Your search for all content returned 14 results
- Go to article: Some Issues in Assessment and Intervention in Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities
- Go to article: Contributions From International Conferences of the International Association for Cognitive Education and Psychology
This article is, first of all, a synthesis of the various views on cognitive education (CE) as presented by the guest authors of this issue, and it is also a critical discussion of the field. We discuss how Sternberg’s initial 5 questions were addressed by the authors, and we place these within the larger framework of the scientific literature on CE, metacognition, and dynamic assessment (DA). We try to unveil the strong and weak points of the various approaches, and we discuss some perspectives for the future.
- Go to article: The International Association for Cognitive Education and Psychology and the Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology
- Go to article: Assessing Special Educational Needs in Austria: Description of Labeling Practices and Their Evolution From 1996 to 2013
Assessing Special Educational Needs in Austria: Description of Labeling Practices and Their Evolution From 1996 to 2013
Even if the label special educational needs (SEN) is similarly used in various countries for indicating students with disabilities, the practices and diagnostic criteria leading to this label vary widely. This study aims to clarify the diagnostic process in Austria that leads to labeling. A sample of 169 special needs teachers who regularly write SEN reports participated in the online survey. The survey questions were based on those of a study by Ansperger (1998), who questioned special education teachers writing such reports in 1995–1996. Results show that, although more and more standardized instruments are used, still quite several unstandardized assessments are reported. Little time is available for the assessments, and only few reports include information on future pedagogical/educational intervention. It is concluded that in inclusive education, assessment should be more oriented toward educational intervention to address the diversity in learning needs among students than at diagnosing disabilities.
- Go to article: Pretest Versus No Pretest: An Investigation Into the Problem-Solving Processes in a Dynamic Testing Context
Pretest Versus No Pretest: An Investigation Into the Problem-Solving Processes in a Dynamic Testing Context
Proponents of dynamic testing have advocated its use as a replacement or addition to conventional tests. This research aimed to investigate the effects of using versus not using a pretest on both the outcome on the posttest and the processes used in solving inductive reasoning tasks in dynamic testing using a graduated prompts training. Sixty-seven 7- to 8-year-old children were assigned to either a group that received a pretest or a group that did not receive a pretest, using a randomized blocking procedure. No significant differences were found between both groups of children on posttest accuracy, process measures, number of hints needed during training, amount of time needed for testing, and the prediction of school related measures. This article concluded that the decision of whether or not a pretest is necessary should be based on the research question to be answered because it does not appear to influence posttest results.
- Go to article: External Memory and Verbalization in Students with Moderate Mental Retardation: Theory and Training
Persons with moderate mental retardation were trained to use external memory strategies in order to overcome their working memory limitations. We expected that metacognitive training would allow these individuals to use external memories and that this would be associated with higher recall. It was further hypothesized that the training would be more effective when combined with a short verbalization instruction. Verbalization of one’s own thinking and actions should support and reinforce strategic thinking and structure representation. Verbalization should also permit the participants to acquire or access meta-knowledge, one of the basic components postulated for transfer of strategies. Furthermore, performance in analogical tasks should be improved by transferring the use of external memory strategies. The results show that only some of the participants of the experimental group with and without verbalization used the external memory strategy after training. Those who did use the external memory strategy at posttest performed well with regard to recall performance. We concluded that an external memory strategy is required if the task memory load is high and that the memory performance depends on the use of an external memory aid. The problem of transfer to analogical reasoning tasks remained, most likely because how external memories could be used in such tasks was not made explicit, and did the tasks did not allow much use of external memories.
- Go to article: Estimation of the Predictive Validity of the HART by Means of a Dynamic Test of Geography
In this study, a dynamic measure of school success was used to validate the Hessels Analogical Reasoning Test (HART), a standardized test of children’s learning potential. It is argued that dynamic tests are superior to standard intelligence tests with regard to ecological, construct, and predictive validity. In this context, it is argued that the usual measures of school success, such as tests for reading and mathematics, are not suited for the estimation of the predictive validity of a dynamic measure of general learning capacity (intelligence), especially for children with learning difficulties or mental deficiency. Therefore, the HART was validated with a dynamic measure of school learning. Three versions of a Geography Learning Test were developed for three different age groups. All versions consist of training followed by a test. The results show that: (a) young children need to be familiarized with a test to be able to respond to the items in the way that is expected; (b) the HART posttest measure is a better predictor of learning than the static pretest; and (c) dynamic measures of learning are preferred to static measures.