This article surveys existing checklists and investigates the extent to which they enable the expression of useful assessments for software selection purposes. Significant problems and limitations of the checklist approach to software selection are noted, particularly an emphasis on predominantly technical attributes of packages at the expense of consideration of broader classroom environments and activities, learning processes and other educational issues. We make a clear distinction between the processes of software selection and software evaluation, and argue that failure in the past to regard this distinction as important has led to the use of checklists, a valuable tool in evaluation, as well in the selection process to which they are not well suited. An alternative approach to software selection is outlined.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
HellerR., Evaluating Software: A Review of the Options, Computers and Education, 17: 4, pp. 285–291, 1991.
2.
LanghomeM. J.DonhamJ. O.GrossJ. F., and RehmkeD., Teaching with Computers: A New Menu for the '90s, Kogan Page, London, 1989.
3.
SalvasA. D. and ThomasG. T., Evaluation of Software, Education Department of Victoria, Melbourne, 1984.
4.
MicroSIFT, Evaluator's Guide for Microcomputer-Based Instructional Packages, The International Council for Computers in Education, Eugene, Oregon, 1982.
5.
ReayD. G., Evaluating Educational Software for the Classroom, in Teachers, Computers and the Classroom, ReidI. and RushtonJ. (eds.), Manchester University Press, Manchester, pp. 79–87, 1985.
6.
AlexanderK. and BlanchardD., Educational Software: A Creator's Handbook, Tecmedia, Loughborough, 1985.
7.
WinshipJ., Software Review or Evaluation: Are They Both Roses Or Is One a Lemon? proceedings of the Australian Computer Education Conference, Educational Computing Association of Western Australia, Perth, pp. 364–376, 1988.
8.
PreeceJ. and JonesA., Training Teachers to Select Educational Software: Results of a Formative Evaluation of an Open University Pack, British Journal of Educational Technology, 16: 1, pp. 9–20, 1985.
9.
MillerL. and BurnettJ. D., Theoretical Considerations in Selecting Language Arts Software, Computers and Education, 10: 1, pp. 159–165, 1986.
10.
JohnstonV. M., The Evaluation of Microcomputer Programs: An Area of Debate, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 3: 1, pp. 40–50, 1987.
11.
RingG., The Effects of Instruction in Courseware Preview Methodology on the Predictive Validity of Teacher Preview Ratings, Journal of Educational Computing Research, 9: 2, pp. 197–218, 1993.
12.
HeckW.JohnsonJ., and KanskyR., Guidelines for Evaluating Computerized Instructional Materials, National Council for Teachers of Mathematics, Reston, Virginia, 1981.
13.
KrauseK., Choosing Computer Software that Works, Journal of Reading, 28, pp. 24–27, 1984.
14.
BurtC., Software in the Classroom—A Form for Teacher Use, The Computing Teacher, 12, pp. 16–19, May 1985.
15.
CoburnP.KelmanP.RobertsN.SnyderT.WattD., and WeinerC., Practical Guide to Computers in Education (2nd Edition), Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1985.
16.
Ministers of Education, Canada, Software Evaluation, Council of Ministers of Education, Toronto, Canada, 1985.
17.
SmithD. and KeepR., Eternal Triangulation: Case Studies in the Evaluation of Educational Software by Classroom-Based Teacher Groups, Computers and Education, 12: 1, pp. 151–156, 1988.
18.
TempletonR., Be Careful but Don't Worry: A Guide to Buying Educational Software, in A Parent's Guide to Educational Software, TaggW. (ed.), Telegraph Publications, London, pp. 54–64, 1985.
SchallW. E.LeakeL., and WhitakerW., Computer Education: Literacy and Beyond, Brooks-Cole, Monterey, California, 1986.
21.
O. T. A., Power On! New Tools for Teaching and Learning, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1988.
22.
EDUCOM, Software Snapshots: Where Are You in the Picture?EDUCOM, Washington, D.C., 1989.
23.
ShuellT. J. and SchuecklerL. M., Toward Evaluating Software According to Principles of Learning and Teaching, Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5: 2, pp. 135–149, 1989.
24.
N.C.E.T., CD-ROM in Schools Scheme Evaluation Report, National Council for Educational Technology, Coventry, 1992.
25.
National Council of Teachers of English, Guidelines for Review and Evaluation of English Language Arts Software, Computers and Composition, 10: 1, pp. 37–44, 1992.
26.
TolhurstD., A Checklist for Evaluating Content-Based Hypertext Computer Software, Educational Technology, 32: 3, pp. 17–21, 1992.
27.
RowleyJ. E., Selection and Evaluation of Software, Aslib Proceedings, 45: 3, pp. 77–81, 1993.
28.
SchuecklerL. M. and ShuellT. J., A Comparison of Software Evaluation Forms and Reviews, Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5: 1, pp. 17–33, 1989.
29.
MatsonM., Flowers of Crystal, 4Mation Educational Resources, Barnstaple, 1984.
30.
O.E.C.D., Information Technologies in Education: The Quest for Quality Software, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, 1989.
31.
KomoskiP. K., Educational Microcomputer Software Evaluation, in Eurit86: Developments in Educational Software and Courseware, MoonenJ. and PlompT. (eds.), Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp. 399–404, 1987.
32.
ReiserR. A. and DickW., Evaluating Instructional Software, Educational Technology Research and Development, 38: 3, pp. 43–50, 1990.
33.
SquiresD. and McDougallA., Choosing and Using Educational Software, Falmer, London, 1994.
34.
McDougallA. and SquiresD., Perspectives Interactions: A New Approach in the Selection of Educational Software, proceedings of the Asia Pacific Information Technology in Training and Education Conference, Australian Council for Computers in Education, Brisbane, pp. 35–40, 1994.
