First of all, it is simply false that formative assessment is “a new way of assessing students.” It was in fact Michael Scrivens who coined the terms “formative” and “summative” assessment way back in 1967, and any teacher who has gone through a university teacher education program will be thoroughly familiar with the distinction. The two types of assessment are distinguished by their purposes. The purpose of summative evaluation is to qualify, that is, to certify that the student has passed the course and has the prerequisites to advance to the next level; it is usually done at the end of the year or the end of a semester. In contrast, the purpose of formative evaluation is to support learning; it provides both the teacher and the learners with information about their progress, what they have mastered or not yet mastered, the kinds of difficulties they are having with the materials, concepts, subject-matter knowledge, etc., and this can help the teacher decide what needs to be reviewed or presented in a different way, what needs further practice, and so on. It thus serves a diagnostic and remedial purpose; it is on-going throughout the course and goes hand-in-hand with teaching. As such, it has absolutely nothing to do with reward and punishment.
It should be emphasized that, with respect to formative evaluation, we are talking about a no-zero policy, not a no-fail policy. Since its purpose is to assess strengths and weaknesses, there has to be a way to distinguish a student who is experiencing serious difficulties with the materials (and hence may receive a failing grade – either an F or some percentage, usually less than 50%) from a student who has not done the assignment. An assignment that is not handed in obviously tells the teacher nothing about that student’s abilities (he or she may be quite bright, but lazy); a zero tells the teacher that the student understands absolutely nothing about the course. It is important for the teacher to know this. All universities use this type of system: students who complete the requirements but do very poorly get a failing grade; students who don’t complete the course requirements receive an INCOMPLETE on their records, which entails that they receive no credits for the course and cannot proceed to the next level in the subject matter concerned; but there is usually a deadline for the student to complete the work, and if he/she doesn’t meet it, the INCOMPLETE will become an F. So, in the end, the “consequences” are the same: as far as the Alberta education system is concerned, a student who does not meet the requirements of the high school leaving diploma (i.e. does not complete all the obligatory courses) will not receive the diploma.