Informal assessment techniques are not always well-developed. In contrast to the standardized formats of formal assessment techniques, informal techniques, such as interviews and classroom tests, may not adhere to certain technical standards. This means the testing may not provide the most valid results. However, it doesn't mean these techniques cannot be sound. Rather, the results depend on how well the educators develop the techniques.
Educators who use informal assessment techniques also have to administer the tests and develop ways of scoring them. This involves developing the tests and the scoring system. The time involved in using informal assessment techniques can make them inconvenient. In contrast, if teachers use formal techniques, they have access to previously determined methods of administering and scoring the tests.
It is not clear how reliable the informal assessment techniques are. There is no uniformity in terms of how educators administer informal assessment techniques. For instance, if an educator uses a take-home test as an assessment technique, he has no control over how the student handles the test. The student may cheat on the test or exceed the time limit the teacher recommended to complete the test.
In addition to informal assessment techniques, there are also formal assessment techniques, such as standardized tests. These tests, such as the Scholastic Aptitude Test for students who plan to go to college, have certain advantages over the informal assessment techniques. They are well-developed and provide reliable outcomes. They serve as a frame of reference to compare the performance of a diverse population. They are also easy to score, considering that the scoring system is predetermined and easy to administer. One shortcoming of formal techniques is that they are suited to the needs of a broad population and educators cannot use them for specific purposes, such as gauging progress related to specific courses.