Online Course

Design webinar:

2017Dynamic assessment:

applications and challenges

Introductory ideas

Located from the work of Vygotsky

Grew as a response to constructivist theories of learning and knowledge (and assessment)

Constructivism essentially about trying to understand how learners make sense/meaning in their learning

Vygotsky introduced socio-cultural dimensions to these

Introduction (continued)

Interesting that Dynamic Assessment

developed in a context of work with

retarded/intellectually disabled learners

The key affordance:

Can we establish what learners know and can

do from a process (of assessment) that is

different from conventional processes (of

assessment)?

Introduction (continued)

Socio-cultural dimensions: educational

background; class; home background;

societal structures; history

Key concept: The Zone of Proximal

Development (ZPD) - the gap between what

people know and can do on their own and

what they might be able to know and do in the

presence of knowledgeable/skilled other(s)

Dynamic assessment: processes

and mechanisms

Socially-situated: people learn in and from a context – which includes the teacher

Learning is co-constructed

Mediation is a key process and mechanism

Three key components of mediation (Feuerstein): (1) intentionality; (2) transcendence and (3) mediation of meaning

Dynamic assessment: processes

and mechanisms

Learning is a dialectic

The sandwich and cake methods of mediation

Sandwich: mediation is ‘sandwiched’ between

two moments of assessment

Cake: mediation is layered onto learning in a

developmental, carefully-sequenced,

incremental process

Dynamic assessment: processes

and mechanisms

Interventionist and interactionist DA

Interventionist: a carefully constructed,

standardised set of interventions designed to

enable development/learning

Interactionist: a set of interventions that

changes in accordance with the responses

from the learners (being assessed)

Dynamic assessment: processes

and mechanisms

Assessment as a form of activism:

constructing assessment to allow the possible

rather than confirming the actual

Fairness is seen as providing everyone with

equal opportunity to access mediation

Feedback is critical

Dynamic assessment in practice

Taking the principles to scale

Is this possible?

What would it take to employ DA principles in

assessment practices?

Knowing the ZPD of individuals/sub-groups

Interventionist DA may be more possible in

large groups than interactionist DA

Validity issues

How do you know what you are testing in DA?

Perhaps separate the dynamic process of assessment from the ‘snap-shot’ view of achievement

Formative vs summative purposes

Intervention in the assessment compromises validity: does it?

Soundness of argument validity