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

Tzuriel, David; Haywood, H. Carl

doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-4392-2_1

Cited by 43 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Results of this study have shown that the scaffolding applied in the mediation phase of a DA task generates significant improvements in the performance levels showed by the children in the posttest phase results which coincide with previous research (Calero et al, 2009;Lidz, 1992Lidz, , 1997Lidz, , 2004Lidz & Van der Aalsvoort, 2005;Tzuriel & Haywood, 1992).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Scaffolding Young Children: The Utility of Mediation in a Classification Test

Mata

Geert

Aalsvoort

2017

EJREP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Scaffolding Young Children: The Utility of Mediation in a Classification Test

Mata

Geert

Aalsvoort

2017

EJREP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, this static assessment may not inform what one will be able to do in the near future nor does it often reflect one's process of learning, but only what has already been learned (e.g., Sternberg, 1996;Tzuriel & Haywood, 1992). An alternative to static assessment is dynamic assessment (DA).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Construct and incremental validity of dynamic assessment of decoding within and across domains

Cho

Compton

2015

Learning and Individual Differences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The first was a concern about the invalidity of earlier approaches to testing because they provided few opportunities for interaction between the tester and testee; the second was the perception that the requirements of society have moved away from those that spawned and supported standardized psychometric testing. Tzuriel and Haywood (1992) argued that the need for change in assessment procedures has been prompted by the democratization and humanization of the educational system, and the view that standardized, static testing procedures are not uniformly valid across groups within the population. More relevant, they believed, were interactive-or dynamicassessment procedures developed from the work of Haywood and Switzky (1974), Carlson andWiedl (1979), Feuerstein, Rand andHoffman (1979), Brown and Ferrara (1985) among many others.…”

Section: Contemporary Assessment Principles and Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While there have been many versions of interactive assessment (see Haywood & Tzuriel, 1992), the Learning Potential Assessment Device (LPAD) developed by Feuerstein et al (1979) remains the most widely known and used. The LPAD focuses upon the measurement of learning processes using a test-teach-test procedure which combines active teaching and testing while the student is engaged in a problem solving activity.…”

Section: Initiatives From the Interactive Assessment Domainmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining the Links Between Psychoeducational Assessment, Instruction and Remediation

Ashman

Conway

1993

International Journal of Disability, Development and Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The assessment of students' capabilities and learning outcomes has long been considered an important factor in instructional design and program planning and refinement. The information provided by clinicians, however, has not always been presented to classroom teachers in a form that will allow them to amend their classroom practices to the students' advantage. This paper reviews the recent history of psychoeducational testing and examines several attempts to link assessment with instruction within the information processing domain. The authors present a case for the inclusion of testing procedures that inform teachers of students' information processing capabilities and they argue that clinicians and educators must work together to translate these data into effective remediation and instruction practices.Psychological and skill-based assessment has been, and is likely to remain, an ever-present and concerning aspect of regular and special education. School psychologists and counsellors will continue to collect information about students to place them in appropriate educational settings and teachers will evaluate students' progress so that they can judge whether instruction has been successful.Obtaining information about students is an important first step toward understanding their educational needs but it should also lead to decisions about how best to maximize their learning outcomes and provide relevant instruction or remediation. A perusal of the literature on assessment and observations of testing events that occur in schools, however, will show that the overwhelming preoccupation of counsellors, psychologists and many teachers is screening and classification; in other words, with decisions about the status of the individual (Haywood, Brown & Wingenfeld, 1990). One could be forgiven for thinking that there is only limited interest in taking the second step that links assessment with instructional design and program planning. Indeed, Ysseldyke, Algozzine and Thurlow (1991) commented "a Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 02:34 14 June 2016 24Ashman and Conway major issue in assessment is the link between assessment information and instruction ... Unfortunately, much that goes on in the assessment of students with disabilities has very limited relevance to intervention" (p. 199).Why is this so and how can the information derived from formal psychological and psychoeducational assessment assist teachers and program developers to construct and deliver effective remediation and instruction?In this paper, we provide some thoughts on this question. We begin by tracing some of the antecedents of contemporary psychoeducational testing practices, review current testing methods, and comment upon their effectiveness. We argue that the nexus between assessment and classroom practice can be achieved if one focus of assessment and instruction is the students' information processing capabilities. Finally, we describe a general classroom-based assessment model that can facilitate the linking of formal and informal as...

show abstract

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

Cited by 43 publications

References 47 publications

Scaffolding Young Children: The Utility of Mediation in a Classification Test

Scaffolding Young Children: The Utility of Mediation in a Classification Test

Construct and incremental validity of dynamic assessment of decoding within and across domains

Examining the Links Between Psychoeducational Assessment, Instruction and Remediation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About