CFP last date
20 May 2024
Reseach Article

A Qualitative Assessment of Educational Software

by Vandana Bagla, Anjana Gupta, Deepika Kukreja
International Journal of Computer Applications
Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA
Volume 36 - Number 11
Year of Publication: 2011
Authors: Vandana Bagla, Anjana Gupta, Deepika Kukreja
10.5120/4531-6387

Vandana Bagla, Anjana Gupta, Deepika Kukreja . A Qualitative Assessment of Educational Software. International Journal of Computer Applications. 36, 11 ( December 2011), 1-7. DOI=10.5120/4531-6387

@article{ 10.5120/4531-6387,
author = { Vandana Bagla, Anjana Gupta, Deepika Kukreja },
title = { A Qualitative Assessment of Educational Software },
journal = { International Journal of Computer Applications },
issue_date = { December 2011 },
volume = { 36 },
number = { 11 },
month = { December },
year = { 2011 },
issn = { 0975-8887 },
pages = { 1-7 },
numpages = {9},
url = { https://ijcaonline.org/archives/volume36/number11/4531-6387/ },
doi = { 10.5120/4531-6387 },
publisher = {Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA},
address = {New York, USA}
}
%0 Journal Article
%1 2024-02-06T20:22:54.025592+05:30
%A Vandana Bagla
%A Anjana Gupta
%A Deepika Kukreja
%T A Qualitative Assessment of Educational Software
%J International Journal of Computer Applications
%@ 0975-8887
%V 36
%N 11
%P 1-7
%D 2011
%I Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA
Abstract

With the ever-growing number of choices of educational software for children scholastic programs, the task of choosing software can be a nerve-wracking one. As computer use becomes more substantial in home and classroom learning, the selection of software endeavors even more importance. The key aspects for providing a better learning experience lies in choosing software that successfully combines education and entertainment. This article inspects the prerequisite of children's software evaluation in the light of dynamic nature of edutainment perspective. To obtain empirical evidence of pupils’ performance, choosing software can be productive, if it accede a set of well accomplished criteria. Key issues are discussed such as the ways to evaluate the appropriateness of software for children and the most efficient means of utilizing this information. This paper utilizes Rank Order Centroid (ROC) Methodology as well as Ratio Method to confront the concerns raised by academics, instructional designers and faculty administration about the teaching/learning software delivered via Information Technologies. The employed methodology utilizes systematic approach to gauge and ultimately select the most suitable software. The factors considered here scout Technical as well as Non-Technical aspects of the problem.

References
  1. Barron, F.H. and Barrett, B.E. 1996. Decision Quality Using Ranked Attribute Weights. Management Science, 42(11), 1515-1523.
  2. Buckleitner, W. 1985. A Survey of Early Childhood Software (1984 to 1993). High/Scope Educational Research Foundation, Ypsilanti, MI.
  3. Crain, W.F. 2003. Multi-attribute Weight Determination: Elicitation & Approximation. Dissertation, George Mason University, Spring 2003.
  4. Escobedo, Theresa H. and Evans, Sharon 1997. A Comparison of Child-Tested Early Childhood Education Software with Professional Ratings. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Education Research Association (Chicago, IL, March 28, 1997). ED411060.
  5. Haugland, Susan W. and Shade, Daniel D. 1988. Developmentally Appropriate Software for Young Children. Young Children; 43(4), 37-43.
  6. Ignizio, J.P. 1982. Linear Programming in Single and Multi-objective Systems, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersy.
  7. Jones, Nancy Baker, Ed. and Vaughan, Larry, Ed. 1983. Evaluation of Educational Software: A Guide to Guides. Southwest Educational Development Lab., Austin, TX.; Northeast Regional Exchange, Inc., Chelmsford, MA ED237064.
  8. Lathrop, A. and Goodson, B. 1983. Courseware in the Classroom: Selecting, Organizing, and Using Educational Software. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley.
  9. Rucker, Chauncy N. and Others 1985. The Connecticut Special Education Network for Software Evaluation.
  10. Serafini, P.1985. Mathematics of Multi Objective Optimization, Springer-Verlag, NewYork.
  11. Serafim O. 2007. A fuzzy compromise solution for multicriteria problems, International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-based Systems, 15(3), 363–380.
  12. Steuer, R.E. 1986, Multiple Criteria Optimization: Theory, Computation, and Application, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
  13. Tammen, Jill; Brock, Laurie.1997. CD-ROM Multimedia: What Do Kids Really Like? MultiMedia Schools; 4(3), 54-56, 58-59.
  14. Weber, M., Borcherding, K. 1993. Behavioral influences on weight judgments in multiattribute decision making. European Journal of Operations Research , 67, 1-12.
Index Terms

Computer Science
Information Sciences

Keywords

Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) Rank Order Centroid (ROC) Methodology Ratio Method Audio-Visual (AV) Trademark Electronic Search System (TESS)