This article summarizes some of the key limitations underlying existing standardized test use with Hispanic students; it also explores recent developments in testing, teaching, and learning research that suggest major improvements in the way testing and assessment can be developed as tools for promoting Hispanic and other students' learning. Assisted performance and dynamic assessment are discussed in the context of individual education plans and a test-train-test cycle.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1985). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
2.
BransfordJ.DelclosV.VyeN.BurnsM. S., & HasselbringT. S. (1988). Improving the quality of assessment and instruction: Roles for dynamic assessment. Unpublished manuscript, Vanderbilt University, John F. Kennedy Center for Research on Education and Human Development, Peabody College, Nashville, TN.
3.
CampioneJ. C., & BrownA. L. (1987). Linking dynamic assessment with school achievement. In LidzC. S. (Ed.), Dynamic assessment: An interactional approach to evaluation learning potential (pp. 82–115). NY: Guilford Press.
4.
CampioneJ. C., & BrownA. L. (in press). Guided learning and transfer: Implications for approaches to assessment. In FredericksenN. & GlaserR. (Eds.), Diagnostic monitoring of skill and knowledge acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5.
CampioneJ. C.BrownA. L., & FerraraR. A. (1982). Mental retardation and intelligence. In SternbergR. J. (Ed.), Handbook of human intelligence (pp. 392–490). NY: Cambridge University Press.
6.
CarrascoR. L.VeraA., & CazdenC. B. (1981). Aspects of bilingual students' communicative competence in the classroom: A case study. In DuranR. P. (Ed.), Latino language and communicative behavior. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
7.
CumminsJ. (1984). Bilingualism and special education. In RiveraC. (Ed.), Language proficiency and academic achievement (pp. 71–76). Avon, England: Multilingual Matters.
8.
DuranR. P. (1988). Testing of linguistic minorities. In. LinnR. (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 573–587). New York: Macmillan.
9.
FeuersteinR. (1979). The dynamic assessment of retarded performers: The Learning Potential Assessment Device. Theory, instruments and techniques. Baltimore: University Park Press.
10.
GoldmanS. R., & TruebaH. T., (Eds.) (1987). Becoming literate in English as a second language. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
11.
HowellK. W., & MoreheadM. K. (1987). Curriculum-based evaluation for special and remedial education. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
12.
LidzC. S. (1987). Dynamic assessment: An interactional approach to evaluating learning potential. New York: Guilford Press.
13.
PadronY. N., (1987). Identifying and teaching cognitive reading strategies to Hispanic students. Paper presented at the Third International Conference on Thinking, Honolulu, Hawaii.
14.
ResnickL. B. (1987). Education and learning to think. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
15.
RiveraC., (Ed.) (1984). Communicative competence approaches to language proficiency assessment: Research and application. Avon, England: Multilingual Matters.
16.
TharpR. G., & GallimoreR. (1988). Rousing minds to life. Teaching, learning, and schooling in social context. NY: Cambridge University Press.
17.
VygotskyL. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. (ColeM.John-SteinerV.ScribnerS., & SoubermenE., Eds.) Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
