Review of Educational Research

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Swanson, H. L.
Right arrow Articles by Lussier, C. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Review of Educational Research, Vol. 71, No. 2, 321-363 (2001)
DOI: 10.3102/00346543071002321


Articles

A Selective Synthesis of the Experimental Literature on Dynamic Assessment

H. Lee Swanson and Catherine M. Lussier

University of California, Riverside

Dynamic assessment is a procedure that determines whether substantive changes occur in examinee behavior if feedback is provided across an array of increasingly complex or challenging tasks. This procedure contrasts with traditional models of assessment in which there is no feedback from the examiner on student performance. This article summarizes a meta-analysis of published studies on dynamic assessment. Thirty studies, which yielded 170 effect sizes (ESs), were reviewed. An analysis of main effects showed that ESs varied significantly as a function of ability group (underachievers yielded higher and children with learning disabilities yielded lower ESs than average, hearing-impaired, and mentally retarded participants did), chronological age (younger students yield higher ESs than older students do), sample size (studies with moderate sample sizes yielded larger ESs than did studies with small or large sample sizes), and type of assessment procedure (scaffolding and general strategies yielded larger ESs than did coaching). Mixed regression modeling indicated that the magnitude of the ES was best predicted by the type of assessment (ESs are higher for general strategies than for scaffolding, and scaffolding yields higher ESs than coaching does) and assessment domain (ESs are higher on visual-spatial than on verbal measures). None of the ability group classifications predicted ES in the complete regression model. These results were discussed within the context of the assumptions related to dynamic assessment and its current limitations.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Special EducationHome page
E. Caffrey, D. Fuchs, and L. S. Fuchs
The Predictive Validity of Dynamic Assessment: A Review
Journal of Special Education, February 1, 2008; 41(4): 254 - 270.
[Abstract] [PDF]



RER home page AER home page EPA home page JEB home page RRE home page