This article outlines some problems inherent in the research concerning the assessment of Native Indian students, especially with reference to the "Native Indian profile." "Deficit" versus "difference" models are examined. Recommendations and new directions for assessment are discussed. Responsibilities of examiners are delineated. Caution is urged.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Brandt, E. (1984). The cognitive functioning of American Indian children: A critique of McShane & Plas. School ofPsychology Review . 13 (11), 74-82.
2.
Chrisjohn, R. & Lanigan, C. (1986). Research on Indian intelligence testing: Review and prospects. In Selected Papers from the First Mokakit Conference (1984) (pp. 50-57). Mokakit Indian Education Research Association, University of British Columbia.
3.
Feuerstein, R. (1979). The dynamic assessment of retarded performers: The Learning Potential Assessment Device, theory, instruments, and techniques . Baltimore: University Park Press .
4.
Goldstein, C.R. (1981). The performance of nine year old Cowichan Native Indian children on two tests of cognitive ability. Unpublished master's thesis , University of British Columbia, Vancouver.
5.
Holmes, B.J. (1980). British Columbia norms tables. Vancouver, B.C.: University of British Columbia Education Clinic.
6.
McShane, D. (1986). Testing, assessment research and increased control by Native communities. In Selected Papers from the First Mokakit Conference (1984) (pp. 80-97). Mokakit Indian Education Research Association, University of British Columbia.
7.
McShane, D. & Plas, J. (1984a). The cognitive functioning of American Indian children: Moving from WISC to WISC-R. School Psychology Review . 13 (1), 61-73.
8.
McShane, D. & Plas, J. (1984b). Response to a critique of the McShane & Plas review of American Indian Performance on the Wechsler Intelligence Scales . School Psychology Review. 13 (1), 83-88.
9.
St. John, J., Krichev. A., & Bauman, E. (1976). Northwestern Ontario Indian children and the WISC . Psychology in the Schools. 13 (4), 407-411.
10.
Scaldwell, Wm., Frame, J. & Cookson D. (1985). Individual intellectual assessment of Chippewa, Muncey and Oneida children using the WISC-R. CanadianJournal of School Psychology. 1(1), 15-21.
11.
Seyfort, B., Spreen, O. & Lahmer, V. (1980). A critical look at the WISC-R with Native Indian children. Alberta Journal of Educational Research. 26 (1), 14-24.
12.
Thorndike, R., Hagen, E. & Sattler, J. (1986). Technical manual: Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale: Fourth Edition. Chicago: Riverside.
