Dynamic Assessment of Preschool Children with Special Needs

Abstract

This study compared two methods of intervention in a test-teach-test (dynamic) assessment with 43 special needs preschool children who were demonstrating a variety of language, behavioral, and learning difficulties. The Children's Analogical Thinking Modifiability Test (Tzuriel & Klein, 1987), a dynamic assessment instrument, was administered to two groups of nonrandomly assigned children in four phases: baseline, pretest, teaching, and posttest. During the teaching phase, 21 children received instruction that was contingent upon their particular difficulties and that emphasized the acquisition of generalizable strategies. The remaining 16 children received prescripted, noncontingent instruction when they required assistance. Group composition and pretest performance were found to be nearly identical. Results indicated that the group receiving contingent, individualized instruction (referred to as mediation) performed significantly better on the posttest, while the performance of the group receiving prescripted instruction remained unchanged. Two components of the mediation procedure, specific feedback about performance as compared with general feedback and justification of the process required for solution, were proposed as critical variables for improving the performance of special needs children during dynamic assessment.

Reducing Test Bias Through Dynamic Assessment of Children's Word Learning Ability

“…These findings are consistent with dynamic assessment studies that found that with MLE, children from nonmainstream groups are able to improve their standardized test scores (Carlson & Wiedl, 1980;Feuerstein, Miller, Rand, & Jensen, 1981;Lidz & Macrine, 2001;Lidz & Thomas, 1987;Missiuna & Samuels, 1989). This higher score, or ability to change, is typically considered to be a more valid measure of ability.…”

“…These studies have used MLE in a one-time, pretest-teach-posttest paradigm. Studies with typically developing preschool children (Lidz & Thomas, 1987), children with learning disabilities (Missiuna & Samuels, 1989), and preschoolers with developmental delay (Reinharth, 1989) have demonstrated higher performance for children receiving MLE compared to those in a no-mediation group. The results from these studies suggest that MLE helps children to perform in their zone of proximal development.…”

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

“…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.…”

“…Feuerstein et al (1979Feuerstein et al ( , 1980Feuerstein et al ( , 1987Feuerstein et al ( , 1988 suggested 11 characteristics of MLE; however, only the first three are considered as necessary and sufficient for any interaction to be classified as a mediated interaction: intentionality and reciprocity, meaning, and transcendence. Some authors consider only the first five or six criteria to be important dimensions of MLE (Haywood, 1987;Klein, 1988;Missiuna & Samuels, 1989;Tzuriel & Eran, 1990;Tzuriel & Ernst, 1990). In the following paragraphs the first six MLE criteria are described.…”

“…The functional assessment is conceived as relatively limited in terms of the quantity and quality of changes that are the target of intervention. Missiuna and Samuels (1989) suggested that although the clues and aids given in functional assessment are contingent upon the child's performance, they are not individually modified for the child's unique needs; that is, the help given a child is more-or-less standardized. Because of these limitations some important questions are left unresolved, such as who is affected and in what dimension one is best affected by the intervention.…”