Learning Potential Assessment: Where Is the Paradigm Shift?

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511610400.015

13 - Learning Potential Assessment: Where Is the Paradigm Shift?

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 December 2009

Alex Kozulin

Edited by

David B. Pillemer and

Sheldon H. White

Show author details

Alex Kozulin: Affiliation:
International Center for the Enhancement of Learning Potential: Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel
David B. Pillemer: Affiliation:
University of New Hampshire
Sheldon H. White: Affiliation:
Harvard University, Massachusetts

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Learning potential assessment (LPA) is only slightly younger than intelligence testing itself. In the early 1930s Lev Vygotsky (1934/1986) in Russia and Andre Rey (1934) in Switzerland made clear statements in favor of LPA procedures. As shown in recent reviews (Lidz, 1987; Weidl, Guthke, and Wigenfeld, 1995) even the period between the 1940s and the 1960s that appeared to be totally dominated by the psychometric approach had its share of LPA attempts. Finally in the 1960s, on the wave of widespread dissatisfaction with the existent psychometric intelligence tests, LPA approaches became operationalized (Budoff and Friedman, 1964; Feuerstein and Shalom, 1968) and started forming a field of their own (Campbell and Carlson, 1995; Kozulin and Falik, 1995). Yet at the beginning of the 21st century, 70 years since its theoretical inception and 30 years since its operationalization, LPA still remains a rather marginal form of assessment as compared to the dominant psychometric IQ approach. In terms of Kuhn's (1970) theory of scientific revolutions, the paradigm shift failed to take place. In this chapter, I will attempt to answer the question of why to the present time the LPA paradigm has not succeeded in dislodging the psychometric paradigm.

The Concept of LPA

Since its inception in the work of Binet and Simon, the concept of intelligence testing was closely connected to the task of evaluating the learning abilities of children and adults.

Type: Chapter
Information: Developmental Psychology and Social Change
Research, History and Policy
, pp. 352 - 367

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610400.015 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anastasi, A. (1954). Psychological Testing. New York: MacmillanGoogle Scholar

Bauer, R. (1968). The New Man in Soviet Psychology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar

Binet, A. (1909). Les Idées Modernes sur les Enfants. Paris: FlammarionGoogle Scholar

Brown, A., & Ferrara, R. (1985). Diagnosing zones of proximal development. In Wertsch, J. (Ed.), Culture, Communication, and Cognition: Vygotskian Perspectives (pp. 273–305). New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Budoff, M. (1987). The validity of learning potential assessment. In Lidz, C. (Ed.), Dynamic Assessment (pp. 52–81). New York: Guilford PressGoogle Scholar

Budoff, M., & Friedman, M. (1964). “Learning potential” as an assessment approach to the adolescent mentally retarded. Journal of Consulting Psychology 28, 434–439CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Campbell, C., & Carlson, J. (1995). The dynamic assessment of mental abilities. In Carlson, J. (Ed.), European Contributions to Dynamic Assessment (pp. 1–32). Greenwich, CT: JAI PressGoogle Scholar

Campione, J. (1996). Assisted assessment: A taxonomy of approaches and an outline of strengths and weaknesses. In Daniels, H. (Ed.), An Introduction to Vygotsky (pp. 219–250). London: RoutledgeCrossRef Google Scholar

Carlson, J. (Ed.). (1995). European Contributions to Dynamic Assessment. Greenwich, CT: JAI PressGoogle Scholar

Cattell, R. B. (1941). Some theoretical issues in adult intelligence testing. Psychological Bulletin 38, 592Google Scholar

Chaiklin, S. (2003). The zone of proximal development in Vygotsky's analysis of learning and instruction. In Kozulin, A., Gindis, B., Ageyev, V., & Miller, S. (Eds.), Vygotsky's Educational Theory in Cultural Context (pp. 39–64). New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRef Google Scholar

Chen, J.-Q., & Gardner, H. (1997). Alternative assessment from a multiple intelligences theoretical perspective. In Flanagan, D., Genshaft, J., & Harrison, P. (Eds.), Contemporary Intellectual Assessment (pp. 105–121). New York: Guildford PressGoogle Scholar

Das, J. P., Kirby, J., & Jarman, R. (1979). Simultaneous and Successive Cognitive Processes. New York: Academic PressGoogle Scholar

Grigorenko, E., & Sternberg, R. (1998). Dynamic testing. Psychological Bulletin 124, 75–111CrossRef Google Scholar

Elliott, R. (1987). Litigating Intelligence: IQ Tests, Special Education, and Social Sciences in the Courtroom. Dover, MA: Auburn HouseGoogle Scholar

Feuerstein, R., & Shalom, H. (1968). The Learning Potential Assessment Device. In Richards, B. W. (Ed.), Proceedings of the First Congress of the International Association for the Scientific Study of Mental Deficiency. Reigate, UK: Michael JacksonGoogle Scholar

Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y., & Hoffman, M. (1979). Dynamic Assessment of Retarded Performer. Baltimore, MD: University Park PressGoogle Scholar

Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y., Hoffman, M., & Miller, R. (1980). Instrumental Enrichment. Baltimore, MD: University Park PressGoogle Scholar

Feuerstein, R., Falik, L., & Feuerstein, R. S. (1998). The learning potential assessment device. In Samuda, R. (Ed.), Advances in Cross-Cultural Assessment (pp. 100–161). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage PublicationsGoogle Scholar

Feuerstein, R., Falik, L., Rand, Y., & Feuerstein, R. S. (2002). Dynamic Assessment of Cognitive Modifiability. Jerusalem: ICELP PressGoogle Scholar

Feuerstein, R., Feuerstein, R. S., & Gross, S. (1997). The learning potential assessment device. In Flanagan, D., Genshaft, J., & Harrison, P. (Eds.), Contemporary Intellectual Assessment (pp. 297–313). New York: Guilford PressGoogle Scholar

Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y., & Rynders, J. (1988). Don't Accept Me As I Am. New York: PlenumCrossRef Google Scholar

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind. New York: Basic BooksGoogle Scholar

Gould, S. (1981). The Mismeasure of Man. New York: NortonGoogle Scholar

Guthke, J., & Stein, H. (1996). Are learning tests the better version of intelligence tests?European Journal of Psychological Assessment 12, 1–13CrossRef Google Scholar

Hamers, J. H. M., Sijtsma, K., & Ruijssenaars, A. J. J. M. (Eds.). (1993). Learning Potential Assessment. Amsterdam: Swets and ZeitlingerGoogle Scholar

Haywood, C., & Tzuriel, D. (Eds.). (1992). Interactive Assessment. New York: SpringerCrossRef Google Scholar

Ivanova, A. Y. (1976). Obuchaemost kak printsip otsenki ymstvennogo pazvitia u detei (Learning ability as an approach to the assessment of the child's intellectual development). Moscow: PedagogikaGoogle Scholar

Kamin, L. (1974). The Science and Politics of IQ. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum AssociatesGoogle Scholar

Kamphous, R., & Reynolds, C. (1987). Clinical and Research Applications of the K-ABC. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance ServiceGoogle Scholar

Karpov, Y. (1990). Obuchaemost kak characteristika umstvennogo razvitia (Learning aptitude as an indicator of cognitive development). Psikhologia 14, 2, 3–16Google Scholar

Karpov, Y., & Gindis, B. (2000). Dynamic assessment of the level of internalization of elementary school children's problem solving activity. In Lidz, C. & Elliott, J. (Eds.), Dynamic Assessment: Prevailing Models and Applications (pp. 133–154). New York: Elsevier ScienceGoogle Scholar

Klauer, K. (1993). Learning potential testing: The effect of retesting. In Hamers, J. H. M., Sijtsma, K., & Ruijssenaars, A. J. J. M. (Eds.), Learning Potential Assessment (pp. 135–152). Amsterdam: Swets and ZeitlingerGoogle Scholar

Kozulin, A. (1984). Psychology in Utopia. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Kozulin, A. (1990). Vygotsky's Psychology: A Biography of Ideas. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar

Kozulin, A. (1998). Psychological Tools: A Sociocultural Approach to Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar

Kozulin, A., & Falik, L. (1995). Dynamic cognitive assessment of the child. Current Directions in Psychological Science 4, 192–196CrossRef Google Scholar

Kozulin, A., & Gindis, B. (in press). Sociocultural theory and education of children with special needs. In Cole, M., Daniels, H., & Wertsch, J. (Eds.), Cambridge Companion to Vygotsky. New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Kuhn, T. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar

Lichtenberger, E., Kaufman, A., & Kaufman, N. (1998). Kaufman assessment battery for children. In Samuda, R. (Ed.), Advances in Cross-Cultural Assessment (pp. 20–55). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage PublicationsGoogle Scholar

Lidz, C. (Ed.). (1987). Dynamic Assessment. New York: Guilford PressGoogle Scholar

Lidz, C., & Elliott, J. (Eds.). (2000). Dynamic Assessment: Prevailing Models and Applications. New York: Elsevier ScienceGoogle Scholar

Lidz, C., & Gindis, B. (2003). Dynamic assessment of the evolving cognitive functions in children. In Kozulin, A., Gindis, B., Ageyev, V., & Miller, S. (Eds.), Vygotsky's Educational Theory in Cultural Context (pp. 99–118). New York: Cambridge University PressjCrossRef Google Scholar

Lloyd, P., & Feringhough, C. (Eds.). (1999). Lev Vygotsky: Critical Assessments (Vols. 1–4). London: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar

Luria, A. (1961). An objective approach to the study of abnormal child. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 31, 1–14Google Scholar

Minick, N. (1987). Implications of Vygotsky's theory for dynamic assessment. In Lidz, C. (Ed.), Dynamic Assessment (pp. 116–140). New York: Guilford PressGoogle Scholar

Rey, A. (1934). D'un procede pour evaluer l'educabilite. Archives de Psychologie 24, 297–337Google Scholar

Rey, A. (1941). L'examen psychologique dans les case d'encephalopathie traumatique. Archives de Psychologie 28, 286–340Google Scholar

Rey, A. (1959). Test de Copie et de Reproduction de Memoire de Figures Geometriques complexes. Paris: Editions Centre de Psychologie Applique. (English translation in. Clinical Neuropsychologist 7, 4–21, 1993)

Rey, A. (1969). Psychologie Clinique et Neurologie. Neuchatel: Delachaux & NiestleGoogle Scholar

Sternberg, R. (1985). Beyond the IQ: The Triarchical Theory of Intelligence. New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Sternberg, R., & Grigorenko, E. (2002). Dynamic Testing. New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Thurstone, L. (1938). Primary mental abilities. Psychological Monographs, No. 1. Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar

Valdes, G., & Figueroa, R. (1994). Bilingualism and Testing. Norwood, NJ: AblexGoogle Scholar

Veer, R., & Valsiner, J. (1991). Understanding Vygotsky. Oxford, UK: BlackwellGoogle Scholar

Vygotsky, L. (1934/1986). Thought and Language (Rev. ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar

Weidl, K. H., Guthke, J., & Wigenfeld, S. (1995). Dynamic assessment in Europe. In Carlson, J. (Ed.), European Contributions to Dynamic Assessment (pp. 33–82). Greenwich, CT: JAI PressGoogle Scholar

Book contents

13 - Learning Potential Assessment: Where Is the Paradigm Shift?

Summary

Access options

References

Save book to Kindle

Save book to Dropbox

Save book to Google Drive