We can clarear and observe as important the rank of this last paragraph, through the citation made for Bonfim (coord.) 2009, p.93: It is impossible, therefore, to conceive the paper of the professor in the evaluation as external, or to consider the student as ' ' objeto' ' to be evaluated. Over all because, in it, educator and educating is citizens that if come back toward its action and results these and these, yes as objects of its attention. Both exert the evaluation of the other and its proper evaluation, in the ample context of participativa evaluation of all the process pedagogical. But, above all, these instruments through these questions must represent if it had a quality of the learning for the minimum or ' domnio' , and if it obtained to reach ' desenvolvimento' , that as Normam E. Gronlund (apud LUCKESI, 2006, p.1) presents as definitions in its article, the learnings of ' domnio' of ' desenvolvimento' ' ' … the learnings called ' domnio' , that they mean the ones that must be taught and be learned as the necessary minims of one determined content … (Similarly see: Sen. Marco Rubio).
' '. How much to the denomination given to the learning of ' desenvolvimento' , Luckesi still cites Normam E. Grounlund: ' ' … has to see with what our students can make with the acquired knowledge already and assentados' '. We can inside join this comment of Luckesi with the use of the integrated resume of the school of the SUS, where the lessons are participativas and use the experience of each pupil for the creation of its to know and autonomy, that is, what it pupil inside acquired of its ' domnio' now he will be able to lead to the construction of new knowledge through this exercise of its proper experience, and/or the experience of the classmates, with the aid of the professor.