Click here to download

Assessment for learning and dynamic assessment. The role of mediation in inclusive assessment
Journal Title: RICERCHE DI PSICOLOGIA  
Author/s: Serenella Besio 
Year:  2019 Issue: 1 Language: Italian 
Pages:  15 Pg. 143-157 FullText PDF:  201 KB
DOI:  10.3280/RIP2019-001009
(DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation:  clicca qui   and here 


The article presents some reflections on Assessment for Learning, an ap-proach to evaluation that aims at definitively overcoming the summative modal-ity typical of standardized assessments and at encouraging partnership between student and teacher within the teaching and learning process. Subsequently, it deepens the Dynamic Assessment approach, a variation of the previous one, aimed at intervening on the individual’s cognitive development through the expe-rience mediated by the relationship. Finally, it offers a comparison among them, and proposes their confluence in a unique paradigm, in order to produce effec-tive educational answers to contemporary challenges, particularly to the goal of inclusion.
Keywords: Assessment for Learning, Dynamic Assessment, disability, inclusive contexts.

  1. Aquario, D. (2015). Valutare senza escludere. Processi e strumenti valutativi per un’educazione inclusiva. Bergamo: Junior.
  2. Bennett, R. E. (2009). A critical look at the meaning and basis of formative assessment. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
  3. Besio, S. (2018). Prefazione. In N. Bianquin, Inclusione e disabilità. Processi di autovalutazione nella scuola (pp. 9-18). Milano, IT: Guerini e Associati.
  4. Black, P. J., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139-148.
  5. Bloom, B. S. (1968). Learning for Mastery. Instruction and Curriculum. Regional Education Laboratory for the Carolinas and Virginia, Topical Papers and Reprints, 1.
  6. Broadfoot, P. M., Daugherty, R., Gardner, J., Gipps, C. V., Harlen, W., James, M., & Stobart, G. (1999). Assessment for learning: beyond the black box. Cambridge, UK: University of Cambridge School of Education.
  7. Broadfoot, P. M., Daugherty, R., Gardner, J., Harlen, W., James, M., & Stobart, G. (2002). Assessment for learning: 10 principles. Cambridge, UK: University of Cambridge School of Education.
  8. Bruner, J. (1983). In search of mind: essay in autobiography. New York: Harper & Row. Tr. It. Alla ricerca della mente: autobiografia intellettuale, Roma: Armando.
  9. Campione, J. C. (1989). Assisted assessment: A taxonomy of approaches and an outline of strengths and weaknesses. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 151-165., DOI: 10.1177/002221948902200303
  10. Elliott, J.G. (2003). Dynamic assessment in educational settings: Realizing potential. Educational Review, 55, 15-32.
  11. Erskine, J. L. (2014). Changes How Teachers Teach: How Testing Is Corrupting Our Classrooms and Student Learning. Multicultural Education, 21(2), 38-40.
  12. Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y., & Rynders, J. E. (1988). Don’t accept me as I am: Helping “retarded” people to excel. New York, NY: Plenum.
  13. Gardner, H. (1993). Educare al comprendere. Milano: Feltrinelli.
  14. Harlen, W., & James, M. (1997). Assessment and learning: differences and relationships between formative and summative assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 4(3), 365-379., DOI: 10.1080/0969594970040304
  15. Harrison, C., Könings, K., Schuwirth, L., Wass, V., & van der Vleuten, C. (2015). Barriers to the uptake and use of feedback in the context of summative assessment. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 20(1), 229-245.
  16. Harrison, C., & Wass, V. (2016). The challenge of changing to an assessment for learning culture. Medical Education, 50, 702-708.
  17. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112., DOI: 10.3102/003465430298487
  18. Haviland, M. (2004). Doing participatory evaluation with community projects. Stronger families Learning Exchange, 6, 10-13.
  19. Heeneman, S., Pool, A. O., Schuwirth, L. W. T., van der Vleuten, C. P. M., & Driessen, E. W. (2015). The impact of programmatic assessment on student learning: theory versus practice. Medical Education, 49(5), 487-498.
  20. Hermansen, H. (2014). Recontextualising assessment resources for use in local settings: Opening up the black box of teachers’ knowledge work. Curriculum Journal, 25(4), 470-494., DOI: 10.1080/09585176.2014.956771
  21. Leung, C. (2007). Dynamic Assessment: Assessment for and as Teaching? Language Assessment Quarterly, 4(3), 257-278., DOI: 10.1080/15434300701481127
  22. Lidz, C. S. (2001). Multicultural issues and dynamic assessment. In L. A. Suzuki, J. G. Ponterotto & P. J. Meller (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural assessment: Clinical, psychological and educational applications. Second Edition (pp.523-539). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  23. Newson, J., & Newson, E. (1975). Intersubjectivity and the transmission of culture: On the social origins of symbolic functioning. Bulletin of the British psychological society, 28, 437-446.
  24. Partanen, P., & Lebeer, J. (2011). Guidelines for a Dynamic and Functional Assessment Oriented at Development and Inclusive Learning. In J. Leeber, A. Candeias & L. Gràcio (Eds.), With a Different Glance. Dynamic Assessment of Functioning Oriented at Development and Inclusive Learning (pp. 249-262). Anwerpen, NL: Garant.
  25. Poehner, M. E., & Lantolf, J. (2005). Dynamic assessment in the language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 9, 233-265.
  26. Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback. Behavioural Science, 28(1), 4-13.
  27. Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, 119-144., DOI: 10.1007/BF00117714
  28. Scriven, M. (1967), The methodology of evaluation. In R. W. Tyler, R. M. Gagne & M. Scriven (Eds.), Perspectives of curriculum evaluation, Chicago, IL, Rand McNally.
  29. Seden, K. (2018). Teacher Subjective Theory of Assessment: A Literature Review. Re-thinking Teacher Professional Education: Using Research Findings for Better Learning, 61st World Assembly ICET 2017, Masaryk University Brno.
  30. Shrestha, P., & Coffin, C. (2012). Dynamic assessment, tutor mediation and academic writing development. Assessing Writing, 17(1), 55-70.
  31. Sternberg, R. J., Grigorenko, E. L. (2004). Il testing dinamico. La natura e la misura del potenziale di apprendimento. Roma: Armando.
  32. Stiggins, R. (2006). Assessment for learning: a key to motivation and achievement. Edge, 2(2), 3-19.
  33. Tomlinson, C. A. (2003). Fulfilling the promise of the differentiated classroom: strategies and tools for responsive teaching. Alexandria, VA: ASCD (trad. it. Adempiere la promessa di una classe differenziata. Roma, IT: LAS, 2006).
  34. Trinchero, R. (2016). Costruire, valutare, certificare competenze. Proposte di attività per la scuola. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  35. Tzuriel, D. (2000). Dynamic assessment of young children: Educational and intervention perspectives. Educational Psychology Review, 12(4), 385-435., DOI: 10.1023/A:1009032414088
  36. Vygotskij, L S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  37. Watkins, A. (Ed.) (2007). Assessment in Inclusive Settings: Key Issues for Policy and Practice. Odense, DK: European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education.
  38. Wennergren, A. C. (2011). Between two stories: assessment of and for learning. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 26(4), 541-550., DOI: 10.1080/08856257.2011.597189
  39. Wiggins, G. (1989). A True Test: Toward More Authentic and Equitable Assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 70(9), 703-713., DOI: 10.1177/003172171109200721
  40. Wiliam, D. (2011). Formative Assessment: definitions and relationships. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37(1), 3-14.
  41. Wood, D., Bruner, J. & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89-100.

Serenella Besio, Assessment for learning and dynamic assessment. The role of mediation in inclusive assessment in "RICERCHE DI PSICOLOGIA " 1/2019, pp. 143-157, DOI:10.3280/RIP2019-001009

   

FrancoAngeli is a member of Publishers International Linking Association a not for profit orgasnization wich runs the CrossRef service, enabing links to and from online scholarly content