Population differences in constructive memory

An experiment was conducted to evaluate constructive memory in fourth-grade low-SES black and middle-SES white children. The children were read nine short passages; each passage was composed of two premise statements and a filler sentence. The children were tested by a recognition procedure. Thirty-six test sentences were presented randomly. Four sentences were associated with each passage (true premise, false premise, true inference, and false inference). Subjects were asked to make yes/no recognition decisions based on whether the test sentence was identical to a sentence presented at study. Middle-SES white children made few errors, except to true inference test sentences. This pattern of performance is consistent with the constructive view of memory. Low-SES black children also had a high error rate to true inference items. However, this outcome may not reflect constructive memory because they also had a high error rate to some of the other types of test sentences.     

Not Proved: Reply to Wynn

Findings on whether young infants look longer at incorrect addition and subtraction have been inconsistent or, as in our study, negative. We hypothesize that imprecise ordinal calculating with very small numbers of objects develops in late infancy and precise calculating in early childhood.     

Collaboration between 3- and 4-year-olds in self-initiated play on instruments

This article reports on a study of collaborative music-making on instruments among 3- and 4-year-old children. An area equipped with musical instruments was provided as a free-choice play option in an early childhood setting and a fixed camera recorded the children's play continuously during a number of visits. From the total 17 h of data five episodes of paired play were selected. Through a process of comparison across these episodes, it was established that children were coordinating their play through a repertoire of communicative and expressive behaviours. One episode of paired play considered to be representative was micro-analysed in detail.     

A collaborative assessment of students’ placement learning

The research informing this paper set out to investigate the qualitative experiences of students, supervisors and tutors involved in a summative collaborative assessment of placement learning on an undergraduate professional qualifying programme in the UK. Analysis of data gathered through semi-structured interviews provides valuable insights into its use. In particular, engagement in a collaborative assessment brings a degree of exposure for all concerned. Participants need to feel ‘able’ to participate, and ability to participate is linked to notions of agency and autonomy. Collaborative assessment design needs to acknowledge power relations and include strategies to reduce imbalances. The importance of recognising and working with the complexities of assessment should not be underestimated. Criterion referencing offers a guide to support consistency but can also falsely present assessment as mechanistic and instrumental. The research shows that it is in the ‘doing’ of assessment that a ‘shared language’ is developed. It demonstrates the value of active student engagement in assessment in relation to the construction and use of theory, developing reflective practice and assessment literacy. The collaborative assessment provides students with the opportunity to experience a ‘performance of understanding’ in a community of practice that, whilst pressured, reflects ‘real’ professional life.     

The NCTQ Selectivity Standard and Principal Evaluation of Teacher Preparation

Ratings published by the National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ) require selectivity in admission to educator preparation programs. NCTQ provides a list of citations to support the selectivity standard termed “strong support.” A review of each citation in the list found little or no support for the standard. Original data was collected examining employment supervisor ratings of over 11,000 teachers’ preparation and analyzed for correlations and differences based on the selectivity standard. No significant differences were found between supervisor ratings of teachers who met or did not meet the NCTQ test standard and no significant correlations were found between the selectivity tests, grade point average, and principal ratings of teachers. These findings bring into question the listed selectivity standard and the rationale for its inclusion in NCTQ's public ranking process.