Dynamic assessment, and in particular the learning potential approach, are receiving increasing attention from educators and research practitioners worldwide. This article reports on the status of dynamic assessment in South Africa, with particular reference to its use in higher education. A review of local studies and an informal survey of 36 institutions revealed that it is widely recognised that fair selection of students from a variety of different backgrounds requires assessment strategies that focus on future potential in addition to current ability. To this end, a number of South African learning potential instruments have been developed, empirical studies conducted (in most cases with positive results), and selection procedures implemented that make use of dynamic assessment techniques. The development and use of dynamic assessment in South Africa has been limited by misperceptions regarding the nature of dynamic assessment; a lack of a consistent definitions and research approaches; and perceptions regarding high costs of implementation.
AdamsH. B. (1994). Teaching as assisting performance in the zone of proximal development: Implications for teacher education. In AdeyA. D.SteynP.HermanN.ScholtzG. (Eds.), State of the art in higher education (pp. 1–14). Pretoria: University of South Africa.
2.
AndrewsS. G. (1996). A small-scale investigation of the group administration of Feuerstein 's learning potential assessment device. M.Ed. thesis, University of Natal (KwaZulu-Natal), Pietermaritzburg.
3.
BabadE. Y.BudoffM. (1974). Sensitivity and validity of learning-potential measurement in three levels of ability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66(3), 439–447.
4.
BealsR. L.HoijerH.BealsA. R. (1977). An introduction to anthropology.New York: Macmillan.
5.
BoeyensJ. C. A. (1989a). Learning potential: A theoretical perspective.Pretoria: Human Sciences Research Council.
6.
BoeyensJ. C. A. (1989b). Learning potential: An empirical investigation.Pretoria: Human Sciences Research Council.
7.
BradburyJ.ZingelJ. (1998). Learning through peer interaction in a multi-cultural primary school classroom. South African Journal of Education, 18(4), 232–240.
8.
BudoffM. (1987a). The validity of learning potential assessment. In LidzC. S. (Ed.), Dynamic assessment: An interactional approach to evaluating learning potential (pp. 52–81). New York: Guilford Press.
9.
BudoffM. (1987b). Measures for assessing learning potential. In LidzC. S. (Ed.), Dynamic assessment: An interactional approach to evaluating learning potential (pp. 173–195). New York: Guilford Press.
10.
BudoffM.HamiltonJ. L. (1976). Optimizing test performance of moderately and severely mentally retarded adolescents and adults. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 81(1), 49–57.
11.
CampbellC.CarlsonJ. S. (1995). The dynamic assessment of mental abilities. In CarlsonJ. S. (Ed.), European contributions to dynamic assessment. Advances in cognition and educational practice (Vol. 3) (pp. 1–31). London: JAI Press.
12.
CampioneJ. C. (1989). Assisted assessment: A taxonomy of approaches and an outline of strengths and weaknesses. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22(3), 151–165.
13.
CampioneJ. C. (1996). Assisted assessment: A taxonomy of approaches and an outline of strengths and weaknesses. In DanielsH. (Ed.), An introduction to Vygotsky (pp. 219–250). London: Routledge.
14.
CampioneJ. C.BrownA. L. (1987). Linking dynamic assessment with school achievement. In LidzC. S. (Ed.), Dynamic assessment: An interactional approach to evaluating learning potential (pp. 82–115). New York: Guilford Press.
15.
CampioneJ. C.BrownA. L.FerraraR. A.JonesR. S.SteinbergE. (1985). Breakdowns in flexible use of information: Intelligence-related differences in transfer following equivalent learning performance. Intelligence, 9, 297–315.
16.
CarlsonJ. S.WiedlK. H. (1978). Use of testing-the-limits procedures in the assessment of intellectual capabilities in children with learning difficulties. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 82(6), 559–564.
17.
CoosnerC. D. (1999). Dynamic assessment – a practical strategy for school educators. Unpublished M.Ed. dissertation, University of Stellenbosch.
18.
CronbachL. J.FurbyL. (1970). How we should measure ‘change’ – or should we?Psychological Bulletin, 74(1), 68–80.
19.
DanielM. H. (1997). Intelligence testing: Status and trends. American Psychologist, 52(10), 1038–1045.
20.
DayJ. D.EngelhardtJ. L.MaxwellS. E.BoligE. E. (1997). Comparison of static and dynamic assessment procedures and their relation to independent performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(2), 358–368.
21.
de BeerM. (2000). The construction and evaluation of a dynamic, computerised adaptive test for the measurement of learning potential. Unpublished D.Phil. thesis, University of South Africa, Pretoria.
22.
de VilliersA. B. (1996). Disadvantaged students: Analysing the zone of proximal development. South African Journal of Higher Education, 10(1), 135–139.
23.
de VilliersA. B. (1999). Disadvantaged students ' academic performance: Analysing the zone of proximal development. Unpublished D.Phil. thesis, University of Cape Town.
24.
DelclosV. R.VyeN. J.BurnsM. S.BransfordJ. D.HasselbringT. S. (1992). Improving the quality of instruction: Roles for dynamic assessment. In HaywoodH. C.TzurielD. (Eds.), Interactive assessment (pp. 317–331). New York: Spinger-Verlag.
25.
ElkoninD.FoxcroftC.RoodtG.AstburyG. (2001). The use of assessment measures in various applied contexts. In FoxcroftC.RoodtG. (Eds), An introduction to psychological assessment in the South African context (pp. 265–294). Cape Town: Oxford University Press.
26.
EmbretsonE. S. (1987). Toward development of a psychometric approach. In LidzC. S. (Ed.), Dynamic assessment: An interactional approach to evaluating learning potential (pp. 141–170). New York: Guilford Press.
27.
EmbretsonE. S.ReiseS. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists.London: Lawrence Erlbaum.
28.
EngelbrechtM. (1999). Leerpotensiaal as voorspeller van akademiese sukses van universiteitstudente (Learning potential as predictor of the academic success of university students). Unpublished D.Phil. thesis, Potchefstroom University for Christian Higher Education.
29.
FeuersteinR.RandY.JensenM. R.KanielS.TzurielD. (1987). Prerequisites for assessment of learning potential: The LPAD model. In LidzC. S. (Ed.), Dynamic assessment: An interaction al approach to evaluating learning potential (pp. 35–51). New York: Guilford Press.
30.
GaydonV. P. (1988). Predictors of performance of disadvantaged adolescents on the Soweto/Alexandra gifted child programme. Unpublished M.Ed. dissertation, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.
31.
GewerA. (1998). Uncovering potential: Dynamic assessment of non-verbal reasoning ability in educationally disadvantaged children. Unpublished M.Ed. dissertation, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.
32.
GrigorenkoE. L.SternbergR. J. (1998). Dynamic Testing. Psychological Bulletin, 124(1), 75–111.
33.
GuthkeJ. (1982). The learning test concept—an alternative to the traditional static intelligence test. The German Journal of Psychology, 6(4), 306–324.
34.
GuthkeJ. (1993). Developments in learning potential assessment. In HamersJ. H. MSijtsmaK.RuijssenaarsA. J. J. M. (Eds.), Learning potential assessment: Theoretical, methodological and practical issues (pp. 43–67). Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.
35.
GuthkeJ.BeckmannJ. F.SteinH. (1995). Recent research evidence on the validity of learning tests. In CarlsonJ. S. (Ed.), European contributions to dynamic assessment. Advances in cognition and educational practice (Vol. 3) (pp. 117–143). London: JAI Press.
36.
HamersJ. H. M.ResingW. C. M. (1993). Learning potential assessment: Introduction. In HamersJ. H. M.SijtsmaK.RuijssenaarsA. J. J. M. (Eds), Learning Potential assessment: Theoretical, methodological and practical issues (pp. 23–41). Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.
37.
HaywoodH. C.TzurielD.VaughtS. (1992). Psychoeducational assessment from a transactional perspective. In HaywoodH. C.TzurielD. (Eds.), Interactive assessment (pp. 38–63). New York: Spinger-Verlag.
38.
HaywoodH. C.WigenfeldS. A. (1992). Interactive assessment as a research tool [Electronic version]. Journal of Special Education, 26(3), 253–269.
39.
HenleyS. J. (1989). An investigation of Feuerstein's theory of mediated learning experience with a disadvantaged community. Unpublished M.A. dissertation, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.
40.
HoffenbergS. R. (1988). Effectiveness of the learning potential assessment device with high achieving adolescents from an advantaged community. Unpublished M.Ed. dissertation, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.
41.
JitendraA. K.KameenuiE. J. (1993). Dynamic assessment as a compensatory assessment approach: A description and analysis [Electronic version]. Remedial and Special Education, 14(5), 6–12.
42.
KanjeeA. (2001). Cross-cultural test adaptation and translation. In FoxcroftC.RoodtG. (Eds), An introduction to psychological assessment in the South African context (pp. 86–102). Cape Town: Oxford University Press.
43.
KozulinA. (1990). Vygotsky's psychology: A biography of ideas.Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
44.
LidzC. S. (Ed.) (1987a). Dynamic assessment: An interactional approach to evaluating learning potential.New York: The Guilford Press.
45.
LidzC. S. (Ed.). (1987b). Cognitive deficiencies revisited. In LidzC. S. (Ed.), Dynamic assessment: An interactional approach to evaluating learning potential (pp. 444–478). New York: Guilford Press.
46.
LidzC. S. (Ed.). (1991). Practitioner's guide to dynamic assessment.New York: Guilford Press.
47.
LidzC. S. (Ed.). (1992). Dynamic assessment: Some thoughts on the model, the medium and the message. Learning and Individual Differences, 4(2), 125–136.
48.
LidzC. S. (Ed.). (1997) Dynamic assessment approaches. In FlanaganD. P.GenshaftJ. L.HarrisonP. L. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests and issues (pp. 281–296). New York: Guilford Press.
49.
LidzC. S.ElliottJ. G. (2000). Introduction to dynamic assessment. In LidzC. S.ElliottJ. G. (Eds.), Dynamic assessment: Prevailing models and applications. Advances in cognition and educational practice (Vol. 6) (pp. 3–13). New York: Elsevier Science.
50.
LidzC. S.MacrineS. L. (2001). An alternative approach to the identification of gifted culturally and linguistically diverse learners. School Psychology International, 22(1), 74–96.
51.
LidzC. S.PenaE. D. (1996). Dynamic assessment: The model, its relevance as a nonbiased approach and its application to Latino American preschool children. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools, 27(4), 367–372.
52.
LipsonL. E. (1992). Relationship of static and dynamic measures to scholastic achievement of black pupils. Unpublished M.Ed. dissertation, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.
53.
LloydF.PidgeonD. A. (1961). An investigation into the effects of coaching on non-verbal test material with European, Indian and African children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 31(2), 145–151.
54.
LopesA.RoodtG.MauerR. (2001). The predictive validity of the APIL-B in a financial institution. Journal of Industrial Psychology, 27(1), 61–69.
55.
MillerR. (1998). A follow-up of the academic performance of English first and second language students. South African Journal of Higher Education, 12(2), 167–175.
56.
MinickN. (1987). Implications of Vygotsky's theories for dynamic assessment. In LidzC. S. (Ed.), Dynamic assessment: An interactional approach to evaluating learning potential (pp. 116–140). New York: Guilford Press.
57.
MollI. C. (1989). Roots and disputes of cognitive developmental conceptions of teaching. South African Journal of Education, 9(4), 714–721.
58.
MorganH. (1996). An analysis of Gardner's theory of multiple intelligence. Roeper Review, 18(4), 263–269.
59.
MurrayD. A. (1988). Effectiveness of Feuerstein's learning potential assessment device in a South African context. Unpublished M.Ed. dissertation, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.
60.
NeisserU.BoodooG.BouchardT. J.BoykinA. W.BrodyN.CeciS. J.HalpernD. F.LoehlinJ. C.PerloffR.SternbergR. J.UrbinaS. (1996). Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns. American Psychologist, 51(2), 77–101.
61.
NelA. (1997). Die voorspelling van akademiese sukses binne konteks van 'n alternatiewe universiteitstoelatingsbeleid (The prediction of academic success within the context of an alternative university admissions policy). Unpublished M.A. dissertation, Rand Afrikaans University, Johannesburg.
62.
NellV. (2000). Cross-cultural neuropsychological assessment: Theory and practice.New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
63.
NunnsC.OrtleppK. (1994). Exploring predictors of academic success in Psychology 1 at Wits University as an important component of fair student selection. South African Journal of Psychology, 24(4), 201–207.
64.
PotterC. S.JamotteA. N. (1985). African matric results: Dubious indicators of academic merit. Indicator SA, 5(1), 10–13.
65.
RuijssenaarsA. J. J. M.CastelijnsJ. H. M.HamersJ. H. M. (1993). The validity of learning potential tests. In HamersJ. H. M.SijtsmaK.RuijssenaarsA. J. J. M. (Eds.), Learning potential assessment: Theoretical, methodological and practical issues (pp. 69–82). Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.
66.
SewellT. E. (1987). Dynamic assessment as a nondiscriminatory procedure. In LidzC. S. (Ed.), Dynamic assessment: An interactional approach to evaluating learning potential (pp. 426–443). New York: Guilford Press.
67.
ShochetI. M. (1986). Manifest and potential performance in advantaged and disadvantaged students. Unpublished D.Phil. dissertation, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.
68.
ShochetI. M. (1994). The moderator effect of cognitive modifiability on a traditional undergraduate admissions test for disadvantaged black students in South Africa. South African Journal of Psychology, 24(4), 208–215.
69.
SibayaP. T.HlongwaneM.MakungaN. (1996). Giftedness and intelligence assessment in a third world country: Constraints and alternatives. Gifted Education International, 11(2), 107–113.
70.
SijtsmaK. (1993a). Classical and modern test theory with an eye toward learning potential testing. In HamersJ. H. M.SijtsmaK.RujssenaarsA. J. J. M. (Eds), Learning Potential assessment: Theoretical, methodological and practical issues (pp. 117–134). Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.
71.
SijtsmaK. (1993b). Psychometric issues in learning potential assessment. In HamersJ. H. M.SijtsmaK.RujssenaarsA. J. J. M. (Eds), Learning Potential assessment: Theoretical, methodological and practical issues (pp. 175–194). Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.
72.
SternbergR. J. (1991). Death, taxes and bad intelligence tests. Intelligence, 15(20), 257–269.
73.
SternbergR. J. (1997). The Triarchic theory of intelligence. In FlanaganD.R.GenshaftJ. L.HarrisonR. L. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests and issues (pp. 92–104). New York: Guilford Press.
74.
SternbergR. J.WagnerR. K. (Eds.) (1986). Practical intelligence: Nature and origins of competence in the everyday world.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
75.
TaylerJ. (1996). Assessment of the predictive validity of the learning ability battery. Unpublished M.A. dissertation, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.
76.
TaylorT. R. (1994). A review of three approaches to cognitive assessment and a proposed integrated approach based on a unifying theoretical framework. South African Journal of Psychology, 24(4), 184–193.
77.
TaylorT. R. (1999). Assessing learning potential and integrating it with cognitive skills training. Paper presented at the Institute for International Research conference, Compliant Assessment Techniques, Midrand, South Africa.
78.
van AswegenM. (1997). The standardisation of a learning potential battery for the selection of poorly qualified employees. Unpublished M.Com. dissertation, University of Pretoria.
79.
VyeN. J.BurnsM. S.DelclosV. R.BransfordJ. D. (1987). A comprehensive approach to assessing intellectually handicapped children. In LidzC. S. (Ed.), Dynamic assessment: An interactional approach to evaluating learning potential (pp. 327–359). New York: Guilford Press.
80.
ZolezziS. A. (1992). Alternative selection measures for university undergraduate admissions. M.Ed, dissertation, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.
81.
ZolezziS. A. (1995). The effectiveness of dynamic assessment as an alternative aptitude testing strategy. D.Phil. thesis, University of South Africa, Pretoria.
