1. Evaluating CALL
courseware
in a
Stafford Lumsden
Seoul National University of Education

2. • A framework for assessing CALL courseware
• Using the framework to look at a specific
example

3. Call evaluation
Established views on
assessing Take advantage of a
courseware number of evaluation Diversity Flexibility
processes

4. Before choosing CALL
courseware
• Teachers (and school management) need to
assess the role of call in the syllabus being taught
• Is it an integral or incidental part of what is being
taught?
• Is CALL being used to instruct or to offer
practice?
• Does the use of CALL offer communicative
opportunities for students
(Hubbard, 1988: 66)

5. An Evaluation Framework

6. Operational Description

7. • Operational Description provides objective
and detailed view of the operation of software
and accompanying elements

9. Activity types

11. Accompanying
items

13. Presentation schemes

15. Interface

17. Teacher Fit
• Do the developer's assumptions regarding
language teaching, as manifested in the
courseware, correspond to those of the
person evaluating it?
(Hubbard, 1988: 61)

18. Mechanical
or Are learners guided
Meaningful by on screen hints?
Practice
Is appropriate
Alternate input Appropriate
Feedback
OK?

19. Learner Fit
• Courseware usually chosen with a group of
learners in mind
Mechanical Appropriate
or Feedback
Meaningful
Practice
Is appropriate Are learners guided
Alternate input by on screen hints?
OK?

20. Implementation
Schemes
• How can the software be used in ways other
than those outlined by the author [developer]
documentation?

21. Appropriateness
Judgements
Could time be better
Will spent elsewhere?
It Are learners likely to do
Be it?
Effective?
Will $₩¥€£
It Be
Efficient?

24. Middle School English

25. Operational Description
• Learner work book
• Learner activity book
• Interactive CD
• Additional mp3 CD
• Teacher manual

26. Presentation Schemes
• CD renders virtual pages, the metaphor being
continued to the extent that pages are turned
by the mouse.
• Provides low barrier to entry

32. Teacher Fit
• Debate to efficacy (Korean Context)
• Useful in-class for NEST
• Bilingual

33. Guides Students
Provides meaningful through courseware
Practice
Semi-authentic provides feedback
Texts

34. Appropriateness
Does MS English 1 represent appropriate
courseware vis-á-vis Hubbard's framework?

35. YES

36. Higgins, J., (1983) Can computers teach? CALICO Vol. 1
No. 3
Hubbard, P., (1988b) Towards a Comprehensive
Methodological Framework for CALL software
development, Paper presented at International TESOL
Convention, March 1988
Hubbard, P., (1988b) An Integrated framework for CALL
courseware evaluation CALICO, Vol. 6 No. 2
Kim S., et al, (2008) Middle School English 1, Seoul:
Doosan

37. stafford.lumsden@gmail.com
Seoul National University of Education
tesol.snue.ac.kr