizando saberes; fortalece a hierarquia que está posta contribuindo para que diversos saberes sejam apagados, percam sua existência e se confirmem com a ausência do conhecimento. (ESTEBAN, 2003, p. 15).

Hoffmann (1996) disagrees with the evaluation being classificatory and criticizes how this way of evaluating, considering that “much more was taught about how to take tests and how to assign averages, than if we worked with the meaning of this practice to benefit the student and our own work” (HOFFMANN, 1996, p. 185). Following the same aspect, Luckesi (2005) also notes that “instead of summative evaluation, we should use the expression “final results”, considering that these results will always be positive if they were effectively constructed as the desired results” (LUCKESI, 2005, p. 1).

Therefore, it is worth noting that for more than one day there is no note or concept, it is important to understand that the evaluation is necessary and is a formal requirement of the educational system and there will always be a need to continue existing to enable paths to development and alleviate the problems existing in the school environment.


According to LDB 9.394/96, in Art. 23, Item V, students should be evaluated continuously, considering their qualitative aspects throughout the school period and it is up to the teacher to accompany them. Therefore, students are now assisted according to their learning failures, which are cut for their individual performance. This attitude is consistent with the formative evaluation and has the influence of “(…) information about his progress in learning by making him know his advances, as well as his difficulties, in order to overcome them (…)” (HAYDT, 1997, p. 292-293), where we search for what remains to be learned and what needs to be improved, based on the errors and successes acquired in the process.

From the point of view of Villas Boas (2006), formative evaluation is the trajectory of learning construction, both of the student and of the teacher, by the possibility of analyzing the progress of the students as well as their learning.

Já a avaliação na concepção formativa consiste no ato de avaliar tanto a trajetória de construção das aprendizagens e dos conhecimentos dos educandos, como também o trabalho do professor, por permitir analisar (…), de maneira frequente e interativa, o progresso dos alunos, (…) e (…) para identificar o que eles aprenderam e o que ainda não aprenderam, para que venham a aprender e para que reorganizem o trabalho pedagógico. (VILLAS BOAS, 2006, p. 4-5).

Considering what the author mentions, it is important that the teacher understands that through this type of evaluation he can detect and identify the deficiencies presented during the students’ school year, because it occurs throughout the teaching process. Haydt (2004) clarifies that this evaluation performs a control function that “aims fundamentally to determine whether the student gradually and hierarchically dominates each stage of the instruction” and offers “(…) information about his progress in learning making him known his advances, as well as his difficulties, in order to overcome them” (HAYDT, 2004, p. 17), which also allows the teacher to restructure and improve his didactic work. It is worth remembering that, according to Sant’anna (2001), the formative evaluation modality has the function of informing and not classifying as the previous one, since it informs the student and the teacher about the results they are achieving during the progress of the activities, in addition to pointing out, locating, discriminating deficiencies and shortcomings, to eliminate them and provide action feedback.

Formativa tem como função informar o aluno e o professor sobre os resultados que estão sendo alcançados durante o desenvolvimento das atividades; melhorar o ensino e a aprendizagem; localizar, apontar, discriminar deficiências, insuficiências, no desenvolvimento do ensino-aprendizagem para eliminá-las; proporcionar feedback de ação (leitura, explicações, exercícios) (SANT’ANNA, 2001, p. 34).

In this way, it is essential that the teacher review his practice and understand that the student is able to improve his “mistakes” through his pedagogical orientations. Evaluating requires renouncing old paradigms and designing alternatives for recovering failures that have greatly affected the educational process. For this, it must be planned in order to fully achieve the objectives proposed since the beginning of the school year.


The current practice of evaluation in the school context has presented itself with the function of classifying and not diagnosing how it should be and, this classification, is defined in numbers that together turn into grades and determine who is able to move forward in school years. It is noteworthy that the teacher needs to understand why he is evaluating and why to evaluate. Therefore, it is necessary that this understanding occurs in order to conduct the evaluation process in the best way, in order to readjust the action plans through an always constant, critical and participatory reflection.

Luckesi (2005) states that:

Para que a avaliação educacional escolar assuma o seu verdadeiro papel de instrumento dialético de diagnóstico para o crescimento, terá de se situar e estar a serviço de uma pedagogia que esteja preocupada com a transformação social e não com a sua conservação. (LUCKESI, 2005, p. 44).

In view of the above, it is necessary to understand that the evaluation will cease to be authoritarian if the context of the models and practices of education cease to be authoritarian. In this idea, the evaluation needs to be committed to a historical-critical proposal, where the student perceives his role in society. When the teacher uses this type of evaluation, diagnostic or analytical type, he proposes an action to probe the situation and the development of learning, which can contribute to the verification of what the student has learned and how he has learned in his/her entire school trajectory, making it possible to know the reality of the teaching-learning process through the previous knowledge of each student, your skills or knowledge already acquired.

Also according to Luckesi (2003):

A avaliação tem a tarefa de ser diagnóstica, ou seja, deverá ser o instrumento dialético do avanço, terá de ser o instrumento da identificação de novos rumos. A avaliação deverá verificar a aprendizagem não a partir dos mínimos possíveis, mas sim a partir dos mínimos necessários. (LUCKESI, 2003, p. 43-44).

Diagnostic or analytical evaluation presents with three intentions. The first is to differentiate the reality of each student in the process. Another is to verify the skills of these students. Finally, it is to identify through them the causes of recurrent learning difficulties. Thus, it is understood that it is essential to create possibilities through evaluative instruments used in the classroom, but, nevertheless, “for diagnostic evaluation to be possible, it is necessary to understand and perform it committed to a pedagogical conception” (LUCKESI, 2005, p. 82) and focused on the construction of knowledge within a participatory and critical curriculum in the society in which one lives.


When it comes to evaluation, it is soon related to the expressions of taking exams, exams, grades, repeating or following the school year. These expressions are the result of a pedagogical conception that lasted for many years, but which still reflects in our times, because it has always been linked only to the role of the teacher in the teaching process and not in learning, where the student has always been seen as a receptive being. However, within a more modern conception, education aims at a look of multiple experiences, in view of cognitive, social and motor development in students. In this approach, Freire (1999) considers that the individual is an active and participative being of his own knowledge.

Se a possibilidade de reflexão sobre si, sobre seu estar no mundo, associada indiscutivelmente à sua ação sobre o mundo, não existe no ser, seu estar no mundo e se reduz a um não poder transpor os limites que lhe são impostos pelo próprio mundo, do que resulta que este ser não é capaz de compromisso. É um ser imerso no mundo, no seu estar adaptado a ele e sem ter dele consciência. (FREIRE, 1999, p. 16).

Therefore, the evaluation has its value and its influences when the student can in fact become aware of his performances and failures to continue advancing in the construction of his knowledge and thus maturing at each stage of his life. It includes so many dimensions and is not reduced only in throwing notes. The evaluation of learning seeks to go beyond the simple application of tests or tests. It verifies the student’s performance in order to obtain information that can support their awareness of the teacher, in order to create and enable solutions. Thus, as Demo (1996) declares, “evaluation is not an end in itself. It is procedural and methodological expedient, which receives its greatest reason for being of the purposes for which it is intended.” (DEMO, 1996, p. 33)

In this assumption, the evaluation dazzles all education. It goes through all school procedures and influence on pedagogical doing and learning. And, if the movements of society require a new school model, this does not differ from a new model for the constitution of evaluation processes, considering that it must ascertain whether the proposed objectives were achieved according to the individualities, experiences, environment, characteristics and totality of each individual.

From Hoffmann’s point of view (2001) the “teacher-student relationship, via evaluation, constitutes a moment of communication for the two subjects, in which each of them will be interpreting (…) and reflecting on the content, (…) the realization of learning” (HOFFMANN, 2001, p. 78). With this, it can be considered that learning happens from the moment the teacher creates situations that prioritize dialogue, as well as stimuli that can sharpen the students’ curiosity and questions, for the search and creation of answers that can improve the degree of their learning. And for this to happen, it is necessary to be significant, where it comes to consider previous experiences, the different types of relationships between events and situations to trigger behavior changes and contributing to the most diverse situations in the school environment.

Se pretendermos uma outra compreensão do processo de avaliação, ou melhor, se o objetivo é que ela exerça o seu papel no processo de aprendizagem, como um meio e não um fim em si mesma, primeiramente teremos que romper com o caráter classificatório e seletivo do sistema escolar da sociedade capitalista, redimensionando a avaliação no sentido de torná-la um auxiliar no desenvolvimento dos alunos, possibilitando-lhes a superação de dificuldades, não enfatizando resultado de aprendizagens (produto) em detrimento do processo de aprendizagem. (BERTAGNA, 2006, p. 77).

Starting from this concept, it is understood that this posture of knowledge construction portrayed by the author requires a change of pedagogical conception, which also implies a change of posture to the evaluation process. Both evaluation and pedagogical action, in its entirety, can find new paths that will allow students to be driven to assume an active role in the educational process and thereby develop even more learning, so the importance of evaluating.


The need to evaluate will always be present. No matter the occasion, standard or standard. There is no escaping this need, although it can be inferred that the evaluation process has numerous purposes and goes far beyond what has been presented, the intention must be to be an employee, in order to know the student better and seek to distinguish their skills and abilities, their interests and their protagonism, so that an assertive planning can be done and, thus, manage the results of the evaluation as a starting point and then come to see what really needs to be learned by this student.

Bicudo (2002) argues about the purposes for which the evaluation should be promoted. She points out that:

A avaliação do aluno na sala de aula tem como propósito promover o aperfeiçoamento do ensino que vem sendo oferecido. Avalia-se para identificar as necessidades e prioridades, situar o próprio professor e o aluno no percurso escolar. Nesse sentido, a primeira questão que orienta um planejamento avaliativo é definir para que se está realizando uma avaliação. Que decisões precisam tomar. Que subsídios espera-se obter do processo avaliativo. (BICUDO, 2002, p. 144).

Considering that each student has its peculiarities it is necessary to understand that each one learns differently, some slower, others more accelerated, but all learn. This is the key point of the question of pedagogy of learning. It is necessary to understand all the steps taken by the student in his development phase, to make the diagnosis sustainable and efficient that can raise the trajectory about: what he has learned, what he already knows about information, what he can improve, so that this generates new knowledge that is developed in the teaching and learning process, that should be dynamic, subtle and in permanent construction. In this path, the evaluation comes as an inclusive character, where the student is encouraged to progress more and more in search of new knowledge and expanding their worldview. Teachers need to know how all this is done, in this way to adopt a new pedagogical action, as Delval (1998) puts it:

Tentará estimular a atividade do próprio sujeito, que é o fator fundamental na construção do conhecimento. Para tanto, deve-se partir dos problemas do próprio ambiente para que o sujeito veja que o conhecimento não é apenas algo que aparece nos livros, mas que serve, principalmente, para resolver problemas e explicar coisas do seu interesse. (DELVAL, 1998, p. 147).

This time, the evaluative action provides information for educators to reflect on their pedagogical practice, with the intention of identifying the students’ previous knowledge in order to assist them in their development process. Teaching and evaluating need to have correspondence and should be done in a continuous process, where it will question the form taught, its adaptation to the various ways of developing learning and taking into account the contextualization of the historical facts experienced by the students, which strongly influences the way they learn. For this, it is necessary that this professional say goodbye to his old armor and redirect his planning to flexibility and teaching strategies, because “learning meanings and teaching is opportunistic this construction”. (MORETO, 2005, p. 58).


One of the perspectives within the teaching process is to institute evaluative practices that focus on the student as a whole, which can occur in freedom of expression, providing him with projects aimed at his participation in the constructions and/or productions of works, having moments of discussions about certain subjects and in various activities in which he himself makes initiatives or decisions and, with this, promote the development of capacities so that the teacher understands what to do in the face of these observations.

Hoffmann (1998) points out that within the evaluative practice, the teacher must:

Oportunizar aos alunos muitos momentos para expressar suas ideias e retomar dificuldades referentes aos conteúdos introduzidos e desenvolvidos; realizar muitas tarefas em grupo para que os próprios alunos se auxiliem nas dificuldades (princípio da interação entre iguais), mas garantindo o acompanhamento de cada aluno a partir de tarefas avaliativas individuais em todas as etapas do processo. (HOFFMANN, 1998, p. 125).

Based on this premise, it is necessary to seek bold forms of evaluation. There is no escaping the systematic model, because it needs to follow standards and rules to meet the proposed objective, which is learning. This model needs to be different from that traditional model until today applied and exclusive to evidence, which has always influenced to define who would be approved or not, learned this or that, but that should be used in various pedagogical situations. In this, Loch (2000) is very clear when he says that evaluate “(…) it is not to give grades, to average, to fail or to approve the students” (LOCH, 2000, p. 31), but to outline mechanisms that will contribute to the adjustments of learning.

In terms of evaluative instruments such as “(…), exams, seminars, presentations, interviews, observation, work, tasks, exhibitions, diaries, …, classroom exercises (…)” (CUNHA, 2014, p. 11), these can incorporate the proposal of written evaluation with questions that may add to the lives of students. This practice should be worked with the aim of promoting creativity, awareness and focusing on the importance of writing for textual comprehension. Another possibility is the oral evaluation, starting from reflection, the process of being in the world, debates between individuals, visual and body expression, with themes that can be discussed in the social, cultural and political context of society. A highlight is that the practice of the test as an evaluation does not need to be definitively abolished, as long as it is not seen as a single means, but as another instrument to be used in the standardization of the evaluation system. However, Cunha (2014) clarifies that:

Nesse sentido, o instrumento não pode ser confundido com a avaliação, ele é uma ferramenta didática, faz parte da avaliação, mas os instrumentos por si só, não dizem nada. Eles só tem sentido para aquele que os interpreta. A avaliação é esta atividade de interpretação que se efetiva enquanto investigação e reflexão sobre as informações apresentadas nos instrumentos. (CUNHA, 2014, p. 1 2).

It is important to consider that evaluation is necessary and fundamental for the improvement of education, both in learning and teaching, but, schools should not continue to act as mere label machines, assigning only grades from zero to ten to tabulate students’ learning or limiting them in their knowledge. Therefore, it is necessary to understand that monitoring is not only evaluating what has already been achieved from results, but also what can be achieved to improve skills inside or outside the classroom.


The evaluation is still much discussed, has undergone several conceptual and methodological changes, after all it is a procedure that implies a triad between the student, the teacher and their school relationships. It needs to provide reflection on the practice, because it refers to a decision-making about what to do, how to do and what to do, to overcome the obstacles that interfere in the students’ learning and, with this, to be able to accompany them and help them in their eventual difficulties.

Through this, it was found through this study that the classification in the evaluation does not collaborate in the advancement of learning or allow the teacher to understand the stages of development of each student, showing that this is a practice that needs to be reflective, so that the evaluation cannot be seen only as an instrument for approval or disapproval, but as an instrument for diagnosing a situation to define the appropriate referrals for learning.

Another point analyzed is the way the school has evaluated the teaching-learning process and what this has reflected in the present times. The school has always worked on the basis of conteudist modes and classification and, when asked who it benefits or who interests, one questions the teaching it is making available to society.

In addition to providing these analyses based on authors, such as Hoffmann, Luckesi, Perrenoud and others to achieve the proposed objective of this work on school evaluation, it also made it possible to answer the following question: what is the influence of school evaluation on the teaching and learning process?, given that it was understood that the evaluation when understood has a very great influence on the students’ learning, be positive, where it promotes mechanisms to help them with their difficulties and their progress or in a negative way, when there is the intention of only evaluating them in the contents studied, qualifying them fit or not for the following year. It was noticed that the evaluation also influences the teacher’s action, because it helps him to know better his student, his skills and abilities, his style and interests necessary for the construction of his knowledge, however, this professional needs to undress his old paradigms rooted by a traditional practice.

Therefore, it is emphasized that the reflections presented here allow us to reinforce that the evaluation needs to be continuous to precisely enable a holistic view of the process and that it should be integrated when making the teacher’s diary, considering, in its planning, the objectives that favor the cognitive, motor, social and affective aspects of the students and, thus, be able to help them in the development of their learning.


BERTAGNA, Regiane Helena. Avaliação Escolar: Pressupostos Conceituais. In: BERTAGNA, Regiane Helena; MEYER, João Frederico da Costa Azevedo. O Ensino, a Ciência e o Cotidiano.  p. 61-81.Editora Alínea, 2006.

BRASIL. Parâmetros curriculares Nacionais. Ministério da Educação. Brasília: MEC, 1997.

_______. Lei nº 9.394, de 20 de dezembro de 1996: Lei de Diretrizes e Bases da Educação Nacional: Brasília, 1999.

_______. Lei de Diretrizes e Bases da Educação Nacional. Lei 9.394/96, de 20 de dezembro de 1996. Dispositivos Constitucionais. Senado Federal: Brasília, 2005.

BICUDO, Maria Aparecida Viggiani. et al. Formação do educador e avaliação educacional. Avaliação institucional. Ensino e aprendizagem. São Paulo: Unesp, 2002.

CHUEIRI, Mary Stela. Concepções sobre a Avaliação Escolar. Estudos em Avaliação Educacional, v. 19: p. 49-64, 2008.

CUNHA, Kátia Silva. O campo da avaliação: tecendo sentidos. Ensaios Pedagógicos: Revista Eletrônica do Curso de Pedagogia das Faculdades OPET, Pernambuco, p. 1-14, 2014. Disponível em:–tecendo-sentidos. Acesso em: 06 jan. 2022.

DELVAL, Juan. Crescer e pensar: a construção do conhecimento na escola. Porto Alegre: Artes Médicas, 1998.

DEMO, Pedro. Avaliação sob o olhar propedêutico. Campinas, SP: Papirus, 1996.

ESTEBAN, Maria Teresa (Org.). Avaliação: uma prática em busca de novos sentidos. Rio de Janeiro: DP&A, 2003.

FERRAZ, Ana Paula do Carmo Marcheti.; BELHOT, Renato Vairo. Taxonomia de Bloom: revisão teórica e apresentação das adequações do instrumento para definição de objetivos instrucionais. Gest. Prod.: São Carlos, v. 17, n. 2, p. 421-431, 2010.

FREIRE, Paulo.  A Educação na Cidade. São Paulo: Cortez; 1991.

____________. Educação e mudança. Rio de Janeiro: Paz e Terra, 1999.

HAYDT, Regina Célia Cazaux. Avaliação do processo ensino-aprendizagem. São Paulo: Ática, 2004.

HOFFMANN, Jussara Maria Lerch. Avaliação Mediadora. Porto Alegre: Editora Mediação, 1996.

___________________________. Avaliação Mediadora: uma prática em construção da pré-escola à universidade. 14ed. Porto Alegre: Mediação, 1998.

___________________________. Avaliação, mito e desafio: uma perspectiva construtivista. 31ed. Porto Alegre: Mediação, 2001.

LIMA, Adriana de Oliveira. Avaliação escolar: Julgamento ou construção. 9. ed. Petrópolis: Vozes, 2004.

LOCH, Jussara M. de Paula. Avaliação: uma perspectiva emancipatória. In: Química na Escola, nº 12, novembro, 2000, p.31.

LUCKESI, Cipriano Carlos. Avaliação da aprendizagem na escola: Reelaborando conceitos e recriando a prática. Salvador: Malabares Comunicação e Eventos, 2003.

_____________________. Considerações gerais sobre avaliação no cotidiano escolar. IP – Impressão Pedagógica. Curitiba, PR: Editora Gráfica Expoente, 2004.

_____________________. Avaliação da aprendizagem escolar: estudos e proposições. 17. ed. São Paulo: Cortez, 2005.

MORETTO, Pedro Vasco. Prova: Um momento privilegiado de estudo não é um acerto de contas. 5. ed. Rio de Janeiro: CP&A, 2005.

PERRENOUD, Philippe. Não mexam na minha avaliação! Para uma aprendizagem sistêmica da mudança pedagógica. In: ESTRELA, A.; NÓVOA, A. Avaliações em educação: novas perspectivas. Porto: Porto Editora,1993.

___________________. Avaliação: da excelência à regulação das aprendizagens entre duas lógicas. Porto Alegre: Artmed, 1999.

SANT’ANNA, Ilza Martins. Por que avaliar? Como avaliar? Critérios e instrumentos. 7. ed. Vozes: Petrópolis, 2001.

SANTOS, Jussara Gabriel dos. História da avaliação: do exame à avaliação diagnóstica. Artigo científico. Faculdade de Educação. Campus Santa Mônica. Universidade Federal de Uberlândia: MG, 2008.

TYLER, Ralph W. Princípios básicos do currículo e ensino. 3ª Ed. Tradução de Leonel Vallandro. Porto Alegre: Globo, 1976.

VASCONCELOS, Celso dos S. Concepção Dialética-Libertadora do processo de Avaliação Escolar. São Paulo, Libertad, 1995.

VILLAS BOAS, Benigna Maria de Freitas. Avaliação formativa e formação de professores: ainda um desafio. Linhas Críticas, Brasília, v. 12, n. 22, p.1-21, mar./ jun. 2006.


3. Didactica magna (Latin) or Great Didactic, also known as the Treatise of Universal Art of Teaching All All, is a book by Comenius published in 1657.

4. Lei de Diretrizes e Bases da Educação Nacional – LDB is Law guidelines and bases of national education.

[1] Master’s degree in Educational Sciences from Três Fronteiras University- Asunción-PY, Postgraduate in Management and Teaching at EAD – Faculdade do Leste Mineiro, Postgraduate in Higher Education Teaching – META College, Specialist in Educational Sciences – Current College, Graduated in Pedagogy – UNIFAP/AP. ORCID: 0000-0001-7305-2870.

[2] Advisor. ORCID: 0000-0002-0572-2577.

Submitted: December, 2021.

Approved: February, 2022.

5/5 - (4 votes)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

RC: 108511
Pesquisar por categoria…
Este anúncio ajuda a manter a Educação gratuita
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Temos uma equipe de suporte avançado. Entre em contato conosco!
👋 Hello, Need help submitting a Scientific Article?