The study investigated the reasoning processes used by psychoeducational assessors in interpreting a typical case-file. The methodology used was one adapted from studies of problem-solving skills in other domains. In the models of reasoning derived from these studies, expertise was associated with extensive use of causal reasoning and with a high level of integration between a selectively narrow body of information and the proposed solutions. It was hypothesised that the reasoning processes used by experienced psychoeducational assessors would show similar properties. In addition, it was hypothesised that experienced and trainee assessors could be differentiated by: (a) the degree of affinity shown to a theoretical orientation in psychology, (the degree of affinity shown by the experienced assessors being greater than that shown by the trainees), and (b) the numbers and types of inferences generated from case-file information. The influences of the referral information and subjects' preconceived notions of educational exceptionality on assessment were also considered. / Two groups of 12 subjects each participated in the study; experienced school psychologists (designated the experts), and trainees in psychoeducational assessment (designated the novices). Think-aloud protocols were obtained from the subjects as they interpreted the case-file. A scale for assessing relative preferences for theoretical orientations in psychology was administered to all subjects. Transcriptions of the think-aloud protocols were segmented and coded according to predetermined inference categories. The case-file text and subjects' coded protocols were used to set out formally representations of subjects' reasoning. / The experts and the novices were compared for adherence to theoretical orientation, the numbers and types of inferences generated, and the reasoning strategies employed. No differences were found between the two groups for the variables analysed. However, for some of the experts, but not for the novices, well-integrated reasoning was associated with adherence to initial theories about the case. Consistencies across both groups of subjects in the types of inferences made and the use of case-file information are suggestive of a case-specific approach to assessment. Assessors appear to emphasise a student's academic strengths and, at the same time, to attend to affective problems. Relatively little attention is paid to physiological factors. The variability in the data collected indicates that there are few criteria against which to gauge expertise in psychoeducational assessment. There was no indication that assessors test their diagnostic theories systematically. It is suggested that, in this domain, reasoning strategies of review and revision are desirable and that representational models of expertise should reflect these strategies.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:LACETR/oai:collectionscanada.gc.ca:QMM.39310 |
| Date | January 1992 |
| Creators | Fine, Esther Karen |
| Publisher | McGill University |
| Source Sets | Library and Archives Canada ETDs Repository / Centre d'archives des thèses électroniques de Bibliothèque et Archives Canada |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Electronic Thesis or Dissertation |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Coverage | Doctor of Philosophy (Department of Educational Psychology and Counselling.) |
| Rights | All items in eScholarship@McGill are protected by copyright with all rights reserved unless otherwise indicated. |
| Relation | alephsysno: 001289677, proquestno: NN74647, Theses scanned by UMI/ProQuest. |
Page generated in 0.0022 seconds