Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T15:54:51.425Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A defense of checklists for courseware evaluation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 November 2001

BERNARD SUSSER
BERNARD SUSSER
Affiliation:
Doshisha Women’s College, Kodo, Kyotanabe City, Kyoto Pref. 610-0395, Japan(e-mail: [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper examines the role of checklists as a device for evaluating CALL courseware. After defining checklists, it examines the reasons why courseware is difficult to evaluate compared to other educational materials. It then covers in detail the main objections to the use of checklists for courseware evaluation; articles in the CAL literature from the 1980s through the 1990s have complained that checklists are inaccurate, cannot deal with educational issues, lack objectivity and reliability, are biased, etc. The present paper then examines these claims one by one, finding either that the criticism is unjustified or that it applies equally to any form of courseware evaluation. The paper concludes with speculations, drawn from postmodern literary theory, as to why the checklist has been the target of so many unsubstantial attacks.

Type
Research Article
Information
ReCALL , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , November 2001 , pp. 261 - 276
Copyright
© 2001 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)