Contemporary research has established that assessments are most effective when they provide students (and faculty) with feedback on their learning in relation to the course learning objectives.^ Formative assessments align with the fact that learning is an iterative process and a "work in progress." It's also true that the line between formative and summative assessments is often blurred: an activity, project, or quiz can both result in a grade and provide students with feedback on their progress.

Formative assessments also go hand in hand with low-stakes assessments, that is, assessments that carry relatively little weight in the course grading system. These take the pressure off students so they do not become overwhelmed by the consequences of any one score. Lowering the stakes of any individual assessment is another important practice in inclusive teaching. Historically, faculty with a "testing" approach to assessment, particularly those with large class sizes, may have relied on high-stakes assessments. Under this approach, by using only a handful of assessments, each one ends up carrying a lot of weight in students' grades. In a class with highest-stakes assessments, a student's final grade might be calculated based mostly on midterm and final exam grades. Even if a course grade is determined by students' score on four exams, a student who fails just one exam cannot mathematically earn an A in the class-regardless of their grade on the other three.