Reading summary: An Integrated Framework for CALL Courseware Evaluation

By Philip Hubbard

Which one is better?

The writer mainly suggested 2 frameworks for call courseware evaluation.
1. Using Hubbard’s framework approach to evaluate courseware, the framework consists of 4 principles which include linking to general framework for language teaching methodology; designing to accommodate a wide range of possible methods, teachers, learners and syllabus goals; linking in form and terminology to frameworks and expressing the multiple dependencies among the different components.

2. Referring to Richards and Rodgers’ teaching /learning process: Language teaching methods should go through three organizational levels which include approach, design, and procedure. In addition it should embody teacher, technique and materials.

i) Operational description or Procedure
Evaluate whether the courseware consists of central and peripheral parts. The central part is the software which would better driven by different activities (vocabulary, grammar …) with various activity type (game, quiz, text reconstruction…) and different presentation schemes (multiple choice questions, picture and word matching…). In addition, the evaluator should pay attention on the screen layout (print size, spacing, presents and quality of animation…), timing (monitoring time on a task, the rate at which information appears on the screen…), and the control (say, can learners choose a particular activity, produce their own materials…), help options, input judging and feedback (correct/incorrect response, done with words…)

ii) Design
Evaluate whether the courseware considered the target users, their variables, the syllabus and the environment.
iii) Teaching approach should be teacher fit and learner fit.
Teacher fit means evaluating courseware with linguistic theories and language teaching/ learning theories. The writer said that computer is only a delivery system for language input. The writer suggested referring to the two types of Richards and Rodgers’ language learning assumptions: Considerate the learner’s age, motivation, first language interference and the influence of environment; as well as Hubbard’s evaluation criteria for explicit learning: Give meaningful, contextualized coherent discourse, provide hints to lead student to make correct answers, accepts appropriate alternative correct answers, offers the option of explanations for correct answers and incorrect answers. Other considerations include sequencing, the treatment of learner differences, the role of culture, the nature of memory etc.

The writer also suggested evaluators to make predictions on courseware’s effectiveness and efficiency, say, can students learn or practice some area of the target language, and are they willing to spend enough time using the software and budget should be considered as well.

Self reflection:
Courseware evaluation seems like buying clothes. There are great variety of choices, consumer should choose according to their financial situations,personal preference, their needs as well as the price and quality of the goods.