Many readers have expressed interest in reviews of computerised career guidance packages. As a first step in this process, Dr Esther Care has provided the following guidelines for evaluation. If you have any comments to make about these guidelines, please contact me. Future editions of the journal will include reviews of packages. If you are currently using a package, you can review it using the guidelines, or your own review process, and forward it to me. We would like feedback from practitioners in different sectors using a variety of packages.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Committee on Ethical and Professional Standards. (1986). Guidelines for the practice of ‘blind’ psychological test interpretation and report writing. The Bulletin of the Australian Psychological Society, 8, 25–26
2.
Committee to Develop Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. (1985). Standards for educational and psychological testing. American Psychological Association: Washington, DC
3.
ForrerS.BowlsbeyJ. (1984). Microcomputers: Career development wave of the future, in LeibowitzZ. B.HirshS. K. (eds) Career Development: Current Perspectives. Washington DC: American Society for Training and Development
4.
JohnsonC. (ed) (1983) Microcomputers and the school counsellor. Alexandria, Virginia: American School Counselor Association
5.
McCrossinP. (1990). New developments in tests and testing. The Bulletin of the Australian Psychological Society, 12, 2–3
6.
MartinC. D.MartinD. H. (1990). Professional codes of conduct and computer ethics education. Computers and Society, 20, 18–29
7.
Occupational and Youth Information Section, Youth Bureau, DEET. (1992). Career information: Checklist for product development. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service
8.
PowerP. G. (1990). Guidelines for the use of psychological tests. The Bulletin of the Australian Psychological Society, 12, 3–5
9.
PryorR. G. L. (1989). Some ethical implications of computer technology. The Bulletin of the Australian Psychological Society, 11, 164–166
