Uncovering the dynamic in static assessment interaction

Abstract

Traditional approaches to standardized assessment are underpinned by the assumption that between-assessor variation in delivery can effectively be eliminated. However, fine-grained analyses of the administration of such assessments (e.g. Maynard and Marlaire, 1992 ) have established that significant subtle interactional variations occur even in procedures with regimented protocols, and that such variations can demonstrably affect examinee performance. In this article we draw upon the Vygotskian thinking that underpins dynamic assessment (DA) to posit that these spontaneous variations may provide clinically relevant information about an examinee’s learning potential. To illustrate this possibility, we apply the methodology of conversation analysis to examine a real-life picture-naming task involving a child with autism. Complex interactional processes above and beyond what might be assumed to occur during assessment are identified. In interpreting these as significant for a deeper understanding of the child’s profile of abilities, we argue that there is clinical value in empirically re-examining routine assessment from alternative methodological perspectives.

Question–response–evaluation sequences in the home interactions of a bilingual child with autism spectrum disorder

“…Additionally, Beatriz's movement to the next item in the question sequence ‘perform[s] the dual action of indicating receipt of a response whilst prompting the next [response]’ (Muskett et al . : 92, see also Margutti and Drew 2014). Muskett et al .…”

“…Much research has been devoted to examining this phenomena in classroom contexts (e.g., Mehan , Sinclair and Coulthard , Hellerman , Waring ) assessment contexts (e.g., Marlaire and Maynard , Muskett et al . , Wilkinson ) and to a lesser extent, home contexts (e.g., Kurkul and Corriveau , Tarplee ).…”

Find the Hidden Object. Understanding Play in Psychological Assessments

“…Interactional studies of assessment, while at times highlighting the limitations of these tools, do not aim to undermine them but rather to provide a broader understanding of how they function, for both interactionist researcher and practitioners to build on to. Following the terminology used in Hasson and Botting (2010), Muskett et al (2012) propose that “static” standardized assessments can be complemented by “dynamic” ones that take into account the interactional vicissitudes of the test administration, highlighting competences that the fixed scoring systems would not pick up. As recalled elsewhere (Fasulo, 2015), a rounder evaluation which would engage the child and also gather information from other sources was a default procedure in the early decades of psychological testing, even for the IQ test, so integrating different evaluations is not necessarily disruptive of the ethos of psychological assessments.…”

The Sally-Anne test: an interactional analysis of a dyadic assessment

“…However, many have problematized the notion that testing could generally stand as ‘an interactionally ‘neutral’ endeavour that is impervious to examiner influence (or indeed examiner contribution, other than via responses to specific stimuli)’ (Muskett et al . : 88). A large body of psychological work has shown that many aspects can impact the performance measured in diverse testing situations.…”

“…CA work has been applied in diverse settings, including doctor–patient consultations (Heath ), standardized assessment situations (Marlaire and Maynard , Maynard , Muskett et al . , involving children with ASD, Wilkinson involving adults with aphasia, and conversations between care staff and clients with intellectual disabilities, Antaki et al . ).…”