Skip to main content
Log in

Emphasising use over attributes in selection of educational software

  • Papers
  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Rejecting traditional checklist approaches to software selection, this paper discusses an approach emphasising classroom use of software over technical attributes. It proposes a way of thinking about software (the perspectives interactions paradigm) that takes the perspectives of the student, the teacher and the designer and uses interactions between pairs of these perspectives to generate broad questions and more specific issues to be considered when software is being assessed for purchase or classroom use. Some example packages are assessed using the paradigm for several different educational contexts, illustrating that this approach raises issues of classroom interactions and learning processes. These issues go beyond, and are more important for selection decisions than those generally considered with a checklist of software attributes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • BleaseD. (1986). Evaluating Educational Software. London: Croom Helm.

    Google Scholar 

  • KemmisS., AtkinR. and WrightE. (1977). How do students learn? Working Papers on CAL., Occasional Paper No. 5, Centre for Applied Research in Education, University of East Anglia, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • MayerM. (1992). Just Grandma and Me. Novato, CA: Broderbund.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDougallA. and SquiresD. (1995a). A critical examination of the checklist approach in software selection. Journal of Educational Computing Research 12(3), 263–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDougallA. and SquiresD. (1995b). An empirical study of a new paradigm for choosing educational software. Computers and Education 25(3), 93–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • MicroSIFT (1982). Evaluator's Guide for Microcomputer-Based Instructional Packages. Eugene, OR: The International Council for Computers in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Microsoft Corporation (1994). Microsoft Encarta Multimedia Encyclopaedia.

  • NCET (1992). CD-ROM in Schools Scheme Evaluation Report. Coventry: National Council for Educational Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Office of Technology Assessment (1988). Power On! New Tools for Teaching and Learning. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • SalvasA. and ThomasG. (1984). Evaluation of Software, Melbourne: Education Department of Victoria.

    Google Scholar 

  • SelfJ. (1985). Microcomputers in Education: A Critical Appraisal of Educational Software. Brighton: Harvester Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • SmolanR. (1992). From Alice to Ocean. Ringwood: Penguin Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • SquiresD. and McDougallA. (1994). Choosing and Using Educational Software. London: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • TaylorR. (1980). The Computer in the School: Tutor, Tool, Tutee. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McDougall, A., Squires, D. & Guss, S. Emphasising use over attributes in selection of educational software. Educ Inf Technol 1, 151–164 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00168279

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00168279

Keywords

Navigation