Educational Software Reviews under Investigation

The purpose of this study was to examine reviews of mathematical software for elementary classrooms, looking particularly at the implicit rubrics used for these reviews. Examination of the software reviews allowed an understanding of the type of information educators receive about the software available and how that information fits with current views of learning as well as the National Council of Teachers in Mathematics (NCTM) standards. Using professional publications for mathematics teachers, a content analysis of 95 reviews of rational number software published over the last 20 years was conducted. Findings indicate that the reviews written for teachers provide little information about what and how students will learn mathematically as they engage with particular educational game software. The reviews focused on how easy the software was to use, how motivating or relevant it may be and the degree to which students could use it on their own. It was found that while the language to describe the educational game software shifted over the 20 years, the games themselves did not, thus indicating that the NCTM standards have only had superficial impact on computer game software in the rational number domain. The analyses suggest that review criteria based on principles of mathematical inquiry could help reviewers evaluate with more assurance the actual potential and benefits even in the absence of such features in the investigated software, and provide teachers with better information on how to select and integrate educational software in their classroom.

[1]  Thomas P. Carpenter.  Results of the Fourth NAEP Assessment of Mathematics: Trends and Conclusions. , 1988 .

[2]  Myra Sadker,et al.  Failing at fairness : how our schools cheat girls , 1995 .

[3]  Richard Lesh,et al.  Rational number, ratio and proportion , 1992 .

[4]  Seymour Papert,et al.  Software Design as a Learning Environment , 1990, Interact. Learn. Environ..

[5]  Adrianne Kinnear,et al.  Introduction of Microcomputers: A Case Study of Patterns of use and Children's Perceptions , 1995 .

[6]  Yasmin B. Kafai,et al.  Game Design as an Interactive Learning Environment for Fostering Students' and Teachers' Mathematical Inquiry , 1998, Int. J. Comput. Math. Learn..

[7]  Nancy K. Mack,et al.  Learning Fractions with Understanding: Building upon Informal Knowledge. , 1988 .

[8]  Katherine Canada,et al.  The technological gender gap: Evidence and recommendations for educators and computer-based instruction designers , 1991 .

[9]  T. P. Carpenter,et al.  A Longitudinal Study of Gender Differences in Young Children’s Mathematical Thinking , 1998 .

[10]  Leen Streefland,et al.  Fractions in Realistic Mathematics Education , 1991 .

[11]  F. Joe Crosswhite.  President's Report. Better Teaching, Better Mathematics: Are They Enough?. , 1986 .

[12]  S. Brown,et al.  Balancing act. , 1996, The Canadian nurse.

[13]  Thomas A. Romberg,et al.  Rational numbers : an integration of research , 1993 .

[14]  Merlyn J. Behr,et al.  Rational numbers: Toward a semantic analysis- -Emphasis on the Operator Construct: An Integration of Research , 1993 .

[15]  John Seely Brown,et al.  An Investigation of Computer Coaching for Informal Learning Activities. , 1978 .

[16]  Rachelle S. Heller.  Evaluating software: a review of the options , 1991 .

[17]  J. H. Renwick.  RATIOS AND PROPORTIONS , 1977, The Lancet.

[18]  T. P. Carpenter,et al.  Problem Solving as a Basis for Reform in Curriculum and Instruction: The Case of Mathematics , 1996 .

[19]  Douglas H. Clements.  Reviewing and Viewing. , 1989 .

[20]  P. Kenneth Komoski.  Keynote Address: Educational Microcomputer Software Evaluation: Its Challenge and Its Uniqueness , 1987 .

[21]  Anne McDougall,et al.  A Critical Examination of the Checklist Approach in Software Selection , 1995 .

[22]  Lily Shashaani.  Gender-Differences in Computer Experience and its Influence on Computer Attitudes , 1994 .

[23]  Raymond S. Nickerson,et al.  Technology in education : looking toward 2020 , 1988 .

[24]  Ronald Souza.  Golfing with a Protractor. , 1988 .

[25]  Merlyn J. Behr,et al.  Number concepts and operations in the middle grades , 1988 .

[26]  Sharon Dugdale,et al.  Visualizing polynomial functions: new insights from an old method in a new medium , 1992 .

[27]  Miriam Gamoran Sherin,et al.  Perspective on M. Lampert’s “When the problem is not the question and the solution is not the answer: Mathematical knowing and teaching” , 2004 .