Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
H. Peterson (1972)
Psychoeducational Evaluation of the Preschool Child.JAMA Neurology, 27
(1965)
Guide to using the Colored Progressive Matrices, Sets A, A b, and B
A. Jensen (1969)
How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic AchievementHarvard Educational Review, 39
R. Feuerstein, Ya’acov Rand (1974)
Mediated Learning Experiences: An Outline of the Proximal Etiology for Differential Development of Cognitive Functions.
Budoff (1967)
Learning potential among institutionalized retardatesAmerican Journal of Mental Deficiency, 72
N. M. Lambert, M. R. Wilcox, W. P. Gleason (1974)
The educationally retarded child
D. Klassen, R. Feuerstein, Y. Rand, M. Hoffman (1979)
The dynamic assessment of retarded performers
N. Lambert, Margaret Wilcox, Warren Gleason (1974)
The educationally retarded child;: Comprehensive assessment and planning for slow learners and the educable mentally retarded
(1978)
The hard-to-teach child
R. Feuerstein, Ronald Miller, Ya’acov Rand, M. Jensen (1981)
Can Evolving Techniques Better Measure Cognitive Change?Journal of Special Education, 15
M. Budoff (1967)
Learning potential among institutionalized young adult retardates.American journal of mental deficiency, 72 3
The objectives of the current study were (a) to develop a measure of children's analogical thinking modifiability (CATM) based on the Feuerstein, Rand, and Hoffman (1979) theory of dynamic assessment of cognitive modifiability, (b) to compare the performance of groups assumed to be differentially modified by intervention, (c) to compare CATM performance with performance on a conventional test, and (d) to study qualitative changes after a learning process. Subjects were disdvantaged, regular, and special education kindergarten children (N=140), and mentally retarded children (N=20). The CATM was administered together with the Ravens Colored Progressive Matrices (RCPM) in a balanced order. Disadvantaged and regular children achieved higher gain scores than other groups in both none-or-all and partial credit methods (p < 01). The MR and the special education groups showed small gains according to the none-or-all credit method; however, according to the partial credit method, the MR group showed high gains and the special education group a performance decrease. Performance scores on the CATM were higher than on the RCPM, especially in comparison to the B8-B12 items-differences reach a peak of 61% and 67% for the disadvantaged and regular groups, respectively. Qualitative analysis indicated that form mistakes were most resistant to change, whereas color mistakes were most easy to modify. Results were explained within Feuerstein's theoretical framework of cognitive modifiability. Impaired cognitive functions as well as analytic versus synthetic processes were suggested to explain group differences.
Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology – Springer Journals
Published: Dec 17, 2004
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.