Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
CHC theory 101:  Introduction to "big picture" context
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

CHC theory 101: Introduction to "big picture" context

1,903
views

Published on

This is a brief introduction for placing CHC intellectual assessment (and all forms of intellectual testing) into a proper "big picture" perspective.

This is a brief introduction for placing CHC intellectual assessment (and all forms of intellectual testing) into a proper "big picture" perspective.

Published in: Education, Technology

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,903
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
9
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
52
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Putting cognitive ability testing in proper perspective: The “big picture” context Dr. Kevin S. McGrew Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) © Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 4-25-14
  • 2. “In an ever-changing world, psychological testing remains the flagship of applied psychology” Embretson, S. E. (1996). The new rules of measurement. Psychological Assessment, 8 (4), 341-349. But…this strong applied testing technology needs to be placed in the proper “big picture” perspective © Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 4-25-14
  • 3. • Minds differ still more than faces (Voltaire, 1746) • Each mind has its own method (Emerson, 1841) • In a world as empirical as ours, a youngster who does not know what he is good at will not be sure what he is good for (Fridenberg, 1959) The Law of Individual Differences © Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 4-25-14
  • 4. • To appreciate the personal individual difference “terrain” or “landscape” of each person’s abilities. • Understand each persons unique personal profile (e.g., ability mountain peaks and valleys). • Measure and identify each person’s peaks (potentials, exceptionalities, capacities, strengths) and their valleys (deficiencies, weaknesses, deficits, weaker abilities) in order to design educational programs to allow them to reach their fullest potential or capabilities. A major purpose of psychological testing
  • 5. The very big picture: Bronfenbrenner's ecological systems model Beyond IQ © Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 4-25-14
  • 6. Local Community School District Social Agencies National PolicyNational Policy Culture Friend Neighborhood Peer Group Work Organization Family system Parents Staff School Teacher Classroom Child Personal Competence Systems C P SE PH Adapted from Masten (2003) Distal (far away) Influences Proximal (close/near) Influences Beyond IQ © Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 4-25-14
  • 7. Conceptual Domain Practical Domain Social - Emotional Domain Physical Domain Personal Competence Systems Cognitive and achievement batteries sample only a portion of a child’s total competencies Beyond IQ © Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 4-25-14
  • 8. Conceptual Domain Practical Domain Social - Emotional Domain Physical Domain Personal Competence Systems The best measures of cognitive abilities explain 40-50 % of school achievement Cognitive assessment tools are valuable, yet fallible (not perfect), tools Beyond IQ © Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 4-25-14
  • 9. Local Community School District Social Agencies National PolicyNational Policy Culture Friend Neighborhood Peer Group Work Organization Family system Parent Child Personal Competence Systems C P SE PH This is why cognitive assessment tools predict/explain 40-50% of school achievement Adapted from Masten (2003) Staff School Teacher Classroom Beyond IQ © Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 4-25-14
  • 10. Beyond IQ © Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 4-25-14 The McGrew Motivation and Academic Competence Model (MACM)
  • 11. McGrew Motivation and Academic Competence Model (MACM) Orientations Towards Others (Social Ability) Cognitive (Social Aware- ness) Behavioral -Prosocial Behaviors -Problem or maladaptive behaviors How does the student need to behave towards others to succeed on the task? --Pro-social goal setting --Social cognition Volitional Controls (Cognitive Strategies & Styles) Self-Regulated Learning Strategies Conative Styles -Planning & activation -Monitoring -Control & regulation -Reaction & reflection What does the student need to do to succeed on the task? -Learning styles -Motivation styles -Self-protection styles Conative Abilities Orientations Towards Self (Motivations) Motivational orientations -Academic motivation -Intrinsic motivation -Academic goal orientation -Academic goal setting Does the student want to do the task and for what reasons? Interests & Attitudes -Academic attitudes -Academic interests & values Self- Beliefs -Locus of control -Academic self- efficacy -Academic self- concept -Ability conception What are the students typical ways of responding to the task? Does the student think they can do the task? Model is a revision of McGrew ‘s Model of Academic Competence and Motivation (McGrew et al., 2004; McGrew. 2007) which is grounded in Snow’s model of academic aptitude (Corono, 2002). Due to space limitations the model only lists general categories under the two areas under Social Ability and excludes the domains of physical, cognitive, affective/emotional and personality. Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP), 01-05-13 – Dr. Kevin S. McGrew Beyond IQ
  • 12. Simplified MACM-based adaptation and extension of Snow’s dynamic model of conation in the academic domain (Corno, 1993) Self-Regulated Learning Strategies Conative Styles Orientations Towards Self (Motivations) Motivational orientations Interests & Attitudes Self- Beliefs Achievement Outcomes Commitment to action “Crossing the Rubicon” Phrases used to describe this stage -Arena of planning and pre-decision-making -Contemplating and deliberating over options -Processes involved in decision to pursue goals -WishWantIntentions Volitional Controls (Cognitive Strategies & Styles) Phrases used to describe this stage -Arena of implementation and management -Carrying out plans and intentions -Action control strategies -Mindfullness (mindful effort investment) -Self-regulation of cognition and emotions Reciprocal interactions & feedback -Can I do the task? -Do I want to do the task and why? -What do I need to do to succeed on the task? COMMITMENT PATHWAY TO LEARNING Contemplate and plan Decide & Commit Implement and monitor Performance feedback Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP), 01-05-13 – Dr. Kevin S. McGrew Beyond IQ
  • 13. Conceptual Abilities (Cognitive and achievement) We are focusing on just one personal competence domain within a larger system of proximal (close) and distal (far) influences on the child Our test instruments only “sample” select conceptual abilities within this one domain © Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 4-25-14
  • 14. Gs Ga Gv Gf Gq Grw Glr Gwm Gc ability construct Human cognitive abilities are hypothetical constructs • Hidden attributes • Unseen phenomena • Not visible • Not directly observable • Latent • Are used to explain behavior
  • 15. Gf = Fluid Reasoning The Theoretical Domain The Measurement Domain Gf Tests are designed to produce visible or observable behavior that can be quantified or measured. The test items are indicators of the attribute that produce the hidden cognitive ability
  • 16. A ???? B ???? What type of test and item formats do we want to use? MeasurementDomain Universe of possible Gf item types and formats C ???? D ???? TheoreticalDomain Gf Fluid reasoning How do we make the unobservable (hidden) Gf abilities visible or observable? This is a key test development question
  • 17. “Tests do not think for themselves, nor do they directly communicate with patients. Like a stethoscope, a blood pressure gauge, or an MRI scan, a psychological test is a dumb tool, and the worth of the tool cannot be separated from the sophistication of the clinician who draws inferences from it and then communicates with patients and professionals” Meyer et al. (2001). Psychological testing and psychological assessment. American Psychologist Developing or administering a cognitive battery is only the first step…………….. © Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 4-25-14
  • 18. “Intelligent” intelligence testing is required after a test is developed and is put into practice © Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 4-25-14

×