TEACHERS SOFTWARE EVALUATION RUBRIC
Title: ___________________________________________
Publisher: _______________________________________
Date of copyright: _________________________________
Version: ________________________________________
URL: ___________________________________________
Cost: ___________________________________________
Hardware: _______________________________________
O/S: ____________________________________________
Memory: ________________________________________
Subject areas: ____________________________________
________________________________________________
Grade Levels: ____________________________________
Delivery Methods:
____
lessons/tutorial _____
drill & practice _____ review _____ simulation _____ testing
____
game _____
discovery _____ problem-solving _____ application
Rating: 0-5 (0=not included or component is far below standard 5=exemplary)
Content
|
The content is educational. |
|
|
The content is valid & reliable. |
|
|
The content is accurate
& factual. |
|
|
The content is age
appropriate. |
|
|
The content is clear. |
|
|
The content sources are
cited and reliable. |
|
|
The content aligns with the
curriculum & standards. |
|
|
The content is free from bias. |
|
Ease of Use
|
The directions are clear
and easy to follow. |
|
|
The program is interactive. |
|
|
The program is easy to
navigate through. |
|
|
The students can exit the
program at any time. |
|
|
The program saves students
work. |
|
|
The program gives positive
feedback. |
|
|
The program allows child to
practice old and new skills. |
|
|
The program covers a
variety of ability/skill levels. |
|
Support Materials
|
The program has a teachers
guide. |
|
|
The program has printed and
understandable instructions. |
|
|
The instructions and help
functions are easy to access through the Internet or by phone. |
|
|
There are supplemental
resources and sample lesson plans. |
|
|
The teacher can modify the user
levels in the program. |
|
Technical quality:
|
The installation and setup
are easy. |
|
|
The program loads quickly
& is error-free. |
|
|
The program works well. |
|
|
The audio (sound) is clear. |
|
|
The program is visually stimulating
through active animation, color, and graphics. |
|
Assessment
|
The program has a
pre-assessment. |
|
|
The program has a
post-assessment. |
|
|
The program keeps a on-going record of a students’ progress. |
|
|
Teachers can assess students
by evaluating progress reports. |
|
|
Assessment methods are
appropriate and suited to the learning objectives. |
|
Strengths:
Weaknesses:
Comments:
Resources adapted from:
http://www.ed.brocku.ca/~jkerr/sftwreva.htm
- Software Evaluation by Dr. Jim Kerr,
Associate Professor, Faculty of Education, Associate Professor, Faculty of
Education, Brock University, St. Catharines, Ontario,
Canada
http:///www.arches.uga.edu/%7Emariah20/rubric.htm;
The Arches at The University of Georgia; A software evaluation created by graduate
students in the ARCHES (Academic Resources for Computing and Higher Education
Sources) program for Grades K-2.
Educational Software
Evaluation Form – NETS FOR TEACHERS –Preparing Teachers for Use Technology
Shelly, Gary B., Cashman, Thomas J., Gunter, Glenda A., Gunter, Randolph E.
(2006), Integrating Technology and
Digital Media in the Classroom, Fourth Edition,
http://www.glc.k12.ga.us/passwd/trc/ttools/attach/mediaspec/SoftwareEvalTemplate2.doc:
