Mathematical power of special-needs pupils: An ICT-based dynamic assessment format to reveal weak pupils' learning potential

British Journal of Educational Technology

Volumn 40, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 273-284

  Peltenburg, Marjolijn ^a   Van Den Heuvel Panhuizen, Marja ^b,c   Doig, Brian ^d  

^a UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c HUMBOLDT UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^d DEAKIN UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DYNAMIC ASSESSMENTS; LEARNING POTENTIALS; STRATEGY USE; TEST CONDITIONS; TOOL USE; VISUAL TOOLS;

TESTING;

EDUCATION;

EID: 60349101768     PISSN: 00071013     EISSN: 14678535     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00917.x     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Allsop, D. H., Kyger, M. M., Lovin, L., Gerretson, H., Carson, K. L. Ray, S. (2008). Mathematics dynamic assessment. Informal assessment that responds to the needs of struggling learners in mathematics. Teaching Exceptional Children, 40, 3, 6 16.
2. Ashlock, R. B. (2005). Error patterns in computation: using error patterns to improve instruction. Columbus, OH : Merrill.
3. Babbitt, B. Miller, S. (1996). Using hypermedia to improve the mathematics problem-solving skills of students with disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29, 4, 391 401.
4. Beishuizen, M. (1993). Mental strategies and materials or models for addition and subtraction up to 100 in Dutch second grades. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 24, 4, 294 323.
5. Beishuizen, M., Van Putten, C. M. Van Mulken, F. (1997). Mental arithmetic and strategy use with indirect number problems up to one hundred. Learning and Instruction, 7, 1, 87 106.
6. Bottge, B. Rueda, E. (2006). Low achievers may benefit from interactive mathematics. Retrieved February 3, 2007, from http://wceruw.org/news/ coverStories/low-achievers-may-benefit-from-interactive-math.php
7. Brown, J. S. Burton, R. R. (1978). Diagnostic models for procedural bugs in basic mathematical skills. Cognitive Science, 2, 155 192.
8. Brown, J. S. VanLehn, K. (1982). Towards a generative theory of 'bugs'. In T. P. Carpenter, J. M. Moser A. Romberg (Eds Addition and subtraction: a cognitive perspective (pp. 117 135). Hillsdale, NJ : Erlbaum.
9. Campione, J. C. (1989). Assisted assessment: a taxonomy of approaches and an outline of strengths and weaknesses. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 3, 151 165.
10. Clements, D. (2002). Computers in early childhood mathematics. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 3, 2, 160 181.
11. Clements, D. H. (1998). Computers in mathematics education assessment. In : G. W. Bright J. N. Joyner (Eds. Classroom assessment in mathematics: views from a national science foundation working conference (pp. 153 159). Lanham, MD : University Press of America.
12. Clements, D. H. McMillen, S. (1996). Rethinking concrete manipulatives. Teaching Children Mathematics, 2, 5, 270 279.
13. Driscoll, M. J. (1983). Research within reach: elementary school mathematics and reading. St. Louis, MO : CEMREL.
14. Feuerstein, R. (1979). The dynamic assessment of retarded performers: the learning potential assessment device, theory, instruments, and techniques. Baltimore, MD : University Park Press.
15. Fiori, C. Zuccheri, L. (2005). An experimental research on error patterns in written subtraction. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 60, 3, 323 331.
16. Janssen, J., Scheltens, F. Kraemer, J. (2005). Leerling- en onderwijsvolgsysteem. Rekenen-wiskunde groep 4. Handleiding [Student and Education Monitoring System. Mathematics Grade 2. Teachers guide Arnhem : CITO.
17. Kolovou, A., Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., Bakker, A. Elia, I. (2008). An ICT environment to assess and support students' mathematical problem-solving performance in non-routine puzzle-like word problems. Paper presented at ICME11 [WWW document]. Retrieved August 15, 2008, from http://tsg.icme11.org/document/ get/466
18. Kraemer, J., Van der Schoot, F. Engelen, R. (2000). Balans van het reken- en wiskundeonderwijs op LOM - en MLK-scholen 2 [Second assessment of mathematics education at special education schools Arnhem : CITO.
19. Kumar, D. Wilson, C. L. (1997). Computer technology, science education, and students with learning disabilities. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 6, 2, 155 160.
20. Lee, C. Chen, M. (2008). Taiwanese junior high school student's mathematics attitudes and perceptions towards virtual manipulatives. British Journal of Educational Technology. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00877.x
21. Peltenburg, M. Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (2008). Mathematical power of special needs students. In M. van den Heuvel-Panhuizen O. Köller (Eds Challenging Assessment - book of abstracts of the fourth biennial EARLI/Northrumbria assessment conference 2008 (p. 142). Berlin : IQB.
22. Riccomini, P. J. (2005). Identification and remediation of systematic error patterns in subtraction. Learning disability Quarterly, 28, 233 242.
23. Ryba, K., Selby, L. Nolan, P. (1995). Computers empower students with special needs. Educational Leadership, 53, 2, 82 84.
24. Singleton, C. (2004). Computer-based assessment. In L. Florian J. Hegarty (Eds ICT and special educational needs (pp. 46 61). Berkshire : Open University Press.
25. Sowell, E. J. (1989). Effects of manipulative materials in mathematics instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20, 5, 498 505.
26. Suydam, M. N. (1986). Manipulative materials and achievement. Arithmetic Teacher, 33, 6, 10, 32.
27. Torbeyns, J., De Smedt, B., Stassens, N., Ghesquière, P. Verschaffel, L. (in press). Solving subtraction problems by means of indirect addition. Mathematical Thinking and Learning.
28. Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (1996). Assessment and realistic mathematics education. Utrecht : CD-Beta Press.
29. Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (2007). Changes in purpose, content and format: trends in assessment in mathematics education. In B. Choksi C. Natarajan (Eds The epiSTEME reviews, volume 2, research trends in science, technology and mathematics education (pp. 241 266). New Delhi : Macmillan.
30. Wiliam, D. (2008). When is assessment learning oriented? Keynote at the fourth northumbria assessment conference WWW document]. Retrieved October 15, 2008, from http://web.mac.com/dylanwiliam/Site/Presentations-files/ EARLI%28A%29%2008.ppt
31. Woodward, J. Gersten, R. (1992). The TORUS project: an innovative assessment technology program. Final report. Oregon: Eugene Research Institute.
32. Woodward, J. Rieth, H. (1997). A historical review of technology research in special education. Review of Educational Research, 67, 503 536.