The Life and Death of Software

Examining the Selection Process

Authors

  • Thomas N. Robb
  • Bernard Susser

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.v18i1.41-52

Keywords:

CALL, Software Selection, Software Evaluation, Checklists, Frameworks

Abstract

This article describes the results of an Internet-based survey asking how foreign language instructors chose courseware. We first review the literature on software selection, looking particularly at methods and tools. We then report the results of a questionnaire advertised on several Internet lists for foreign language teachers. The main factors on which teachers base their selection were reported to be testing the software and the features advertised. We examine the effectiveness of various selection methods and describe problems in the selection process. This study does not present statistically valid conclusions because of the small number of responses, but it does suggest some problems with present methods of software selection.

References

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. (1998). Only the best: The annual guide to the highest-rated educational software and multimedia. Alexandria, VA: Author.

Bangert-Drowns, R. L., & Kozma, R. B. (1989). Assessing the design of instructional software. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 21 (3), 241-262.

Bishop, A. L. (1999). CALL issues: Setting policy for the evaluation of the CALL environment. In J. Egbert & E. Hanson-Smith (Eds.), CALL environments: Research, practice, and critical issues (pp. 272-283). Alexandria, VA: TESOL.

Borton, W., & Rossett, A. (1989). Educational software and published reviews:

Congruence of teacher, developer, and evaluator perceptions. Education,

(4), 434-444.

Bradin, C. (1999). CALL issues: Instructional aspects of software evaluation. In J.

Egbert & E. Hanson-Smith (Eds.), CALL environments: Research, practice, and critical issues (pp. 159-175). Alexandria, VA: TESOL.

Cunningsworth, A. (1984). Evaluating and selecting EFL teaching materials. London: Heinemann Educational Books.

Decoo, W. (1994). In defense of drill and practice in CALL: A reevaluation of fundamental strategies. Computers and Education, 23 (1-2), 151-158.

Hall, J. (1998). 1998 educational software preview guide. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE).

Healey, D. (1994). What makes software worth buying? CAELL Journal, 5 (1), 12-15.

Healey, D., & Johnson, N. (1997). A place to start in selecting software. CAELL Journal, 8 (1), 3-9.

Healey, D. & Johnson, N. (Eds.). (1999). 1999 TESOL CALL Interest Section software list. Waldorf, MD: TESOL.

Higgins, J. (1995). Computers and English language learning. Oxford, England: Intellect.

Hopey, C. E., Rethemeyer, R. K., & Elmore, J. A. (1995). Making the right choice: Evaluating computer software and hardware for adult literacy instruction. NCAL Practice Guide PG95-04. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, National Center on Adult Literacy. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 393 009)

Hubbard, P. L. (1987). Language teaching approaches, the evaluation of CALL software, and design implications. In W. F. Smith (Ed.), Modern media in foreign language education: Theory and implementation (pp. 227-254). Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Company.

Hubbard, P. (1988). An integrated framework for CALL courseware evaluation. CALICO Journal, 6 (2), 51-72.

Hubbard, P. (1992). A methodological framework for CALL courseware development. In M. C. Pennington & V. Stevens (Eds.), Computers in applied linguistics: An international perspective (pp. 39-65). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.

Hubbard, P. L. (1996). Elements of CALL methodology: Development, evaluation, and implementation. In M. C. Pennington (Ed.), The power of CALL (pp. 15-32). La Jolla, CA: Athelstan.

International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). Educational software preview guide [On-line]. Available: http://www.iste.org and http://wfm.sd38.bc.ca:8005/ESP/default.htm

Johnston, V. M. (1987). The evaluation of microcomputer programs: An area of debate. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 3 (1), 40-50.

Murphy, C. A. (1995). An evaluation format for “open” software tools. Computers in Human Behavior, 11 (3-4), 619-631.

Rea-Dickins, P. (1994). Evaluation and English language teaching. Language Teaching, 27 (2), 71-91.

Sheldon, L. E. (1988). Evaluating ELT textbooks and materials. English Language Teaching Journal, 42 (4), 237-246.

Sloane, H. N., Gordon, H. M., Gunn, C., & Mickelsen, V. G. (1989). Evaluating educational software: A guide for teachers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Squires, D., & McDougall, A. (1994). Choosing and using educational software: A teachers’ guide. London: Falmer Press.

The Educational Software Selector (TESS). The Educational Products Information Exchange (EPIE) [On-line]. Available: http://www.epie.org/epie_tess.htm

TLT Group. Flashlight Program [On-line]. Available: http://www.tltgroup.org/programs/flashlight.html

Vaille, J. A. (1998). Guidelines for the evaluation of instructional technology resources. Eugene, OR: ISTE.

Downloads

Published

2013-01-14

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Robb, T. N. ., & Susser, B. (2013). The Life and Death of Software: Examining the Selection Process. CALICO Journal, 18(1), 41-52. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.v18i1.41-52

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >>