Developing Cognitive Potential in Vocational High School Students

Narrol, Harvey; Silverman, Harry; Waksman, Mary

doi:10.1080/00220671.1982.10885432

Cited by 11 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Research on dynamic assessment has focused primarily on their use with particular groups: children with learning disabilities (Samuels, Tzuriel, & Malloy-Miller, 1989), with cultural deprivation (Feuerstein, Rand, & Hoffman, 1979) and hearing impairment (Keane, 1987). Dynamic assessment has also been used to evaluate the outcome of intervention programs, such as Feuerstein, Rand, Hoffman, & Miller's (1980) Instrumental Enrichment, for teaching thinking to adolescents (Arbitman-Smith, Haywood, & Bransford, 1984;Narrol, Silverman, & Waksman, 1982;Samuels, Roadhouse, Conte, & Zirk, 1984). However, little research has examined the use of dynamic assessment for evaluating the outcome of preschool intervention programs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating Preschool Programs: The Role of Dynamic Assessment

Samuels¹,

Killip²,

MacKenzie³

et al. 1992

Interactive Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating Preschool Programs: The Role of Dynamic Assessment

Samuels¹,

Killip²,

MacKenzie³

et al. 1992

Interactive Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Research has included culturally disadvantaged adolescents, post-secondary students, educationally delayed adolescents, and adolescents with intellectual disabilities. All studies have reported improved cognitive performance by students (Feuerstein et Howie, Thickpenny, Leaf, & Absolum, 1985;Narrol, Silverman, & Waksman, 1982). However, in a definitive review, Savell, Twohig, and Rachford (1986) concluded that although statistically significant results have been obtained in many IE studies, it is difficult to compare effects across studies due to the use of a wide range of pre and posttest measures.…”

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

“…This is not to say that attempts have not been made, rather that thcir results havc not becn widely available. Apart fTOm the data providcd by the IsraelŸ team (Rand et al, 1979;Feucrstein et al, 1980Feucrstein et al, , 1981, a few articles hace appearcd in the USA (Arbitman-Smith & I-Iaywood, 1980;Narrol, Silverman & Waksman, 1982), Australasia (Howie et al, 1985) and England (Weller & Craft, 1983). Most of the rcsearch in this arca has othcrwi'se been rcportcd at confcrences and in highcr dcgrcc theses.…”

Section: Some ÿ Conceptual Issues In the Evaluation Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feuerstein’s Instrumental Enrichment Programme: Important issues in research and evaluation

Burden

1987

Eur J Psychol Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The key elements underlying Feuerstein's Instrumental Enrichment Programme are described together with the pro, gramme's aims. Suggestions are made as to appropriate ways of evaluating the programme's e[r and a summary of most of the avctitable large and small scale research prior to 1986 is given. This research is itsetf evaluated in the light of previous suggestions and found to be deficient on a number of counts. Nevertheless, a degree of cautious optimista avith regard to the potential effects of FIE is considered warranted. Suggestions are made as to how [uture research might overcome the pit[alls of earlier studies by the application of alternatire evaluation strategies.

show abstract

Developing Cognitive Potential in Vocational High School Students

Cited by 11 publications

References 8 publications

Evaluating Preschool Programs: The Role of Dynamic Assessment

Evaluating Preschool Programs: The Role of Dynamic Assessment

Examining the Links Between Psychoeducational Assessment, Instruction and Remediation

Feuerstein’s Instrumental Enrichment Programme: Important issues in research and evaluation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About