Skip to main content

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
Cancel
×
×
Home
  • Home
Chapter
  • Get access
    Buy the print book
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
    Log in Register Recommend to librarian
  • Cited by 7
  • Cited by
    Crossref Citations
    Crossref logo
    This (lowercase (translateProductType product.productType)) has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.
    Zapata-Rivera, Diego 2017. Toward Caring Assessment Systems. p. 97.
    Penuel, William R. and Shepard, Lorrie A. 2016. The Handbook of Cognition and Assessment. p. 146.
    Mislevy, Robert J. and Durán, Richard P. 2014. A Sociocognitive Perspective on Assessing EL Students in the Age of Common Core and Next Generation Science Standards. TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 48, Issue. 3, p. 560.
    Penuel, William R. Confrey, Jere Maloney, Alan and Rupp, André A. 2014. Design Decisions in Developing Learning Trajectories–Based Assessments in Mathematics: A Case Study. Journal of the Learning Sciences, Vol. 23, Issue. 1, p. 47.
    Mislevy, Robert J. 2013. Measurement is a Necessary but not Sufficient Frame for Assessment. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research & Perspective, Vol. 11, Issue. 1-2, p. 47.
    Aguirre-Muñoz, Zenaida and Amabisca, Anastasia A. 2010. Defining Opportunity to Learn for English Language Learners: Linguistic and Cultural Dimensions of ELLs' Instructional Contexts. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR), Vol. 15, Issue. 3, p. 259.
    Greeno, James G. and Collins, Allan 2008. Commentary on the Final Report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Educational Researcher, Vol. 37, Issue. 9, p. 618.
    ×
  • Print publication year: 2008
  • Online publication date: June 2012

10 - Issues of Structure and Issues of Scale in Assessment from a Situative/Sociocultural Perspective

Export citation
Summary

INTRODUCTION

A situative/sociocultural (S/SC) perspective “views knowledge as distributed among people and their environments, including the objects, artifacts, tools, books, and communities of which they are a part. Analyses of activity in this perspective focus on processes of interaction of individuals with other people and with physical and technological systems” (Greeno, Collins, and Resnick 1997). Accordingly, “a situated view of assessment emphasizes questions about the quality of student participation in activities of inquiry and sense making, and considers assessment practices as integral components of the general systems of activity in which they occur” (p. 37). Research on school learning from the SC perspective “incorporates explanatory concepts that have proved useful in fields such as ethnography and sociocultural psychology to study collaborative work, …mutual understanding in conversation, and other characteristics of interaction that are relevant to the functional success of the participants' activities” (p. 7). In such analyses, attention focuses on patterns of interactions that occur in detailed and particular situations, yields “thick” descriptions of the activities, and often produces voluminous data. Studies at this level of detail are essential for understanding the conditions and interactions through which students learn; that is, “opportunities to learn” that particular circumstances afford particular students in light of their particular personal and educational histories of experience.

Yet no practical assessment at the level of the classroom, let alone a school or a program, can demand scores of hours of video per student, all analyzed by a team of graduate students, each producing a multipage ideographic report.

Recommend this book

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this book to your organisation's collection.

Assessment, Equity, and Opportunity to Learn
  • Online ISBN: 9780511802157
  • Book DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511802157
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to *

CAPTCHA *

Skip to the audio challenge
×
References
American Council on the Training of Foreign Languages. 1989. ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines. Yonkers: Author.
Bachman, L. F. 2005. Building and supporting a case for test use. Language Assessment Quarterly 2: 1–34.
Bachman, L. F. and Palmer, A. S.. 1996. Language testing in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bormuth, J. R. 1970. On the theory of achievement test items. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Chi, M. T. H., Glaser, R., and Farr, M., eds. 1988. The nature of expertise. Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum.
Collins, A., J. S. Brown, and S. E. Newman. 1989. Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser, edited by Resnick, L. B., 453–94. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cronbach, L. J., G. C. Gleser, H. Nanda, and N. Rajaratnam. 1972. The dependability of behavioral measurements: Theory of generalizability for scores and profiles. New York: Wiley.
Douglas, D. 2000. Assessing language for specific purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Enright, M. K., W. Grabe, K. Koda, P. Mosenthal, P. Mulcahy, and M. Schedl, 2000. TOEFL 2000 reading framework: A working paper (TOEFL Monograph Series MS-17). Princeton: Educational Testing Service.
Ericsson, K. A. 1996. The acquisition of expert performance: An introduction to some of the issues. In The road to excellence: The acquisition of expert performances, sports, and games, edited by Ericsson, K. A.. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gasser, H. 1955. How to draw and paint. New York: Dell.
Gitomer, D. H., L. S. Steinberg, and R. J. Mislevy. 1995. Diagnostic assessment of trouble-shooting skill in an intelligent tutoring system. In Cognitively diagnostic assessment, edited by Nichols, P., Chipman, S., and Brennan, R., 73–101. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
Greeno, J. G. 1983. Conceptual entities. In Mental models, edited by Gentner, D. and Stevens, A. L.. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Greeno, J. G., A. M. Collins, and L. B. Resnick. 1997. Cognition and learning. In Handbook of educational psychology, edited by Berliner, D. and Calfee, R., 15–47. New York: Simon and Schuster Macmillan.
Greeno, J. G., P. D. Pearson, and A. H. Schoenfeld. 1997. Implications for the National Assessment of Educational Progress of research on learning and cognition. In Assessment in transition: Monitoring the nation's educational progress, background studies, edited by Linn, R., Glaser, R., and Bohrnstedt, G., 151–215. Stanford: The National Academy of Education.
Holland, P. W. and Wainer, H.. 1993. Differential item functioning. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
Kadane, J. B. and Schum, D. A.. 1996. A probabilistic analysis of the Sacco and Vanzetti evidence. New York: Wiley.
Lave, J. 1988. Cognition in practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Linn, R. L. 1993. Linking results of distinct assessments. Applied Measurement in Education 6: 83–102.
Messick, S. 1989. Validity. In Educational measurement, 3rd ed., edited by Linn, R. L., 13–103. New York: American Council on Education/Macmillan.
Messick, S. 1994. The interplay of evidence and consequences in the validation of performance assessments. Educational Researcher 23: 13–23.
Mislevy, R. J. 1994. Evidence and inference in educational assessment. Psychometrika 59: 439–83.
Mislevy, R. J. 2003. Substance and structure in assessment arguments. Law, Probability, and Risk 2: 237–58.
Mislevy, R. J. and Gitomer, D. H.. 1996. The role of probability-based inference in an intelligent tutoring system. User-Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 5: 253–82.
Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L., and Almond, R.. 2003. On the structure of educational assessment. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives 1: 3–62.
Mitchell, R. 1992. Testing for learning: How new approaches to evaluation can improve American schools. New York: The Free Press.
Myford, C. M. and Mislevy, R. J.. 1996. Monitoring and improving a portfolio assessment system. CSE Technical Report 402. Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST).
Newell, A. and Simon, H. A.. 1972. Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Resnick, L. B. 1997. Student performance portfolios. In Psychology and educational practice, edited by Walberg, H. J. and Haertel, G. D., 158–75. Berkeley: McCutchan.
Riconscente, M., Mislevy, R. J., and Hamel, L.. 2005. An introduction to PADI task templates. PADI Technical Report #3. Menlo Park, Calif.: SRI International.
Salthouse, T. A. 1991. Expertise as the circumvention of human processing limitations. In Toward a general theory of expertise, edited by Ericcson, K. A. and Smith, J., 286–300. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schum, D. A. 1994. The evidential foundations of probabilistic reasoning. New York: Wiley.
Schutz, A. and Moss, P. A.. 2004. Reasonable decisions in portfolio assessment: Evaluating complex evidence of teaching. Education Policy Analysis Archives 12. http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v12n33/.
Shafer, G. 1976. A mathematical theory of evidence. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Steinberg, L. S. and Gitomer, D. G.. 1996. Intelligent tutoring and assessment built on an understanding of a technical problem-solving task. Instructional Science 24: 223–58.
Stewart, J. and R. Hafner. 1994. Research on problem solving: Genetics. In Handbook of research on science teaching and learning, edited by Gabel, D., 284–300. New York: Macmillan.
Toulmin, S. E. 1958. The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wolf, D., J. Bixby, J. Glenn, and Gardner. 1991. To use their minds well: Investigating new forms of student assessment. In Review of educational research, vol. 17, edited by Grant, G., 31–74. Washington, D.C.: American Educational Research Association.
Cancel
Confirm
×