Advertisement

Redesigning Testing: Operationalizing the New Science of Learning

  • Zachary Stein
  • Theo Dawson
  • Kurt W. Fischer
Chapter

Abstract

Complex standardized testing infrastructures have come to shape most educational systems. With so many people taking so many tests, we must seriously begin to ask, what are we measuring? and what is worth measuring? This chapter presents the work of a research group that has begun to use the latest in computer technology and learning science to build tests that are both standardized and formative, grounded in research about learning, and richly educative. Fischer’s Dynamic Skill Theory provides a framework for modeling the diverse learning sequences and developmental pathways that characterize how real individuals in real-world contexts learn and develop. Dawson’s Lectical™ Assessment System is a psychometrically validated domain-general developmental assessment system. These two sophisticated outgrowths of contemporary learning science are being employed in an effort to design a new kind of testing infrastructure, an effort known as the DiscoTest™ Initiative. In this chapter we describe these efforts and explore how these specific advances in research and design will change the practice of testing, beyond using standardized tests as mere sorting mechanism and toward the use of tests as educative aids.

Keywords

Student Performance Test Design Learning Sequence Sorting Mechanism Reflective Judgment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Arnett, J. (2004). Emerging adulthood. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Baldwin, J. M. (1906). Thought and things: A study in the development of meaning and thought or genetic logic (Vols. 1–3). New York: Macmillan Co.Google Scholar
  3. Beck, U. (2001). A life of one’s own in a runaway world: Individualization, globalization and politics. In Individualization (pp. 22–30). London: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  4. Case, R. (1992). The minds staircase: Exploring the conceptual underpinnings of children’s thought and knowledge. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  5. Chapman, P. D. (1988). Schools as sorters. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Commons, M. L., Trudeau, E. J., Stein, S. A., Richards, F. A., & Krause, S. R. (1998). Hierarchical complexity of tasks shows the existence of developmental stages. Developmental Review, 18, 237–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cremin, L. (1970). American education: The colonial experience. New York: Haper & Row.Google Scholar
  8. Dawson, T. L. (2002). A comparison of three developmental stage scoring systems. Journal of Applied Measurement, 3, 146–189.Google Scholar
  9. Dawson, T. L. (2003). A stage is a stage is a stage: A direct comparison of two scoring systems. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 164, 335–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dawson, T. L. (2004). Assessing intellectual development: Three approaches, one sequence. Journal of Adult Development, 11, 71–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dawson, T. L. (2008, 11/1/04). The Lectical™ Assessment System. 1. Retrieved September, 2008, from http://www.lectica.info
  12. Dawson, T. L., & Gabrielian, S. (2003). Developing conceptions of authority and contract across the life-span: Two perspectives. Developmental Review, 23, 162–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dawson, T. L., & Stein, Z. (2008). Cycles of reseach and application in education: Learning pathways for energy concepts. Mind, Brain, and Education, 2, 89–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dawson, T. L., Xie, Y., & Wilson, M. (2003). Domain-general and domain-specific developmental assessments: Do they measure the same thing? Cognitive Development, 18, 61–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dawson-Tunik, T. L. (2004). “A good education is …” The development of evaluative thought across the life-span. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 130(1), 4–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  17. Fischer, K. (1980). A theory of cognitive development: The control and construction of hierarchies of skills. Psychological Review, 87(6), 477–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fischer, K., & Bidell, T. (2006). Dynamic development of psychological structures in action and thought. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Theoretical models of human development (6th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 313–399). New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  19. Fischer, K. W., Hand, H. H., & Russel, S. (1984). The development of abstractions in adolescence and adulthood. In M. L. Commons, F. A. Richards & C. Armon (Eds.), Beyond formal operations: Late adolescent and adult cognitive development (pp. 43–73). New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  20. Fischer, K. W., & Kennedy, B. (1997). Tools for analyzing the many shapes of development: The case of self-in-relationships in Korea. In K. A. Renninger & E. Amsel (Eds.), Processes of development (pp. 117–152). Erlbaum: Mahwah, NJ.Google Scholar
  21. Gould, S. J. (1981). The mismeasure of man. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  22. Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action: Reason and the rationalization of society (T. McCarthy, Trans., Vol. 1). Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  23. Hess, F., & Petrilli, M. (2006). No child left behind. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  24. Hursh, D. (2008). High-stakes testing and the decline of teaching and learning. New York: Rowman & Littlefeild.Google Scholar
  25. Karier, C. (1986). The individual, society, and education: A history of American educational ideas (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  26. King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing reflective judgment: Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Google Scholar
  27. Kitchener, K. S., & Fischer, K. W. (1990). A skill approach to the development of reflective thinking. Contributions to Human Development, 21, 48–62.Google Scholar
  28. Kohlberg, L. (1984). The psychology of moral development: The nature and validity of moral stages (Vol. 2). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Google Scholar
  29. Lagemann, E. (2000). An elusive science: The troubling history of educational research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  30. Lemann, N. (1999). The big test: The secret history of the American meritocracy. New York: Farrar, Straus and Grioux.Google Scholar
  31. Mislevy, R. J. (1993). Foundations of a new test theory. In N. Frederiksen, R. J. Mislevy & I. I. Bejar (Eds.), Test theory of a new generation of tests (pp. 147–169). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  32. Nairn, A. (1980). The reign of ETS: The corporation that makes up minds: The Ralph Nader Report on the Educational Testing Service.Google Scholar
  33. National Research Council on the Foundations of Assessment . (1999). High stakes: Testing for tracking, promotion, and graduation. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  34. National Research Council on the Foundations of Assessment . (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  35. Obama, B. (2008) Speech to the 146th Annual Meeting and 87th Representative Assembly of the National Educational Association. Delivered July 5, 2008.Google Scholar
  36. Piaget, J. (1932). The moral judgment of the child. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  37. Reisberg, D. (2001). Learning. In R. Wilson & F. C. Keil(Eds.), The MIT encyclopedia of the cognitive sciences (pp. 460–461). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  38. Rose, D., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for learning. Washington, DC: ASCD Books.Google Scholar
  39. Sadler, P. M. (2000). The relevance of multiple choice tests in assessing science understanding. In J. J. Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee, & J. D. Novak (Eds.), Assessing science understanding: A human constructivist view (pp. 249–278). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  40. Siegler, R. S. (1981). Developmental sequences within and between concepts. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 46, 84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sokal, M. (Ed.). (1990). Psychological testing in American society: 1890–1930. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Stein, Z. (2009). Resetting the stage: Introduction to special sections on learning and development. Mind, Brain, and Education, 3, 2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tomasello, M. (1999). The cultural origins of human cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Watson, M. W., & Fischer, K. W. (1980). Development of social roles in elicited and spontaneous behavior during the preschool years. Developmental Psychology, 16, 484–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Werner, H. (1957). The concept of development from a comparative and organismic point of view. In D. B.Harris (Ed.), The concept of development. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  46. White House office of the press secretary (2009) Administration’s statement on educational policy. Retrieved, June, 2009, from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Fact-Sheet-Expanding-the-Promise-of-Education-in-America/.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Developmental Testing ServiceLCCNorthamptonUSA
  2. 2.Harvard University Graduate School of EducationCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations