The author reviews issues and studies related to the nature of quantitative versus qualitative assessment of cognitive skills. It is noted that quantitative assessment has been based on the nomothetic theory of test construction. Currently, we are witnessing the emergence of a variety of modified approaches toward assessing cognitive skills; some focus more on process than product, while others emphasize detailed behavioral observations. For such approaches, the generic term "qualitative assessment" is suggested to sharpen the distinction between the new approaches and the traditional assessment techniques based on norm-referenced tests. The paper briefly reviews relevant studies published both in the United States and in the Soviet Union.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ashby, S.J.The development of the ability to combine activities in problem solving . Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut , 1976.
2.
Batting, W.F.Within individual differences in "cognitive" process. In R. L. Solso (Ed.), Information processing and cognition. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 1975, 195-228.
3.
Bogioavlenskaya, D. B. Procedure of investigation of the levels of intellectual activity . Voprosy Psikhologii, 1971, 1, 144-147.
4.
Brison, D.W.The school psychologists use of direct observation. Journal of School Psychology, 1967, 5(2), 109-115.
5.
Bronfenbrenner, U.Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American Psychologist, 1977, 32(7), 513-531.
6.
Buros L. K.Fifty years in testing: Some reminiscences, criticisms and suggestions . Educational Research, 1977, 6(7), 9-16.
7.
Cardon, B.W.Law, professional practice and university preparation. Where do we do from here? Journal of School Psychology, 1975, 13(4), 377-386.
8.
Carver, R. P. The dimension of tests: Psychometric and edumetric. American Psychologist, 1974, 29, 512-518.
9.
Dembo, T., Leviton, G.L., & Wright, B.A.Qualitative vs. quantitative approaches in the new field. Adjustment to misfortune. Rehabilitation Psychology, 1975, 22(1), 9-15.
10.
Dubrovina, I. V. Investigation of elementary manifestation of specific mental abilities in junior school children. Voprosy Psiklologii, 1970, 6, 94-103.
Em, E. B. Pedagogical study of elementary grade pupils of an auxiliary school . Defectologia, 1974, 1, 33-40.
13.
Friedman, L. M., & Bui Van Hue. A diagnostic method of learning activity. Voprosy Psikhologii, 1978, 2, 129-133.
14.
Gibbs, J. C. The meaning of ecologically oriented inquiry in contemporary psychology . American Psychologist, 1979, 2, 127-141.
15.
Giora, Z.Psychopathology: A cognitive view. New York, London: Gardner Press, 1975.
16.
Glaser, R.Instructional technology and the measurement of learning outcomes . American Psychologist, 1963, 18, 519-521.
17.
Glaser, R.Instructional technology and the measurement of learning outcome, some questions . In W. James (Ed.), Criterion-referenced measurement: An introduction. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Educational Technology Publication , 1971.
18.
Gorth, W.P., & Grayson, A.A program to compose and print tests for instructional testing using item sampling. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1969, 29(1), 173-174.
19.
Guilford, J.P.The nature of human intelligence. New York, London: McGraw-Hill, 1967.
20.
Haeussermann, E.Developmental potential of preschool children: An evaluation of intellectual, sensory and emotional functioning. New York: Grune & Stratton, 1958.
21.
Hambleton, R. K., Swaminath, H., Algina, J., & Coulson, D. B. Criterion referenced testing and measurement: A review of technical issues and developments. Review of Educational Research, 1978, 1, 1-47.
22.
Haywood, H.C.Alternative to normative assessment. In P. Mittler (Ed.), Research to practice in mental retardation (Vol. II). Baltimore: University Park Press, 1977.
23.
Kamin, L.J.Heredity, intelligence, politics and psychology. In N. J. Block, & P. Dworkin (Eds.), The I.Q. controversy. New York: Pantheon Press, 1976.
24.
Kunzelman, H.P. (Ed.). Precision teaching: An initial training sequence. Seattle, Wash.: Special Child Publication, 1970.
25.
Leontiev, A.N.Problems of mental development (3rd ed.). Moscow: Moscow University Press, 1972.
26.
Lindsley, O.R.Precision teaching in perspective: An interview with Ogden R. Lindsley . Teaching Exceptional Children, 1971, 3(3), 114-119.
27.
Luria, A.R.Higher cortical functions in man. New York: Basic Books, 1966.
28.
Marceil, J.C.Implicit dimensions of idiography and nomothesis: A reformulation . American Psychologist, 1977, 32(12), 1046-1055.
29.
Maskauskas, J. A. Evolution models for criterion-referenced testing: Views regarding mastery and standard-setting. Review of Educational Research , 1976, 1, 133-158.
30.
Piel, G.I.Q.failing the test. The Sciences, 1978 , 1 (23), 7-9.
31.
Piaget, J.Biology and knowledge. Chicago, London: The University of Chicago Press, 1971.
32.
Popham, W. J., & Husek, T.R.Implication of criterion-referenced measurement . Journal of Educational Measurement, 1969 , 6, 1-9.
33.
Proger, B.B., & Mann, L.Criterion-referenced measurements: The world of gray versus black and white . Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1973, 6(2), 19-30.
34.
Razran, G.The observable unconscious and the inferrable conscious in current Soviet psychophysiology: Interoceptive conditioning, semantic conditioning and the orienting reflex. Psychological Review, 1961 , 68.
Rudman, H.The standardized test flap. Kappan, 1977, 59(3), 179-185.
37.
Scott, K. P. Learning theory, intelligence and mental development. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1978, 4, 325-336.
38.
Siniov, V. N. Inductive and deductive reasoning in students of an auxiliary school . Defectologia, 1973, 3, 32-37.
39.
Sitko, M.C., Fink, A.H., & Gillespie, P.H.Utilizing systematic observation for decision making in school psychology. School Psychology Monograph, 1977, 3(1), 23-44.
40.
Smith, J.K.Perspectives on mastery learning and mastery testing. ERIC/ TM Report 63, 1977, 1-29.
41.
Umanskaya, N. M. Techniques of intelligence assessment in preschool children with underdeveloped speech. Defectologia, 1977, 2, 64-72.
42.
Underwood, B. J. Individual differences as a crucible in theory construction. American Psychologist, 1975, 30, 128-134.
43.
Urbanska, B.Diagnosis and classification of backward children. Nowa Szkola , 1971, 6, 53-56.
44.
Uzgiris, I.C., & Hunt, McV.Assessment in infancy. Urbana, Chicago, London: University of Illinois Press, 1975.
45.
Vellutino, R.F., Steger, B.M., Moyer, S.C., Harding, C.J., & Niles, J.A.Has the perceptual deficit hypothesis led us astray? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1977, 10(6), 54-64.
46.
Venger, L. A. The qualitative approach to the diagnosis of a child's mental development . Voprosy Psikhologii, 1974, 1, 116-125.
47.
Voitko, V.I., & Gilbukh, Y.Z.Some main concepts of psychodiagnosis. Voprosy Psikhologii , 1976, 4, 16-31.
48.
Wahler, K.G., House, A.E., & Stambaugh, E.E.Ecological assessment of child problem behavior . New York, Paris: Pergaman Press, 1976.
49.
Zigler, E., & Trickett, P. K. I.Q., social competence, and evolution of early childhood intervention programs. American Psychologist , 1978, 9, 789-799.
50.
North East RegionResource Center.A position statement on non-biased assessment of culturally different children (Region 9, Task Group on non-biased assessment). Hightstown, N.J.: Author, 1976.
51.
Curtis, W.S., & Donlon, E.T.Behavioral evaluation prototype of the multiple disabilities project (mimeographed)Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University , 1970.
52.
Allen, D.Stimulating change in instructional systems through new evaluation techniques . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Minneapolis , March 1970.
