Summative evaluations include conventional assessments such as written examinations. The advantage of this traditional type of assessment is that it clearly documents the mastery of information for most students. This type of assessment, however, is also weak because of its artificial nature, rarely duplicated in noneducational environments like the workplace, and it does not accurately measure the learning of students with certain disabilities.
Oral examinations have the advantage of being more realistic measurements of learning achievements, and this type of summative evaluation is also closer to what will be required beyond graduation: A medical doctor who can perform well in an oral examination is more likely to have the information at hand during surgery. On the other hand, many types of learning mastery cannot be measured under these conditions, particularly in the humanities.
Research papers are an excellent type of summative evaluation in many fields, allowing students to demonstrate mastery of many skills and much information. Unlike written and oral examinations, a research paper also allows a student to reach deeper into material studied, which is a type of formative evaluation as well. Research papers do require careful supervision and considerable time, and are prone to abuse through plagiarism.