The assessment of analogical thinking modifiability among regular, special education, disadvantaged, and mentally retarded children

Abstract

The objectives of the current study were (a) to develop a measure of children's analogical thinking modifiability (CATM) based on the Feuerstein, Rand, and Hoffman (1979) theory of dynamic assessment of cognitive modifiability, (b) to compare the performance of groups assumed to be differentially modified by intervention, (c) to compare CATM performance with performance on a conventional test, and (d) to study qualitative changes after a learning process. Subjects were disadvantaged, regular, and special education kindergarten children (N = 140), and mentally retarded children (N = 20). The CATM was administered together with the Ravens Colored Progressive Matrices (RCPM) in a balanced order. Disadvantaged and regular children achieved higher gain scores than other groups in both none-or-all and partial credit methods (p less than .01). The MR and the special education groups showed small gains according to the none-or-all credit method; however, according to the partial credit method, the MR group showed high gains and the special education group a performance decrease. Performance scores on the CATM were higher than on the RCPM, especially in comparison to the B8-B12 items--differences reach a peak of 61% and 67% for the disadvantaged and regular groups, respectively. Qualitative analysis indicated that form mistakes were most resistant to change, whereas color mistakes were most easy to modify. Results were explained within Feuerstein's theoretical framework of cognitive modifiability. Impaired cognitive functions as well as analytic versus synthetic processes were suggested to explain group differences.

The Development of Interactive-Dynamic Approaches to Assessment of Learning Potential

“…The development of the testing movement has been paralleled, especially in recent years, by dissatisfaction and critical arguments from both professional and lay critics (e.g., Baily & Harbin, 1980;Bronfenbrenner, 1979;Brown & Ferrara, 1985;Feuerstein, Rand, & Hoffman, 1979;Gamlin, 1989;Gould, 1981;Haney, 1981;Haywood, Filler, Shifman, & Chatelanat, 1975;Lidz, 1987b;Mercer, 1975;Minick, 1987;Missiuna & Samuels, 1988;Tzuriel, 1989a;Tzuriel & Klein, 1985;Tzuriel, Samuels, & Feuerstein, 1988;Vernon, 1979;Vygotsky, 1978). The dissatisfaction has been nourished by humanistic trends that have focused on the individual; they emphasize the unique environmental factors that block or facilitate the fulfillment of human potential.…”

“…Together with the growing concern over the uses and abuses of standard tests, there have been attempts to modify the testing procedures and suggest novel assessment approaches (Brown & Ferrara, 1985;Budoff, 1967Budoff, , 1987Carlson & Wiedl, 1978Feuerstein, et al, 1979;Guthke, 1982;Haussermann, 1958;Haywood & Switzky, 1974, 1986Lidz & Thomas, 1987;Mearig, 1987;Paour 1979;Tzuriel, 1989a;Tzuriel & Klein, 1985, 1986Vygotsky, 1929Vygotsky, , 1962Vygotsky, , 1978. The need for change in assessment procedures can be conceptualized on both molar and molecular levels.…”

“…Special efforts have been made recently to extend interactive assessment to preschool children (Burns, 1983;Lidz & Thomas, 1987;Mearig, 1987;Missiuna & Samuels, 1989;Savron, 1989;Tzuriel, 1989aTzuriel, , 1989bTzuriel & Caspi, in press;Tzuriel & Eran, 1990;Tzuriel & Ernst, 1990;Tzuriel & Klein, 1985.…”

Avaliação cognitiva psicométrica e assistida de crianças com baixa visão moderada

“…Pode-se considerar que as provas assistidas se mostraram adequadas para a avaliação dessas crianças, à semelhança dos dados obtidos por Enumo e Batista (2006b) com crianças com DV. As provas assistidas forneceram indicadores do processo de raciocínio das crianças deste estudo, na medida em que identificaram a variação individual de desempenho e propiciaram a compreensão do funcionamento cognitivo, no que diz respeito às operações cognitivas e aos comportamentos subjacentes ao desempenho infantil na situação de aprendizagem, conforme estudos anteriores realizados com crianças com diferentes necessidades educativas especiais (Batista e cols., 2004;Enumo & Batista, 2006b;Linhares & Enumo, 2007;Paula & Enumo, 2007;Tzuriel, 2001;Tzuriel & Klein, 1985).…”

Habilidades cognitivas, conducta y potencial de aprendizaje en preescolares con síndrome Down

“…130) a evaluar la posibilidad de aprendizaje de una persona que inicialmente posee una ejecución baja en una tarea; para ello, mediante un diseño pretest-intervención/mediación -postest sobre una tarea similar a las utilizadas por los tests de inteligencia tradicionales, permite valorar la capacidad de aprendizaje de un individuo y establecer algunas variables relacionadas con la tarea, el contexto y/o con el propio sujeto que pueden facilitar dicha modificabilidad. Esta metodología ha mostrado su utilidad para poblaciones deficitarias (Budoff, 1969;Calero, 2004;Campione y Brown, 1987;Carlson y Wiedl, 2000;Fernández-Ballesteros y Calero, 2000;Feuerstein, Rand y Hoffman,1979;Feuerstein, Feuerstein, Falik y Rand, 2002;HesselsSachltter, 2002;Lauchlan y Elliott, 2001;Lidz y Thomas, 1987;Tzuriel y Klein, 1985), pues diferentes autores han puesto de manifiesto la modificabilidad cognitiva (el aumento significativo de puntuaciones tras la fase de intervención) de niños con déficits intelectuales, de aprendizaje y/o de lenguaje y son muchos los que ven en este tipo de evaluación un importante instrumento de apoyo psicopedagógico y una oportunidad para mejorar los procesos de enseñanza-aprendizaje dado que la fase de mediación promueve capacidades de autorregulación del aprendizaje y la adquisición de estrategias metacognitivas (Fuchs, Fuchs y Hamlett, 1994;Lidz y Gindis, 2003;Samir y Lazerovitz, 2007;Sternberg y Grigorenko, 2003;Rodrí-guez, 2005). Su objetivo no es sólo medir la ejecución de los sujetos, sino su posibilidad de aprendizaje, su fin no es el pronóstico académico, entendido del modo tradicional, sino la estimación de la posibilidad de aprovechamiento de diferentes programas de entrenamiento cognitivo.…”