Book Reviews/Comptes Rendus155 universities. However, because his claim occupies a central position in his book, that survey might have usefully been so expanded as to make up at least another chapter in the volume. He does not do this vital task; instead, he unexpectedly and, one might say, inadvisedly, takes a digression by defending the advocacy of multiculturalism in higher education. Yamane's digression into a defence of multiculturalism leaves the reader thirsting for two things: one, for more solid evidence for his main claim; and two, for an extended treatment of the justification for multiculturalism in higher education. Indeed, his spirited and insightful but all-too-brief defense of multiculturalism advocacy elicits a desire for more of his scholarly argumentation. One would hope that this defense will be available to us from Yamane in the future. • References Glazer, N. (1970). Remembering the answers: Essays on the American student revolt. New York, NY: Basic Books. Levine, A. (1980). Why innovations fail. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Fenwick, T., & Parsons, J. (2000). The Art of Evaluation: A Handbook for Educators and Trainers. Toronto, ON: T h o m p s o n Educational Publishing Inc. Pages: 244. Price $34.95 CAD. Reviewed by Cinde L. Lock, Queen's University Divided into fifteen short, stand-alone chapters and twelve toolboxes that highlight various types of assessment activities, Tara Fenwick and Jim Parsons' book, The Art of Evaluation: A Handbook for Educators and Trainers, provides educators with options and ideas about how to keep the learner at the center of the teaching, learning, and assessment process. Indeed, these authors focus on the learner and the instructor, rather than the program or topic of learning, as they highlight concrete The Canadian Journal of Higher Education Volume XXXII, No. 2, 2002 Book Reviews/Comptes Rendus155 examples of assessment activities that are designed to make the assessment process worthwhile, significant, and meaningful to individuals in their learning. This book focuses on adult learners enrolled in college or other postsecondary institutions and their needs. Throughout the book, the authors argue, "Adults have rather fragile egos" (p. 25), "Adult learners have their own purposes and motivation for learning" (p. 44), and "adults learn concepts experientially" (p. 83). However, I would be hard-pressed to find a child or adolescent who did not fit these descriptions as well. Indeed, the book could be directed at learners of all ages without much adaptation. The only type of learner that may have distinct assessment needs is the adult who is involved in work-related training activities. Although the authors identify this type of learner as being a focus of discussion, there is no section of the book that is specifically concerned with the unique needs or assessment concerns related to these individuals. Instead, comments aimed at trainers are woven throughout the book. Such integration makes it somewhat difficult to understand how assessment practices might best be adapted to suit this type of learner. While trainers who are interested in organizational learning goals may emphasize the growth and achievement of employees, other workrelated training may focus on business or industry goals such as a desire to increase productivity, to save money, or to save time. These latter goals might best be assessed through very different methods from those employed in more learner-directed assessment environments. Such business-oriented methods are not clearly identified or made distinct from other assessment methods outlined in this book. Another goal of the book was to address both program evaluation and assessment methods related to learners and instructors. However, the vast majority of examples and discussion in this publication centered around the issue of assessment, not evaluation. The authors argue, "Program evaluation includes learner evaluation, but is broader-based and serves different goals." They include sections such as "discrepancy-based evaluation" (p. 34) and a "key evaluation checklist" (pp. 36-37). However, the goals of program evaluation or activities related to conducting such evaluations are not identified or elaborated on throughout the text. The Canadian Journal of Higher Education Volume XXXII, No. 2, 2002 Book Reviews/Comptes Rendus155 The arguments related to learner assessment would be strengthened if the sections about program evaluation were eliminated from the text. These sections make some arguments confusing as it is not always clear if the authors are discussing concerns related to program evaluation or learner assessment. Further confusion occurs as the authors use the terms evaluation and assessment interchangeably throughout the book. A strength of the book lies in its identification of various methods by which learners can be assessed. Educators can quickly refer to the toolbox section to locate a type of assessment (such as portfolio, learner journals, and performance assessments) that they would like to know more about. Progressive topics are also included as toolboxes, such as "assessing with video" (p. 175), and "assessment in on-line courses" (p. 215). Each toolbox highlights how a specific type of assessment can be used in a learning environment, as well as the benefits and potential concerns related to the use of the method. Examples of rating scales and assessment tools linked to the assessment method are also provided in each toolbox. While the chapters of the book outline the importance of including learners in identifying assessment criteria, the assessment of these criteria along a continuum of cognitive complexity is absent from the discussion. An understanding of such increasing levels of complexity is also missing from many of the assessment tool examples provided in the toolbox section of the book. For instance, one rating scale provided for evaluating journals identifies assessment criteria to be evaluated such as "responses are complete," and "responses link personal experience and other resources with the course material" (p. 160). The educator is then expected to assess learner achievement of these criteria on a 6-point scale that ranges from dependent (score point 1 ) to superior (score point 6). However, descriptions or definitions of the score points are not provided. If a student (or an assessor for that matter) is not aware of how a rating of competent (score point 4) differs from a rating of proficient (score point 5), then how will this individual know that he or she was assessed fairly? In addition, how will the learner know what is required to advance to the next level of learning? Assessment rubrics with clearly-defined learning The Canadian Journal of Higher Education Volume XXXII, No. 2, 2002 Book Reviews/Comptes Rendus155 criteria and continua of cognitive expectations would enhance many of the tools provided for educator or trainer use. One chapter of the book does outline the issue of cognitive complexity and the need for an identification of increasing levels of skill, ability, or thought. This chapter (Chapter 9) entitled, "Evaluating levels of conceptual growth," provides Bloom's Taxonomy as the only example of increasing levels of cognitive complexity. Although various limitations of this taxonomy are noted by the authors, other taxonomies that offer different perspectives on cognition are not provided. In addition, this taxonomy of learning is not well integrated into discussions of the various methods of assessment provided throughout the book. Two taxonomies that could easily be integrated into assessment tools include Fostaty Young and Wilson's ICE approach (2000) and Biggs and Collis' SOLO taxonomy (1982). Fostaty Young and Wilson's model, for example, describes the assessment of learners along a continuum related to ideas, connections, and extensions. This model relates to assessing learning along a scale of novice to expert or superficial to deep. Specifically, learners advance from being able to identify the ideas or key concepts related to a topic, to being able to connect these ideas to each other, to previous knowledge, to the learners themselves, or to a broader context. The final stage of the model involves learners being assessed on their ability to extend their understanding by extrapolating, predicting, or synthesizing their learning. Such extensions involve learners internalizing the learning and often applying it to new contexts. The inclusion of detailed cognitive criteria would strengthen the tools and examples provided throughout the text. A second edition of the book would also be improved by the inclusion of a discussion about how the broader criteria for evaluation (as provided in Chapter 4) could be integrated into the various methods of assessment listed. For instance, the discussion of assigning grades to learner achievement is confounded with notions of assigning marks for learner participation and effort. The assigning of such marks would not be justified if a criterion-referenced approach were being applied to assessment but might be more relevant if a self referenced assessment approach were undertaken. Unpacking some of the confounding issues for readers could be achieved by identifying the The Canadian Journal of Higher Education Volume XXXII, No. 2, 2002 Book Reviews/Comptes Rendus155 types of assessment approaches (e.g., criterion-, norm-, and self-referenced) that best match the use of certain assessment methods (e.g., portfolios, journals, performance assessment). This information would help educators to identify the most appropriate assessment tools to employ given their instructional goals, the characteristics of the learners, and the nature of the learning environment. • References Biggs, J.B., & Collis, K. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: SOLO taxonomy. New York, NY: Academic Press. Fostaty Young, S., & Wilson, R.J. (2000). Assessment and learning: The ICE approach. Winnipeg, MB: Portage and Main Press. O'Grady, J., & French, G. (Eds.). (2000). Northrop Frye's Writings on Education. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press. Pages: 684. Price: $100 CAD (cloth). Reviewed by Martin Schiralli, Queen's University Northrop Frye, a figure of enormous continuing significance on the world intellectual stage, was arguably one of the five or six most important minds working in the humanities in the twentieth century, and certainly the greatest Canadian humanist ever. Although his immense contribution to the business of understanding the substance and expression of human meaning was obscured somewhat in the last decades of that century by the postmodern turn in university humanities departments, the significance of his writings on literature, the theory of literary criticism, and religion have never been seriously disputed. Moreover, for many years, Frye was for active in university administration as Principal of Victoria College in the University of Toronto and later as Chancellor of Victoria University. His writings on the nature and possibilities of education at all levels, and especially on the role of the university in public The Canadian Journal of Higher Education Volume XXXII, No. 2, 2002