Assessment instruments are never neutral but always mediational, embedding a culturally biased telos¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · theoretical r2 · q1
Currency · newest study 1995 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q1 i? Every means of data elicitation embodies a culturally biased sense of telos; instruments of data elicitation are never neutral but always mediational, so choosing an assessment means already assumes it can determine learning. → Peter Smagorinsky 1995

Evidence¶

Peter Smagorinsky 1995¶

Peter Smagorinsky. (1995). The Social Construction of Data: Methodological Problems of Investigating Learning in the Zone of Proximal Development. Review of Educational Research, 65(3), 191-212. https://doi.org/10.2307/1170682

q1 · i? · theoretical · r2

Theoretical argument drawing on Moll and Greenberg (1990) and Gardner (1983): the article argues that 'the instruments of data elicitation are never neutral' and that what is measured may be cultural compatibility between learner and mediation rather than progress toward a telos. Support is argumentative, not empirical.

"The ZPD's developmental nature suggests that the instruments of data elicitation are never neutral but, rather, are always mediational."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Every assessment procedure or instrument embodies a sense of telos, producing data that locate people along the researcher's assumed developmental path — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• AI systems are non-neutral socio-technical artifacts embedding cultural assumptions and power relations — a broader claim this one bears on
• Luria's Uzbekistan cognition research is of questionable validity because its mediational means were culturally inappropriate — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Data on learning in the ZPD are social constructs, so the purity-of-data metaphor is inappropriate — a narrower finding that bears on this claim