By using Shlomo Vinner's credit system concept, we show that summative assessment is a rather vague and underrepresented notion in mathematics education literature. The emotional drive behind this article is expressed in the following questions: How is it possible to look for concrete exclusionary school practices that qualify some and disqualify others without realizing that promotion/exclusion only becomes effective when a certain symbol is officially attached to the name of a student? How is it possible not to notice that promotion/exclusion can only be based on assessment-evaluation of mathematical content ability? How is it possible that mathematics education literature never broaches the consequences of assessment-evaluation on the lives of the students? We argue that these are not due to a temporary blindness of mathematics education research, but, rather, that we are dealing with a symptom. We focus on the dichotomous aspect of summative assessment as potentially loaded with anguish for students and teachers; we call it the splitting moment and endeavor to discuss its consequences for students and teachers.