This article examines the implications of argument-based validity for the continued development of dynamic assessment (DA) research and practice. We propose that the move toward validation as a process of interpretation and evidence-based argument is commensurable with DA but that fundamental ontological differences with conventional approaches to measurement must be recognized. Following Ollman's (2003) explication of dialectical thinking, and in particular the distinction between philosophies of external and internal relations, we submit that the standard view of abilities as discrete traits is untenable in DA. Instead, abilities must be understood in a manner that takes account of (a) available forms of mediation and (b) change that occurs over the course of DA. To illustrate how a process of validation might be undertaken in DA, we present findings from recent DA studies involving second language learners. Our discussion brings into focus both learner participation in DA interactions and score changes over time.
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
- Developmental and Educational Psychology