71.8 F
Los Angeles
Friday, November 22, 2024

Trump Lawyer Resigns One Day Before Trial To Begin

Joseph Tacopina has filed with the courts that he will not represent Donald J. Trump. The E. Jean Carroll civil case is schedule to begin Tuesday January 16,...

Judge Lewis A. Kaplan Issues Order RE Postponement

On May 9, 2023, a jury found Donald J. Trump liable for sexual assault and defamation. The jury awarded Ms. Carroll $5 million in damages. Seven months ago,...

ASUS Announces 2023 Vivobook Classic Series

On April 7, 2023, ASUS introduced five new models in the 2023 Vivobook Classic series of laptops. The top laptops in the series use the 13th Gen Intel® Core™...
Rationale for a Checklist for Evaluating Education Software

Rationale for a Checklist for Evaluating Education Software

This draft checklist applies aspects of empirically based learning theories to assess the usefulness of a software program to increase learning of someone unfamiliar with the content and processes of the program. These theories emerge from objective, experimental behavior studies. This checklist supplements common sense evaluations users conduct, such as answering questions about whether a buyer likes, wants, and can afford the program,

Why Bother with a Checklist?

In short, a checklist permits systematic description of software most likely to maximize learning rates of specific content by users.

Educators and educational software developers use a wide range of theories, principles, and ad hoc arrangements of tasks and criteria to claim that a program increases learning. In this sense, a theory describes systematic, replicable explanations of cause – effect relationships between specific, measurable variables. This checklist offers a way to describe specific learning theories and empirical bases for them used to create a software program.

In addition, educators and developers also use a wide range of learning and instructional strategies and tactics, ranging from self-discovery to direct instruction to direct learning. To complicate the situation further, individual teachers and home schoolers uniquely adapt use of software for a variety of reasons with individual and groups of learners. This checklist offers a way to describe specific instructional and assessment procedures and their empirical bases to create a software program.

A relatively small number of software programs use a technically consistent, coherent, empirically derived learning theories (e.g., Zeaman and House, Two Choice Visual Discrimination Analysis; Skinner, Stimulus-Response) or set of instructional theories (e.g., Gold, Try Another Way).

As a result, educational software may appear appealing to a learner, but the content leads to less learning than possible. For example, programmers may use colors and movements to stimulate learner attention. However, student responses to these stimuli may follow an inefficient path to an unspecified learning criterion. Other programs may appear unappealing to an educator, but, according to empirical evidence, they will likely lead to superior learning rates.

This checklist identifies (or more likely allows users to infer) learning principles and priorities used to say something exists as educational and not entertainment or some other kind of software. Usually, an evaluator must infer learning principles from the format, sequence of tasks, arrangement of prompts, etc. of the presentations of the software.

Parents and teachers may use this checklist as a guide for clarifying two main points about a software program. First, what is to be learned? Second, how does use of this software lead to that learning? These are conventional generic effectiveness and efficiency questions adapted to evaluate educational software.

Software developers may use this checklist to determine if they have addressed generic educational learning criteria they intend to offer.

The checklist addresses seven educational software domains drawn from conventional criteria used to offer confident instruction: assumptions; learning content and processes; prerequisite skills; delineated specific learning criteria; mediation requirements for use; research base; and empirical field test reports.

Robert Heiny
Robert Heinyhttp://www.robertheiny.com
Robert W. Heiny, Ph.D. is a retired professor, social scientist, and business partner with previous academic appointments as a public school classroom teacher, senior faculty, or senior research member, and administrator. Appointments included at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Peabody College and the Kennedy Center now of Vanderbilt University; and Brandeis University. Dr. Heiny also served as Director of the Montana Center on Disabilities. His peer reviewed contributions to education include publication in The Encyclopedia of Education (1971), and in professional journals and conferences. He served s an expert reviewer of proposals to USOE, and on a team that wrote plans for 12 state-wide and multistate special education and preschools programs. He currently writes user guides for educators and learners as well as columns for TuxReports.com.

Latest news

Related news