Thursday, Jan. 13, 2022
Gernsbacher, M. A., Soicher, R. N., & Becker-Blease, K.
A. (2020). Four empirically based reasons not to administer time-limited tests.
Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 6(2), 175-190.
This article explored reasons for favoring non-timed tests
over timed test: validity, reliability, inclusivity, and equity. The article reinforced my previous empirical
finding from conversations with teachers and students, that giving students
with dyslexia more time is the most prescribed accommodation. This article is
of interest to me because it challenged my previous conceptions about allowing
more time as an accommodation; it suggested that because extra-time may benefit
all students this accommodation for learning diverse students may be
unequitable; and because of this the authors strongly advocate that tests be
untimed for all students. The authors reiterated common historical
misconception of corelating ability with speed and offered much research
contradicting this belief in many subject areas and education levels. The
authors also cite research indicating that although a commonly used and
accepted accommodation, most students given this accommodation do not utilize it
significantly; in essence the authors suggest that the advantage in untimed
tests is the absence of the “pressure of time ticking off” and associated
anxiety.
Monday, Jan. 10, 2022
Note: I chose to include both article because the first used many references to the second, and I wanted to read the original source. The article in The Dyslexic Advantage views the Beals and Garelick (2015) article through the lens of students with dyslexia, rather than the original article's more general viewpoint.
Dyslexia Advantage Team. (2020). Don't let working memory
prevent math learning. https://www.dyslexicadvantage.org/dont-let-working-memory-prevent-math-learning/
This article talks about how working memory can affect a student’s
math performance but not their inherent mathematical ability, and accommodations
should be considered to offset this disadvantage. The paper specifically
addresses the practice of asking students to explain their thought processes in
math problems, which they believe may be particularly challenging to students
with poor working memory. They also suggest that there is a significant benefit
in streamlining a question into its basic mathematical representation for
students who have dyslexia, as this puts less emphasis on working memory and
tests mathematical ability. This is interesting to me because it's not something that I've considered before in potential accommodations or adaptions for students with dyslexia. I am aware of the potential disadvantages of word problems in terms of the extra required reading but had not considered their requirement of working memory, nor had I thought about asking students to explain their thinking. Personally, explaining thinking always caused anxiety for me, as it seemed something beyond my current state of thinking and felt like it was asking something quite separate from the mathematical problem itself.
Beals, K. & Garelick, B. (2015). Explaining Your Math:
Unnecessary at Best, Encumbering at Worst. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2015/11/math-showing-work/414924/
This article by Katherine Beals and Barry Garelick (2015) is
the cornerstone of the previous article in The Dyslexic Advantage. The authors question
the equity in requiring students to explain their mathematical reasoning
process, and whether their ability to provide a correct answer should not be
proof enough of their understanding. The authors reason that there can many
reasons, other than mathematical ability, that challenge, or prevent, a student
from being able to eloquently explain their thought process. This article gave me a fresh insight into potential disadvantages our teaching and assessment methods may present to students with dyslexia and other learning differences or needs.
