A Detailed Rubric for Assessing the Quality of Teacher Resource Apps

Since the advent of the iPhone and rise of mobile technologies, educational apps represent one of the fastest growing markets, and both the mobile technology and educational app markets are predicted to continue experiencing growth into the foreseeable future. The irony, however, is that even with a booming market for educational apps, very little research regarding the quality of them has been conducted. Though some instruments have been developed to evaluate apps geared towards student learning, no such instrument has been created for teacher resource apps, which are designed to assist teachers in completing common tasks (e.g., taking attendance, communicating with parents, monitoring student learning and behavior, etc.). Moreover, when teachers visit the App Store or Google Play to learn about apps, the only ratings provided to them are generic, five-point evaluations, which do not provide qualifiers that explain why an app earned three, two, or five points. To address that gap, previously conducted research related to designing instructional technologies coupled with best practices for supporting teachers were first identified. That information was then used to construct a comprehensive rubric for assessing teacher resource apps. In this article, a discussion that explains the need for such a rubric is offered before describing the process used to create it. The article then presents the rubric and discusses its different components and potential limitations and concludes with suggestions for future research based on the rubric.

[1]  J. Carlson Avoiding Traps in Member Checking , 2010 .

[2]  Scott McLeod,et al.  Large-scale 1:1 computing initiatives: An open access database , 2013 .

[3]  Claudia Eckert,et al.  Automotive Proxy-Based Security Architecture for CE Device Integration , 2012, MOBILWARE.

[4]  Hans van der Heijden,et al.  Factors influencing the usage of websites: the case of a generic portal in The Netherlands , 2003, Inf. Manag..

[5]  Monica Landoni,et al.  Evaluation of content activities in children's educational software , 2002 .

[6]  Imsook Ha,et al.  Determinants of adoption of mobile games under mobile broadband wireless access environment , 2007, Inf. Manag..

[7]  Dale Henderson,et al.  Active Learning in the Digital Age Classroom , 2001 .

[8]  Anastasios A. Economides,et al.  An Evaluation Instrument for Hypermedia Courseware , 2003, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[9]  B. Schneirdeman,et al.  Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction , 1998 .

[10]  Garry Falloon,et al.  Looking to the future: M-learning with the iPad , 2010 .

[11]  T. Landauer,et al.  Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction , 1997 .

[12]  Susan Weinschenk 100 Things Every Designer Needs to Know About People , 2011 .

[13]  Rob Phillips,et al.  Evaluating the use of learning objects in Australian and New Zealand schools , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[14]  S. Jamieson Likert scales: how to (ab)use them , 2004, Medical education.

[15]  Cheng-Yuan Lee,et al.  A Comprehensive Evaluation Rubric for Assessing Instructional Apps , 2015, J. Inf. Technol. Educ. Res..

[16]  Ping Zhang,et al.  The Effects of Animation on Information Seeking Performance on the World Wide Web: Securing Attention or Interfering with Primary Tasks? , 2000, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[17]  Taylor Buckler,et al.  Is There an App for That? Developing an Evaluation Rubric for Apps for Use with Adults with Special Needs , 2012 .

[18]  N. Tractinsky,et al.  What is beautiful is usable , 2000, Interact. Comput..

[19]  Chechen Liao,et al.  Factors influencing the intended use of web portals , 2011, Online Inf. Rev..

[20]  Jane Coughlan,et al.  Development of a tool for evaluating multimedia for surgical education. , 2008, The Journal of surgical research.

[21]  Robert C. Meurant The iPad and EFL Digital Literacy , 2010, FGIT-SIP/MulGraB.

[22]  Gary M. Olson,et al.  The growth of cognitive modeling in human-computer interaction since GOMS , 1990 .

[23]  Shah Alam,et al.  Instructional Design and Learning Theory on the Development of a Multimedia Courseware , 2013 .

[24]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction , 1998 .

[25]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Multi media Learning(準備委員会企画講演2) , 2001 .

[26]  Hui Xiong,et al.  Mobile app recommendations with security and privacy awareness , 2014, KDD.

[27]  Tom Gaertner,et al.  Effective Teaching Strategies That Accommodate Diverse Learners , 2016 .

[28]  Ewa Wasniewski,et al.  One-on-One with an iPad: A faculty perspective on iPad supports for students with disabilities , 2013 .

[29]  Xiaochen Li,et al.  What makes a good app description? , 2014, Internetware.

[30]  R. Mayer,et al.  Animations need narrations : an experimental test of a dual-coding hypothesis , 1991 .

[31]  Ahmed E. Hassan,et al.  Analyzing and automatically labelling the types of user issues that are raised in mobile app reviews , 2015, Empirical Software Engineering.

[32]  G. Kennedy,et al.  CRITERIA AND A PROGRAM OF EVALUATION FOR COMPUTER AIDED LEARNING , 1998 .

[33]  Hani Morgan iPad Programs Could Lead to a Bright Future for Schools , 2014 .

[34]  L. Krefting Rigor in qualitative research: the assessment of trustworthiness. , 1991, The American journal of occupational therapy : official publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association.

[35]  Bhawna Dhupia,et al.  Review of Cross-Platforms for Mobile Learning Application Development , 2015 .

[36]  Todd S. Cherner,et al.  Cleaning up That Mess: A Framework for Classifying Educational Apps. , 2014 .

[37]  Savilla Banister,et al.  Integrating the iPod Touch in K–12 Education: Visions and Vices , 2010 .

[38]  Thomas C. Reeves,et al.  Systematic evaluation procedures for interactive multimedia for education and training , 1996 .

[39]  Kar Yan Tam,et al.  Does Animation Attract Online Users' Attention? The Effects of Flash on Information Search Performance and Perceptions , 2004, Inf. Syst. Res..

[40]  R. Mayer,et al.  The instructive animation: helping students build connections between words and pictures in multimedia learning , 1992 .

[41]  Jessika Eichel,et al.  The Differentiated Classroom Responding To The Needs Of All Learners , 2016 .

[42]  Peter H. Bloch Seeking the Ideal Form: Product Design and Consumer Response , 1995 .

[43]  R. Mayer,et al.  Nine Ways to Reduce Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning , 2003 .

[44]  P. Atkinson,et al.  Making Sense of Qualitative Data: Complementary Research Strategies , 1996 .

[45]  D. Bell,et al.  The Sage Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods , 2013 .