Educational Effectiveness of Computer Software
1994; 1105 Media; Volume: 22; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês
ISSN
0192-592X
Autores Tópico(s)Education and Technology Integration
ResumoThis paper describes a study in which an attempt was made to demonstrate that not all supposedly good, educational software is used as intended. And even when it is, the predefined objectives often are far from being achieved. Not enough is known about how learning takes place. Educational software offers us new means of investigating this complex process. * Site of the Research The research was done at Old Orchard Junior High School (OOJH) in Skokie, Ill., during 1992 and 1993. OOJH, the only middle school in District 68, is recognized nationally for excellence. It serves grades 6 through 8. One Apple is used solely for two keyboarding classes and two tool classes (spreadsheets and databases) during four periods each day. A second lab consists of 25 Tandy laptop computers that are transported to classes as needed for word processing. The third, or main, contains 30 Apple color computers, some of which are linked to printers. Other than language arts, music and word processing, rarely is any other subject taught in the main lab. The main has an extensive library of educational and entertainment software. For the lunch hours (study hall period), a list is posted of the 40 or so games available to students. The most popular programs are: * Shifty Sam * Jeopardy * Fraction Munchers * Number Munchers * Where in the World (or the U.S., or in Time) is Carmen Sandiego? * Dazzle Draw * Game Show * Word Challenge * Odell Lake * Microzines * Paper Plane Pilot * Wood Car Rally * Oregon Trail * Pizza to Go * Dog Sled Ambassadors. Students at OOJH are provided with some very good educational software. Our focus is on the way the programs are being used. * Popular Programs and Why During the school's three lunch periods, students can come to the main to play educational games for 20 minutes instead of going to study hall. Observations of students were conducted in this during the lunch hours as they interacted with a particular package. A few students were chosen for indepth interviews on a voluntary basis. Each lunch period, different grade-level students attended but, consistently, most were males. Students were left on their own, except for the presence of a supervisor, whose sole function was to distribute software and maintain orderly conduct in the lab. From our own observations and those of supervisors, games used during the free lunch periods divide into the following five categories: * Games girls like most (frequently played): Jeopardy, Fraction Muncher, Number Muncher, Game Show and Word Challenge. * Games girls like less (played some times): Shifty Sam, Carmen Sandiego, Dazzle Draw and Oregon Trail. * Games girls don't like (never played): Paper Plane Pilot, Wood Car Rally, Microzines and Odell Lake. * Games boys like most: Jeopardy, Oregon Trail, Carmen Sandiego, Odell Lake and Fraction Muncher. * Games boys don't like: Game Show and Word Challenge. It was noticed that students did not want to venture onto new software, as their time was limited. When they came to the for the first time, they usually played games recommended by their friends. Software documentation indicated that many programs were designed for a classroom environment with trained teacher guidance, which was not the case during these lunch periods. A supervisor was there to answer basic inquiries from students, however, she was not prepared for all questions. * How Each Program Is Used Many children play Number Muncher and Fraction Muncher just to attain the highest score. Its arcade-like quality makes it very attractive despite the fact that there is not much a junior high school student can learn from the game. …
Referência(s)