Assessment of Historical Analysis and Argumentation (AHAA): A New Measure of Document-Based Historical Thinking

IF 2.3 1区心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL

Cognition and Instruction Pub Date : 2019-07-10 DOI:10.1080/07370008.2019.1632861

Abby Reisman, Emily Brimsek, Claire Hollywood

{"title":"Assessment of Historical Analysis and Argumentation (AHAA): A New Measure of Document-Based Historical Thinking","authors":"Abby Reisman, Emily Brimsek, Claire Hollywood","doi":"10.1080/07370008.2019.1632861","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract A troubling gap exists between the current state of history assessment and the knowledge and skills deemed essential for students to thrive in the 21st century. We propose a new assessment of historical thinking that represents a promising alignment with extant cognitive research, as well as with the practices that undergird the discipline. In this article, we discuss the design of the Assessment of Historical Analysis and Argumentation (AHAA), as well as the accompanying scoring rubric, and report findings from our administration of multiple forms of the exam with secondary students (N = 618). Evidence indicates that the exam captured student historical thinking about documents and that the items prompted students to construct a cognitive representation of intertextual reasoning. Given the dearth of assessments that capture student historical thinking about documents and their understanding of content, we believe the AHAA has the potential to be an important instructional resource.","PeriodicalId":47945,"journal":{"name":"Cognition and Instruction","volume":"37 1","pages":"534 - 561"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/07370008.2019.1632861","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognition and Instruction","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2019.1632861","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 6

Abstract

Abstract A troubling gap exists between the current state of history assessment and the knowledge and skills deemed essential for students to thrive in the 21st century. We propose a new assessment of historical thinking that represents a promising alignment with extant cognitive research, as well as with the practices that undergird the discipline. In this article, we discuss the design of the Assessment of Historical Analysis and Argumentation (AHAA), as well as the accompanying scoring rubric, and report findings from our administration of multiple forms of the exam with secondary students (N = 618). Evidence indicates that the exam captured student historical thinking about documents and that the items prompted students to construct a cognitive representation of intertextual reasoning. Given the dearth of assessments that capture student historical thinking about documents and their understanding of content, we believe the AHAA has the potential to be an important instructional resource.

查看原文本刊更多论文

历史分析与论证评估:一种基于文献的历史思维新方法

历史评估的现状与21世纪学生茁壮成长所必需的知识和技能之间存在着令人不安的差距。我们提出了一种新的历史思维评估，它代表了与现有认知研究以及支撑该学科的实践相一致的前景。在本文中，我们讨论了历史分析和论证评估(AHAA)的设计，以及附带的评分标准，并报告了我们对中学生(N = 618)进行多种形式考试的管理结果。有证据表明，考试抓住了学生对文献的历史思考，这些题目促使学生构建互文推理的认知表征。鉴于缺乏能够捕捉学生对文件的历史思考和他们对内容的理解的评估，我们相信AHAA有潜力成为一个重要的教学资源。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Cognition and Instruction Multiple-

CiteScore

7.90

自引率

12.10%

发文量

期刊介绍： Among education journals, Cognition and Instruction"s distinctive niche is rigorous study of foundational issues concerning the mental, socio-cultural, and mediational processes and conditions of learning and intellectual competence. For these purposes, both “cognition” and “instruction” must be interpreted broadly. The journal preferentially attends to the “how” of learning and intellectual practices. A balance of well-reasoned theory and careful and reflective empirical technique is typical.