ED 246 862 DOCUMENT RESUME /- IR 011 194 AUTHOR Mojkowski, Charles TITLE Guide to Software Selection Resources: Part Three. Reading and Communication Skills. INSTITUTION New York State Education Dept., Albany. Center for Learning Technologies.; Northeast Regional Exchange. Inc., Chelmsford, MA. SPONS AGENCY National Inst. of Education (ED), Washington, DC. PUB DATE - Nov 83 GRANT NIE-G-82-0017 NOTE 30p1; For Part Two,'see ED 237 064; for Part One, see IR 011 193. PUB TYPE Guides - Non-Classroom Use (055).--7 Reference Matevials - Directories/Catalogs (132) -- Tests /Evaluation Instruments (160) EDRS PRICE MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Check List's; Computer Assisted Instruction;. *Courseware;'Elementary Secondary-Education; *English Instruction; *Evaluation Criteria; Evaluation Methcds_; *Information Networks; Information Sources; *Language Arts Media ReSearch; Media Selection IDENTIFIERS *Software Evaluation ABSTRACT Third in a series, this- -loose -leaf guide reviews resourceszfor evaluating, selecting, and using software for teaching reading and communication skills. Sources of educational, software listed include both' commercial publishers and public domain sources. Software selection information-sources are divided into journals, newsletters, and special publications; information clearinghouses; and human resources. Automated information clearinghouses are also listed. A checklist (originally prepared by the National Council of Teachers of English Committee on Instructional Technology) contains descriptive, application, and evaluative criteria for use with language arts and general purpose software. Evaluation criteria related to reading and`-communication skills are discussed, and-a section on software application reviews some educational principles and practices related to integrating software with the teaching of English, reading, and writing. A brief discussion summarizes research, findings on the effectiveness of computer assisted instruction. Twenty-three references are listed. (LMM) ****************4*******t*********i************************************ * 'Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the'best that con be made from the'original document. **A*******************************t******15****************************
Transcript
ED 246 862
DOCUMENT RESUME
/- IR 011 194
AUTHOR Mojkowski, CharlesTITLE Guide to Software Selection Resources: Part Three.
Reading and Communication Skills.INSTITUTION New York State Education Dept., Albany. Center for
SPONS AGENCY National Inst. of Education (ED), Washington, DC.PUB DATE - Nov 83GRANT NIE-G-82-0017NOTE 30p1; For Part Two,'see ED 237 064; for Part One, see
IR 011 193.PUB TYPE Guides - Non-Classroom Use (055).--7 Reference
EDRS PRICE MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS Check List's; Computer Assisted Instruction;.
*Courseware;'Elementary Secondary-Education; *EnglishInstruction; *Evaluation Criteria; EvaluationMethcds_; *Information Networks; Information Sources;*Language Arts Media ReSearch; Media Selection
IDENTIFIERS *Software Evaluation
ABSTRACTThird in a series, this- -loose -leaf guide reviews
resourceszfor evaluating, selecting, and using software for teachingreading and communication skills. Sources of educational, softwarelisted include both' commercial publishers and public domain sources.Software selection information-sources are divided into journals,newsletters, and special publications; information clearinghouses;and human resources. Automated information clearinghouses are alsolisted. A checklist (originally prepared by the National Council ofTeachers of English Committee on Instructional Technology) containsdescriptive, application, and evaluative criteria for use withlanguage arts and general purpose software. Evaluation criteriarelated to reading and`-communication skills are discussed, and-asection on software application reviews some educational principlesand practices related to integrating software with the teaching ofEnglish, reading, and writing. A brief discussion summarizes research,findings on the effectiveness of computer assisted instruction.Twenty-three references are listed. (LMM)
****************4*******t*********i************************************* 'Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the'best that con be made
from the'original document.**A*******************************t******15****************************
U.S. OEPAI1TMENT OF EDUCATIONNA110f4At. INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION
EDUCATIONAL. IICSLIUFICili It.IF01-1MATION
0: In, ihn. tmwro 11.r, 6,11 rplitoilut ,1!Wm Ih 1.1,1,r1 111 (MOM/MIMI
hfig.R.1111.0 .1
611101 t hdcu111 ti.1.P b,+.11 nt.rtr. ut .41f111,1.61,1 Iii.111111.0,1V
V1,011,1,1 ille,,,It.t,
pi 1,1111.11 f,t 11411
co
`GUIDE TO SOFTWARE. SELECTION RESOURCES:cp
PART THREE
READING AND COMMUNICATION SKILLS
Center for Learning TechnologiesNew York State Education Department
v. Albany, New York 12230v.
"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY
Greg Benson
TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)."
The New York State Education Department does Mot discriminate on the basis of age, color, creed,
41k
.
dis marital status, veteran status, national origin, race, or sex in the educational programs andclivities which it operates. This policy is in compliance with Title IX of the Education Amendments of
1972.I Inquiries concerning this policy may be referred to the Department's Affirmative Action Officer,
Education Building, Albany, NY 12234.
The University of the State of New YorkThe State Education DepartmentCenter for Learning Technologies
Albany, New York 12230
The development of this publication was supported through a subgrant from the Northeast `RegionalExchange, Inc., which is funded by the U.S. Department of Education, National Institute for Education,under grant number NIE G-82-0017. The opinions expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflectpositions or policies of the. U.S. Department of Education or the Northeast Regional Exchange, Inc.
0President of The University and Commissioner of Education
Gordon M. Ambach
Executive Deputy' Commissioner of EducationRobert J. Maurer
NORTHEAST REGIONAL EXCHANGE, INC.The Northeast Regional Exchange,. Inc. (NEREX), a private, not-for-profit corpu-ntion, is a service and researchagency that promotes educational equity and improvement. NEREX coordinates resources and sharing of informa-tion among the seven state departments of education in the Northeast based on an ustl'ilished set of state and re-gional priorities. Through NEREX, states are able to expand their available resource base and work through regionalsharing efforts toward program improvement in local school districts and other educational institutions. The North-east Regional Exchange, Inc. is governed by a Board of Directors that includes the seven Chief State School Officersfrom the Northeast and eight representatives froin a wide variety of education constituency groups in the region.
Connecticut:Gerald N. Tirozzi
Commissioner of Education.
David G. CarterAssociate Vice PresidentUniversity of Connecticut
Robert E. BcoseCommissioner of Education
Robert Gce.ttelDirector Center for Research.University of Southern Maine
Mnssachuktts:John W. Lawson
Commissioner of Education
Kevin T. AndrewsPrincipal, Spaulding SchoolNewton
Board of Directors
New Hampshire:Robert L. Brunelle, ChairCommissioner of Education
Jeannette VezeauPresident, Notre Dame College
New York:
Gordon M. AmbachCommissioner of Educaribn
Anne L. Bondy, Vice-ChairPresident, B.O.C.E.S.
Southern Westchester -
Sandra FeldmanAssistant to the PresidentUnited Federation of Teachers
J. Lynn GriesemerExecutive Director
Rhode Island:Troy EarhartCommissioner of Education
Ann ProsserPrincipal, Hunt School
Central Falls
Vermont:Stephen S.'Kaagan
Commissioner'of Education
Sylvia KelleyAssistant SuperintendentBurlington
Acknowledgments
Parts I and III of this Guide were written by. Charles Nrojkowski of Educational Consulting Services,Cranston, RI. Part II* was prepared by Nancy Baker Jones of the Southwest Educational DevelopmentLaboratory and Larry Vaughan of ale Northeast Regional Exchange, Inc.
Robert Caldwell, chairman of the National Council of Teachers of English Committee on InstructionalTechnology, provided resource information used in Part III.
Foreword
As with all instructional material, the selection of appropriate educational computer software is one of"the most important responsibilities of teachers and administrators. In these early stages of the develop- ',
ment of educational applications of the microcomputer and other interactive learning technologies, it isimportant to establish a strong foundation for our uses of these powerful new tools. Unfortunately, it hasbecome commonplace to hear criticism of much of the available microcomputer educational software.Unless high quality materials are used appropriately, the power of the technology will be wasted.
Recognizing the critical role of software in computer-based teaching and learning, the Center for Learning'Technologies of the New York State Education Department and the Northeast Regional Exchange arepleased to provide this esource series for teachers and administrators. It provides information on re-sources and tools for locating software and assessing its appropriateness for various instructional applica-tions. The purpose of the series is not to identify "good" software for educators, but to provide a meansthrough which teachers can make decisions about appropriateness and quality within the context of theircurriculum and instructional needs.
This Guide to Software Selection Resources has been designed as a resource series to aid the decisionmakng process in schools. The series includes both generic and content area resources. Part III is the firstof the content-specific materials; it focuses on reading and communication skills. Continued collabora-tion between the,Center for Learning Technologies and the Northeast Regional Exchange will yield addi-tions to this Guide that focus on mathematics, science, and other curriculum priorities.
Gregory BensonDirector
Center for Learning TechnologiesNew York State Education Department
The purpose of this Guide t eft ware Selection Resources is to provide teachers and achniniStrators witha reference tool for identifyu, evaluating anal selecting software for use in computer-based teaching andlearning. The Guide is organized as a series of modules that deal with different aspects of the process.
Part I provides an overview of software selection and general educational technology resources in NewYork State. This section serves as a preamble to the remaining sections of the Guide, which deal withsoftware selection resources in specific content at as. Special emphasis is placed on the organizational andmaterial resources that are available throughout New York State to assist educators in implementingmeaningful applications of computer technology, particularly software.
Part II is , general purpose introduction to evaluating software. Prepared by the Northeast Regional Ex-change, inc. r id the Regional Lcliange tlf the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory, Evalua-tion of Educational Software: A Guide to Guides serves as a introduction to criteria, procedures andsources of Fr aware evaluation information.
.Part III de.a with software selection information and procedures relating to reading and communication.skillS. Subsequent updates of the Guide will deal Nith ^ lditional subject areas, as well as new generalpurpose resources, A section on mathematics and science software is presently under development andwill be available as Section IV of this Guide in late winter, .1984.
A number of assumptions explain the a:; ,:4rOach we take in the Guide:
Software evaluation and selection is Drily orm.t.omponent of a comprehensive computer program devel-opment and implementation process, This prficess requires the identification and use of a wide range ofinformation and assistance resource., available throughout New York SZIte.
The selection and evaluation of software is primarily an educational task and only secondly a technical'one. HoWever powerful and sophisticated the microcomputer may be, the pedagogical quality of thesoftware is what determines its value in upporting teaching and learning. Thus, while evaluation ofsoftware may be a relatively new activity, lite evaluation of traditional instructional materials has beentaking place for many years. Such evaluation forms the foundation for selecting softwe.
Evaluating instructional materials squires an understanding of the teaching and learning context inwhich the materials wilt be used. What is "g,...71.' instructional material in one setting may be trnaccepta-ble in another. For this reason. we have awzitled evaluating or recommending specific software. This isnot to say that software evaluation is solely a matter of individual judgment; there are accepted stand-ards and procedures that can be applied. This Guide deals with such standards, and explains how theycan be used by teachers and administrators.
7
Tile amount ot software is grinVing rapidly, as are sollice!i but idiom This n1i11111i1I presents
it "snapshot" of informal ion available presently, 11110iites will lie prepared as thin! and resources peihelping teitchers and mliiiiiiistrators III hi:1111111 kVIIII
I he 1411111ill 01' the Cultic allovs you to add your own resources, as N%'ell ils incorporate theupdines provided by the f'enter Tor Learning Technologies The 'enter would 111111141Mo receiving copies
materiids you identify so that they may he included editions, Please send them to:
( 'enter for 1 ningNew NUM: Faltical i(ut I)eiutrtuienlCollura! litItication Center
Stine PlazaAlbany, N11' 12230
Contents
Part IIISoftware Selection Resources: Reading and Common leation Skills
Introduction xi
Sources or Educational Software ,1
Commercial Publishers1
Public Domain 2
-purees of Software Selection Information 5
Journals, Newsletters, and Special Publications 5
Information Clearinghouses 5
Human Resources 6
Automated Information Clearing Houses 7
Methods of Describing and Evaluating Educational Software 8
Essential Descriptive and Application'Information 8O
Evaluation Criteria Related to Conimuilication Skills 8
Software Applications: Principles and Practices 15
Effectiveness: What the Research Says I8
Bibliography 19
ix
I NTRODIA ION
This part of the Guide is devoted to a review of re-sources for evaluating, selecting, and using soft-ware in teaching reading and communication skills.
Perhaps it is because the field is so new, or becausemost teachers of English, reading and writing viewthe microcomputer as unrelated to their teaching,but for whatever reason, the amount of informa-tion dealing exclusively with software evaluationand selection in these.subject areas is quite small. Inmost cases, the reader will do well to use the generalmaterials and procedures dekribed in Part I of thisGuide. There are som other useful resources, how-ever, and their numb r and variety are likely to in-crease rapidly as writers and publishers begin tofocus on software selection and application_ fromspecific subject mattet perspectives.
We assume the reader is familiar with general pur-pose software evaluation methods and resources
xi
such as those described in Part II, Evalimilon ofEducational Software: A Guide to Guides and PartI Educational nclutology Resources In New YorkState. In addition to the general questions ad-dressed in those sections, this part responds to thefollowing questions asked by English, reading andwriting teachers who are beginning to use micro-computers.
Where can I find software for teaching readingand communication skills?
Where can I find out what descriptive and evalu-ative information is available on software used inteaching reading and communication skills?
What subject-matter standards can I use to as-sess the quality of the software available?
Where can I find information to help me useSoftware in my teaching?
10
SOURCES (flEDUCATION 04SOFTWARE
.
Many general purpose educational software evalua-tion publications include sections devoted to soft-ware for teaching reacting ining and connmicationskills. Following 'are some specific resources thatshould he reviewe 1:
.Commercial' ublishersThe National Cott -mil of Tbachers of English hasidentifild the following publishers as having soft-ware in the English. anguage Arts:
Milton Bradley company .
Education DivisiOn443 Shaker RoadEast LotigmeadbW, MA 01028
Selected Microcomputer SoftwareOpportunities for I earning, Inc.8950 Lurline AvenueDept. 26CDChatsworth, CA 91311
Vanloves Apple II/111 Software DirectoryVital Information, Inc.350 Union StationKansas City, MO 64106 1.
Miliken Publishing Company1100 Research BoulevardSf. Louis, MO 63132
Science Research AssociatesHigh School Division155 N. Wacker DriveChicago, 11-.60606
ILLS, Inc.Random House School Division400 Hahn RoadWestminister, MD 21157
Courseware Associates, Inc.8710 Park LaneSuite CDallas, TX 75231
The Micro CenterDept. S-4P.O. Box 6Pleasantville, NY 10570
In addition to instructional software, teachers ofcommunications skills. will be interested in identify-
-ing general purpose word-proeessingsoftware.This------category includes not only text editors, but spellingand grammar checkers. Becatise much of this sat-ware is not used exclusively or even primarily in ed-ucgtion, other sources are needed to identify whatis available. Nearly every computer journal has car-tied an article on word processing software. Thefollowing sources are samples,of those articles.
"k1/4 (11 4I,;. dlocessing: Hotline, Inv Ittglit !'101 \,lie,"hv I id\ itl t ;allot ill '0m/tut/int, Api IIPia 1 , pp. I t ) I 29 and 1 /1,
"I icitrell or it \Void 1,10,:ssor," hl Hiles( h.ii)
of Inv issue I giyvit to evaluations Id ahotit itdoivii son vate paclattges.Infowood.,i \void 1,1 rtograins," by Shea and liAtliv Chin in //thy1Porhi. 'Fannin I 1, 11 _11. Inclullr,conwitt isou churl i1111 glossiry III Iliad, relinedIn 1)rolvssi1111
WI" 111°''''N'illirk sollvnlv and ils educational applival ions \vill he (liscussed iu following rows, Thebil)lioguiphy lists some references relating 10 usingcommercial wort) processing, software In the class-room,
Anolher area where conimervial publishers haveproduced soft ware or intervst teachets of reading
4'"To, Succeed on the SAT." Electronic Learning.April, 1983, pp. 52-55.
mid cOlinininicalion shills is pollination hit thelush. 1 he chair ills' toll()
ing page (lest:10)0s ill'intivhcli (1\1o10:!i.A1' sotiware knoll
IVIthile 1)41
All of I lie public domain solt \s.ire cavil in Poll II,Irtincalloind tiottithret A Guide is
Goideti. (1)twoN N.1 .81to of lerings hir readingand coniiiiiiiiieittiou shills, t 'ontacl Itfose orgaiiiiit-lions di, voly for specific iilloomition : \11 ti(1(11
Clonal Ilnhllr domain source is:
Complaint? Nelwurk, IN)80Itiversidc, CA 92s01, Nwork
offers free software programs for leach,yrs in areas stwhits vocabulary Imilding and iv-view, poetry, spelling, vowels, and parts ()I'
non to pro:-.,teed or to begiven hints,llas built-in.editor.
$7.5)),one week
policy old delkreturial
Percentcorrect
Part 2: $35;package: $50
National Associa,tion of Secondary
ImprovingCollege Ad-
Apple II.(48K)
Optionalvideotape
No Workbook:$5.50;
Freebackup
Yes, demon.stration disk
No No tinting/SAT scoring
School Principals1904 AssociationDriveReston, VA 22091(703) 860.0200
missions TestScores(Verbal; Mathto be releasedin April)/$183.75; $725for six hourvideotape
lessons. Disksgive series ofthree clues;review cluesuntil questionis answeredcorrectly.
Manual: $10 one week formula
1"To Succeed on the SAT." Electronic Learning.April, 1983, pp. 52-55 reprinted by permission.
4 14
SOURCES OFSOFTWARE SELECTIONINFORMATION
Three categories of information resources are used:journals, newsletters and special publications; in -.
formation clearinghouses; and experienced educa-tors.'
Journals, Newsletters andSpecial PublicationsBecause the field is so new, there is only one journaldevoted exclusively or primarily to the use of com-puters in reading and language arts.
_ Computers._ Reading and Language Arts.Gerald H. Block, Editor-in-Chief, P.O. Box13039, Oakland, CA 94661.
This journal publishes detailed articles on practiCalapplications of computers in teaching reading andthe language arts; research studies; reviews of soft-ware, hardware and books; announcements offorthcoming curriculum materials; -.a calendar ofevents; reader iurveys; and letters to the editor. -(Note: Information taken from a pre-publicationannouncement.)
Articles on software reviews and applications arebeginning to appear in the following subject-matterjournals:
English Journal. Published by the NationalCouncil of Teachers of English. 1111 KenyonRoad, Urbana, IL 61801
Language, Arts. Published by the NationalCouncil of Teachers of English. /111 KenyonRoad, Urbana, IL 61801 .
5
The Reading Teacher. Published by the l'itter-national Reading Association. 800 BarksdaleRoad, P.O. Box 8130, Newark, DE 19711
The National Council of Teachers of Eriglish.andthe ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and Com-munications Skills have published:
Computers in the English Classroom:. APrimer for Teachers. It is available fromNCTE (stock no. 08180).
There-are no spedarptiblications that are devotedto describing and evaluating software in readingand communication skills. The publications citedin Part II contain numerous references in these -ob-ject areas, and we include, on<the following pages,some sample citation from Schobl Microware Re-views, EPIE, Courseware Report Card, and the Di-gest of Software Reviews.
Information ClearinghousesThe professional organizations in these subjectareas do not maintain clearinghouses dealing withsoftware. The ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading
d Communication Skills (RCS), working intion with the National Council of Teachers
of English (NCTE) and the International ReadingAssociation (IRA), has produced several informa-tion products dealing with computers and instruc-tion in English, reading and writing. Theseproducts typically take the form of bibliographies.Sample titleseare:
15
Coniputers and Reading InstructionComputers in EslishWord Processingind WritingComputers and ComposingCAI in the English Classroom
While these bibliographies do not deal 'exclusivelyor primarily with software descriptions and evalua-tions, some descriptions \of softWare use are in-cluded. ERIC/RCS is located at NCTE's offices,The Kdress is:
Nttional Council of Teachers of English1111 Kenyon RoadUrbana, IL 61801217-328-3870
The National Council of Teachers of English hasforMed a ComiNittee on Instructional Technologywhich has the following charter:
oystablish guidelines for the development ofco puter materials and other complex soft-ware .in the language arts; to develop guide-lines for classroom use of new instructionaltechnologies; to define those content areas andprocess objectives within the English curricu-lum which best Jena themselves to deliverythrough new instructional technologies; tosuggest new uses of technology and needed ar-eas of research in the use of .interactive media(e.g., the composing process using-word proc-essors; use of computers in teacher trainingand in adaptive testing); to encourage the use.of video-disc technology as a potential me-dium for instruction, information storage,andquality entertainment; to consider wa ofgathtring and disseminating teacherand/or teacher-tested games, lessons andon how to use computers; to make Englishteachers at all levels aware of how\Fiew technol-ogies can be used to develop. skill in language
.erarts.One of die Committee's first products is a set ofguidelines for evaluating software in language arts.These guidelines are included in the following sec-tion. The Committee also will address the issue ofcomputer literacy as it relates to computer-basedlanguage arts instruction and word processing.NCTE will make available a list of sources of soft-ware that can be used in language arts. A publica-tion resulting from the CoMmittee's work isComputers in the \English Classroom: A Primer forTeachers (NCTE, Stock No. 08180).
In New York State, the following organizationsprovide information on software used in teachingreading and communication skills.
New York State Rcading Association300 Hayward AvenueMt. Vernon, New York 10:52912-942-2100_ __
New York State English CouncilP.O. Box 2397Liverpool, New York 13089315-652-11'18
The Demonstration and Technical Assistance Cen-ters listed in Part I provide descriptive and evalua4tive information on software, and provide previewfacilities as well.
Human ResourcesThe bibliography lists several experts contributingto the appropriate use of software in teaching read-ing and communication skills. For informationabout the work of the NCTE' Committee on In-structional Technology, contact:
Dr. Robert CaldwellSchool of Applied Health Science CenterUniVersity of TexasDallas, TX 75235
Others whose work was reviewed in the preparationof this guide are:
John Henry Martin, Jr.Stuart, FLD. Midian Kurland lir
Bank Street College of EducationCenter for. Children and Technology610 West 112th StreetNew York, NY 10025Andee RubinBolt, Beranek and Newman, Inc.50 Moulton StreetCambridge, MA 02238Henry Olds, Jr.Intentional Educations, Inc.341 Mt. Auburn StreetWatertown, MA 02172
In New York, the Statewide Instructional Comput-ing Network (SICN) is preparing a list of resourcepersons who are able and available to assist teach-ers and administrators in a wide range of computrapplications, including software evaluation, selgc-tion, and use. You can obtain this list by conta0-ing:
Dr.Alan Osterhoudt.1Assistant Superintendent
Herkimer BOCES. Grds Boulevard
'Hdrkimer, NY 13350315-867-2007
16
Automated InformationClearinghousesThis category includes computer-based informa-tion databases that give exeltisive or considerableattention to software. All of these databases may besearched (are searchable) over the telephone linesusing a microcomputer and a modem. Searchingthese databases requires some special skills, but theeffort is rewarded with access to thousands of refer-ences and actual documents and journal articles onsoftware and its applications. Using 'special"searching,:' techniques, those articles or docu-ments dealing with a specific topic or software ma-terial can be located in minutes and reviewed on thecomputer monitor. Print documentation is usuallyavailable through the mail within a short turn-around time.
Resources in Computer Education (RICE).Developed by the MicroSIFT Project at theNorthwest Regional Educational Laboratory,300 S.W. Sixth Avelue, Portland, OR 97204.Available online from Bibliographic RetrievalServices, 1200 Rome 7, Latham, NY 12110.
RICE is a file of information on the educationalapplications of microcomputers. It has five sub-files, not all of which zre available presently:
Producers, which include all commercial andnoncommercial producers of computer-based in-structional and administrative software;
Software - Packages, which contains descriptiveand evaluative information about known prod -ucfs from prodieers;
Computer Literyy, which contains objectivesand test items;
Inventory, which contains numbers of studentstations and other data on installations of hard-ware in schools;
Project Register,' which contains descriptions ofresearch and development projects in K-12 com-puter applications.
Although all of the files are potentially useful tomicrocomputer users, the one containing informa-tion on software packages is particularly suited tosoftware evaluation. This sub-file may be searchedby using the key words that define the kind of infor-
mation needed. For example, you can identify all ofthe software that is available for teaching eco-nymics in the junior high school, and thP* will runon a particular microcomputer.
A notable feature of RICE is that it contains evalu-ation irkformation on much of the software in thefile. There is a special section (called a field) of eachdescription that is devoted to evaluation informa-tion. This evaluation is based on reviews of the soft-ware by educators throughout the couiltry thatcollaborate with MicroSIFT in evaluating software.RICE descriptions also contain references to re-views in other publications.
SchoolsPractices Information File (BPIF). De-veloped and provided by Bibliographic Re-tr'eval Services, 1200 Route 7, Latham, NY121 i0. 4
SPIF is a file of educational programs, practicesand materials. A major portion of the file is de-voted to descriptions of software, searchable inmuch the same manner as the RICE file. SPIF soft-ware descriptions typically do not contain evalua-tion information.
Educational Resources Information Center(ERIC). Produced by the. National Institute ofEducation through contracts with several or-ganizations; available through most of thevenders of online datatAses.
ERIC is the major file of educational Vormation'iri the country. It has descriptions of all forms ofinformation esearch reports, curriculumguides, speeches, programs, journal articles. WhileERIC contains few if any software descriptions, itdoes contain scores of records describing educa-tional applications of microcomputers and soft-,
7 .
ware.
Information from all three of these files is availablefrom the Educational Programs and Studies Infor-mationServices (EPSIS) in the New York State Ed-ucation Department. EPSIS may be contacted at:
New Y. ork State Education DepartmentRoom 330 EBAlbany, NY 12234518-474-3639
The checklists in Part II are useful for describingand evaluating all software. This section deals withinformation, specific to reading and communica-tion skills that should be obtained as a supplementto that in the general checklists. In these subjectareas, literature dealing with assessing software 114isonly recently begun to appear in the popular con-tent and professional journals, and is still relativelyscarce. The NCTE Committee on InstructionalTechnology has prepared an evaluation checklistfor use with language arts software and generalpurpose software. This checklist, reproduced onthe following pages, contains descriptive, application and evaluative criteria, and is similar to the in-struments in Part II.
Esscntia; Descriptive andApplication InformationThe instruments contained in Part II and that usedby the Center for Learning Technologies (see PartI) will serve most requirements in decidingwhether undertaking an evaluation o a particularsoftware program is worthwhile. Mos jof the ques-tions in those checklists can be applied to general-purpose soft -ware (such as those for handling text,data and graphics), that can be transformed intoeducational software by developing the appropriatesuppoft materials for teachers and students. Themost popular software in this category is wordprocessing programs, although software that al-lows students to build' information files of re-sources is coming into use in secondary schools.
Qt.
Evaluation Criteria Related toReading and Communication SkillsAlthough the NCTE instrument isbsimilar to thechecklists in Part II, it incorporates a few generalitems relating to the language arts curriculum (e.g.,numbers III-13-15). In addition, it provides supple-mentary questions for word processing and othergeneral-purpose software. In general, however,checklists will be of limited utility in assessing thecontent of the software, because they do not ade-quately take into account the subject matter of theprogram.
Deciding whether a specific software package is ap-propriate for specific classroom applicat,;ons re-quires an understanding of curriculum standardsand guidelines. In addition to the gerieral evalua-tion criteria listed in Part II and in the NCTE in-strunlent, you will need to assess the softwareagainstatethe N
t the standards established at the district andvels. The following criteria are suggested byw York State Education Depatment:
Does Software used for writing instruction:
reflect an understanding of writing as a pro-cess of communication, as well as a way to dis-cover and activate ideas?
help students generate ideas for ve,hting, selectand arrange those ideas, fin3 appropriatemodes for expressinq them, o, and re-vise the written produet?
188
r
NCTE Guidelines for Software Review and Evaluation
PROGRAM:
PRODUCER:
REQUIRED EQUIPMENT
GRADE LEVEL: COST:
OVERALL PROGRAM OBJEC FIVES:
\
SINGLE LESSON OBJECTIVES (if you are reviewing one lesson only):
Ahswer yes orno for the fol7owing criteria in Sections I through V.
I. MANAGEMENT FEATURES
I. Program provides teacher with a management system. (If no, go to Section ii.),
2. Program has reeordZkeeping system that is useful and efficient.
3 Records are easily retrievable.1
4. Teacher can assign performance levels and otherwise modify or add to records.
II. CONTENT
. Content is accurate.
2. Content is appropriate to grade level for which it is intended:
3. Content can be modified by student or teacher.
4. Possible content modifications are appropriate to the subject matter.
5. Program contributes to the Language Arts curriculum.
6. Program achieves its purpose.
7. Program is motivating to \students.
a
199
III. INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGY
(Note: If the software you are reviewing is other than tutorial/drill and practice, go to the GuidclinesAddendum to complete this section. Then continue with Section IV.)
1. Program is attractive.
2. Program provides opportunity for practice.
3. Practice is sufficicut to help ensure mastery.
4. Examples are provided.
5; Examples are clear.
6. Presentation is logically sequenced.
7. Student has control over rate of presentation.
8. Feedback for incorrect responses is helpful for discovering correct answers.
9. Program allows learner to review, repeat, or advance according to performance.
10. Program reports student performance periodically.
11. Program provides an appropriate balance lietween conteffi nresenation and studentinteractions or responses.
12. Program offers a variety of interactions, varying keys pressed or responses required.
1,3. Program stimulates cognitive growth (or a new way of thinking).
14. Program complements (or enhances) other Language Arts materials.
15. Program allows meaningful application of Language Arts
IV. EASE OF OPERATION
1. Directions to student are clear.
_ ._ 2. Directions are accessible when needed.
3. Student' can operate program independently.
4. Student is prevented from getting lost in the program, with no way out.
5. Student is provided with option to quit 07 continue at any time.
V. SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL
1. Program provides teacher's guide.
2. Program provides supplementary student materials.
3. If yes, materials are appropriate and useful.
10 2
4. Program provides pre- and post-tests.
5 Replacement print materials are available from p-oducer.
OVERALL EVALUATION
Use the scale at the right rate this program. (1 is lowest.)
1. MAID AGEMEN 1' FEATURES1 2 3 4 5,
II. CON !'ENT1 2 3 4 5
(III. INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGY1 2 3 4 5
IV. EASE OF OPERATION1 2 3 4 5
V. SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS1 2 3 4 5
COMMENTS: What are the program's strengths and weaknesses?
STUDENTS'RESPONSES TO PROGRAM:
RECOMMENDATIONS:
GUIDELINES ADDENDUM
Choose the description which best fits the software you are reviewing, and repond to each criterion underthat heading with a yes or no.
A. SIMULATION/PROBLEM SOLVING (Learning through discovery and decision-making)
1. Problem-solving situation is realistic.
2. Design is motivating.
3. Procedural tasks are clearly sequenced.
4. Feedback to decisions is helpful/
5. Suggesti6ns are given for optimum performance..
6. Outcomes to choices are explained.
7. The program is relevant to the acquisition of Language Arts skills.
B. EDUCATIONAL GAME
1. Format is motivating.
2. Graphics are appropriate to presentation.
3. Content is appropriate to Language Arts skills.
4. Learner has access to help or review.
5. There is an appropriate reward for success and no ."reward"-for incorrect responses.
6. Additional information or clues are provided by error feedback.
C. TEACHER UTILITY (A program which allows teacher to "author" content within a programmedformat)
1. Directions to teacher are clear.
2 Items are easy to enter.
3. Editing is possible.
4. Format for'presenting items to student is appropriate.
5. Student directions are clear.e.
ol
6. The type of interaction is appropriate to the skills.taught.
7. Record-keeping is provided.
D. WORD PROCESSING/TEXT EDITING (Xprogram which assists students in the composing proc-ess)
1. Instructions are clear.
2. Examples are provided.
3. Practice is provided.
4. Editing and revising are possible.
5. Editing capabilities are sufficient to writer's needs.
6. Editing.is easy to perfoi-m.O
3
7. Keys used for editing process are straightforwSrd and easy to understand andsmanipulate.
12
8. Stored data (spelling dictionary, etc.) are appropriate to learner's level.
9. Teacher can add to stored data.
_ 10. Learner has access to help or review.
11. There is provision for printing out compositions.
12. The program Makes a contribution to the composing process.
E. OTHER TYPES OF SOFTWARE
If the software you are reviewing does not fall into any of the above categories, you may wish to give abrief description of it below, followed by your evaluative comments.
help students recognize that precision in punc-,tuation, capitalization, spelling and othermanuscript conventions is a part of the totaleffectiveness of writing?
Does software used for. reading instruction:
help students learn to approach reading as asearch for meaning?
help develop the necessary reading skills tocomprehend connected text in a variety offorms?
demonstrate that reading functions are a plea-surable activity as well as a means of acquiringknowledge?
help students to read accurately and makevalid inferences?
elicit personal and/or critical responses to lit-erature?
provide students with strategies for organiz-ing, responding to, or crystallizing textual in-formation, rather than merely serving as avehicle for displaying that infomation?
Does software used for language instruction:
13
help students recognize language as a powerfultool for thinking and learning?
illustrate the ways in which grammar repre-sents the orderliness of language and makesmeaningful communication possible?
demonstrate how topic, purpose and audienceinfluence the structure-hd use of language?
help students learn how the English languagehas developed, continues to change, and sur-vives because it is adaptable to new limes?
provide opportunities for using language be-yond the letter, word and sentence levels?
23
Does software designed to promote thinkin9
help students analyze, classify, compare, for-mulate hypotheses, make inferences and drawconclusions?
promote creative thinking by providing oppor-tunities to bring fresh perceptions to familiarideas?
encourage logical thinking by providing op-portunities for constructing arguments, de-tecting fallacies in reasoning, and testing thevalidity oft an assertion by examining the evi-dence?
foster critical thinking by requiring students toask questions, discriminate between fact andopinion, and evaluate the intentions and mes-sages of speakers and writers?
Evaluating software tools such as word processingprograms requires the use of more specific evalua-tion criteria that combine those used for generalpurpose compute: software reviews and criteriathat reflect the adaptations that will be required touse the software tools in the classroom. An exampleof a software tool that is transformed into a educa-tioal software package is Word Processing on theApple, which teaches studints the fundamentals ofword processing through the use of the Apple
'Writer I program. The package was developed bythe Minnesota Educational Computing Consor-tium, and includes specially prepared teacher andstudent support materials to accompany the com-mercial software program. An evaluation of thesoftware alone is insufficierit to assess its utility forclassroom use. Only by evaluating the support ma-terials as well can a judgment be made on the qual-ity of the tool as an educational software package.
An example of ap empirical evaluation of a soft-' ware tool is that conducted by Virginia Bradley on
three different word processing programS.' Whilethe article describing the evaluation does not indi-cate whether Bradley conducted a review according
14
to criteria such as those in the NCTE checklist, herassessment incorporates criteria related to the abil-ity of the tools to accommodate the capabilities andlimitations of her students. Bradley "suggests thefollowing characteristics as important in ',using aword processing program in the elementary grades:
1. A screen editor is vital so that children can seetheir entire work (or a good portion of it) at onetime.
2. The screen should display upper and lower caseletters.
3. The.text should be displayed'in a double-spacedformat.
4. Both large, primary type letters and normalsized ones should be' displayable by giving acommand.
5. Left and right arrow deletion and retrieval func-tions are well accepted by children.
6. Mnemonic commands that relate to children'svocabularies would be easier Tor them to learnand remember.
7. A dictionary that checks for spelling and otherstructural errors would be an extremely usefulcomponent.
8. The smallest number of commands possibleshould be used.
9. A quiet printer is very important to avoid dis-turbing others in the classroom.
Bradley's assessment illustrates the limitations ofgeneric checklists in evaluating the utility of an ed-ucational software program or software tool to beused in a particular subject' area. Her additionalcriteria range from substantive curriculum stand-ards to relatively mundane concerns, such as thatfor a quiet printer. The best software evaluationswill incorporate technical questions, as well asquestions about the curriculum and its implemen-tation in the classroom.
'Virginia Bradley, "Improving Students' Wiitingwith Microcomputers," Language Arts, October,1982, pp. 732-43.
24a
SOFTWARE APPLICATIONS:PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES
Selecting high quality software and general purposesoftware tools is only part of the work of using soft-ware meaningfully in the classroom. Careful atten-tion must be given to how the software supportsand advances the curriculum and instructional ob-jectives. The journal literature, and descriptions ofpromising practices indicate that meaningful soft-ware use by teachers of reading and communica-tion skills is increasing, substantially, even though itis a new activity for the vast majority otteachers.This'section briefly reviews some educational prin-ciples and practices related to integrating softwarewith the teaching of English, reading and writing.
The first question to ask is what uses of the com-puter students should make, and for what pur-poses. In teaching readtpg and communicationskills, the most typical modes of use (see "Evaluat-ing the Evaluation Schemes" in Part II) are likely tobe as a tutor and as a tool. The literature,contains
numerous examples of both application modes. If,as many experts indicate, computer literacy will bedefined increasingly in terms Of an individual'sability to use the computer to perform discipline-related tasks, teachers of reading and communica-tion skills will need to take a leadership role indesigning., and ,-implementing instructional pro-grams that teach students how to,communicate us-ing the computer. '
It is this emphasis on the tool mode that hqs moti-vated many teachers to, incorporate text editing(word processing) into their teaching of creativeand expository writing. Afew word processing pro-grams for use by elementary grade students have
been developed, and teachers are devising ways toteach students to increase the quantity and thequality of their writing using the computer. At thesecondary level, teachers are able to use generalpurpOse word processing !programs that requiregreater-skill. As Kurland, points out, using thecomputers a tutor is not revolutionary, since itusually does what theteacher is ablest() do. But usesof the computer for writing, developing bibliogra;phies and research file databases, ancrcommuni-eating through electronic mail representstep- function differences 'in the way importantcommunication skills can be taught. It is this kindof literacy that students will require. in order tocompete in the job market, as well as in post-sec-.ondary education.
Given this need4o help students acquire computerliteracy for communication, the selection of soft-ware involves making judgments on the appropri-ateness
.--of general 'purpose tools already used in
work environments. Application decisions willneed to deal with the logistics of using a limitednumber of computers to accommodate skills devel-opment that requires frequent and- regular use by allstudents. The decision to use a software programwill require thorough use of the; checklists pro-vided, as well as detailed planning in classroom or
'D. Midian Kurland, "Educational Software Tools:The Rationale Behind the/Development .of theBank Street Writer." In Teaching Writing ThroughTechnology: A Resource Guide. pp. 112-23.
15 25
ganization and management. A review of softwarefor use in the tutor and tool modes will serve to il-lustrate some of the problems in selecting,and usingappropriate materials.
Software as TutorThere is a considerable amount of software avail-able in this category. While much of it is criticizedas being very limited technically and pedagogically,its usefulness is dependent on how and with whomit is used. Most of the softwareis drill and practicein mechanics word recognition, grammar --, re-..
quiring that the teacher use it within a comprehen-sive instructiopal plan. As Roblyer states, the key is"matching what software there is to identifiedneeds in language instruction, and using all of thisas the basis of a complete, well-designed pro-gram."'
Of course, there is better tutor software available,and new development is benefiting from the identi-fication of inadequacies in exiking materials. Onesuch development is the Writing to Read programcurrently being tested by John Henry Martin withsupport from IBM.' The program teaches' youngchildren to write and, in doing so, helps them toread. Writing to Read illustrates the way in whichhigh quality computer-assisted instructional mate-rial is developed: The content and instructionalmethods are designed and tested; then the com-puter is used to support the materials, using all ofits unique capabilities. This includes using true in-teraction, in which the computer adjusts its re-sponses to the student's.
SAT courses are 'another application of tutorialsoftware. Responding to the resurgence of interestin SAT scores (and to research which finds that"teaching" the SAT produces performance gains),educators are offering special tutorial classes. Be-cause of the SAT emphasis on Verbal skills, Englishteachers usually take a coordinating role in prepar-ing and conducting classes. Publishers are bringingseveral new programs to market for use in formalclasses or in self-study applications. Evaluatingand selecting a program involves using specific cri-teria related to these various applications. leaddi-tion to applying general descriptive, applicationand evaluative criteria, the following questionsneed to be addreised:
Does the software include teacher and/or studentmanagement? If so, how many students will itaccommodate?
Are there accompanying or reference materials?
Is the program regularly updated to incorporatechanges in the SAT?
How much instruction does the program offer?(the quantity of instruction ranges from ' briefhints to lengthy tutorials)
What is the turnaround time for backup disks?
Does the program include a timed practice test?
Is the practice test or any other portion of theprogram scored? If yes, how?
Does the program have graphics and sound?'
Software as ToolThe most common application of software tools is,the teaching of writing using word processing soft:ware. It is likely that future classes in communica-tion skills will include 'the use of electronic diailsystems, online computerized databases (e:g.,newspaper files or encyclopedias), and electronicfiling systems which allow students to create bibli-,ographies and research files on the computer. Atpreient, however, these uses arc uncommon, andword processing tools are receiving most of the at-4tentionof teachers of cor4munication skills.
Of the4,ires of word processors on the market,only a few are appropriate for use in educ\atiOnwithout considerable riiixiification, particularlyfor upper elementary level students. Two eiluca-tion-specific programs are cited he,re: Th y BankStreet Writer and QUILL.
The Bank Street Writer (available from Broder-bund Software,.1938 Fourth Street, San Rafael, CA94901 and Scholastic, Inc., 902 Sylvan' Avenue,Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632) was developed by In-tentional Educations, Inc. and Bank Street College'of Education. It is .for the beginning writer, incoi-porating tested instructional methods with techni-cally simple software. The-prograrn is designed tosupport the teaching of writing. For example, thestudent is encouraged to communicate withoutworrying about mechanics (i.e., spelling, punctua-tion, paragraphing). In fact, the program discour-ages the student from editing and rewriting until,s/he has completed the creative process. Only then
47'4%
14D. Roblyer, "Recommendations on RemedialReacting/Writing Labs," Educational Computer,May/June, 1983, p. 36,1
'Leigh E. Zeitz, "Children Should Learn to Read byLearning to Write," ItifoWorld, May 23, 1983,pp: 17-21.
3"To Succeed on the_SAT," Electronic Learning,April, 1983, p. 52.
16
N 26
4
can s/he switch to the edit function and begin themore tedious process of rewriting. Such a technicaldesign is consistent with correct teaching of thewriting process.
A more comprehensive set of writing software toolsis QUILL, a program developed by Bolt, Beranekand Newman, Inc., of Cambridge, Massachusettsand The NETWORK, Inc. of Andover, Massachu-setts. The software is for students in grades 3-6, andhas four components:
The PLANNER enables the writer to organizethpughts by posing a series of questions thatwhen answered are a plan for creating a writ-ten piece.
The WRITER'S ASSISTANT is a text editing-- system for children that makes producirg and
revising what they have written easier.
The LIBRARY is an information storage sys-tem that allows students to produce and shareinformation about topics of study and inter-est.
The MAILBAG is an electronic message sys-tem that encourages students to.communicatevia computer, as they will be doing in the nearfuture.
QUILL provides more Than tools for processingwords; it encourages cl-eative written communica-tion by providing motivations and opportunitiesfor writing. QUILL is a modification of more so-phisticated software available in business and in-dustry; it helps students to become literate in theuse of computer tools while learning basic writingskills.
If QUILL represents the kind of computer skillsthat students will need to communicate itt college,
work, and the home, then teachers of communica-tion skills will need to incorporate them into theircurriculum. It is likely that more sophisticated mi-crocomputers and software will merge the tutorialand tutor modes. This would allow students, for ex-ample, to use word processing software to create areport, and then use spelling and grammar checkersthat not only identify errors, but provide studentswith appropriate instruction, while keeping recordsfor the teacher on the lessons provided.
SummaryWhile the amount of available information dealingexclusively With reading and communication skillsis small, general purpose criteria and procedur6sare applicable in most cases. Use of the criteria de-veloped by the. New York State Education Depart-ment as a supplement to a rating instrument willhelp to customize the evaluation and selection pro-cess for reading and communication skills.
The predominant uses of the computer in develop-ing reading and communication skills will be as atutor and as a-tool. The range and quality of tuto-rial software is increasing, but incorporating suchsoftware into the existing curriculum will continueto be the most difficult problem facing teachers.
Perhaps the most potent and pervasive use of thecomputer will be as a text preparation and editingtool. Although research is scant and inconclusive,it appears that word processing tools can be used topromote creative communication and the develop-ment of the revision and editing skills essential togood writing.
27
17
EFFECTIVENESS: WHATTHE RESEARCH SAYS
There is a considerable amount of research avail-able on the of computer-based in-struction, most of it on the use of the comptiter as atutor. For both the drill' and practice and tutorialmodes, the research concludes that computer-based instruction raises student achievement fromthe fiftieth percentile to about the sixty-fifth per-centile. This conclusion was derived by reviewingscores of studies done at many sites over multi-yearperiods.
Most of the research to date has been done at thesecondary school level across all of the subjectareas; but primarily in math and science. Only afew studies have been conducted at the elementaryschool level, but findings from these tend to paral-lel those for the secondary level. One researcher, ex-amining studies conducted over several years,concluded that computer-based instruction was notas effective as peer or cross-age tutoring.'
The time required to learn specific material is usu-ally considerably less for computer-based delivery.Costs are at least comparable to those for tradi-tional instruction.
'James Kulik "Synthesis of Research on Computer-Based Instruction," Educational Leadership, Sep-tember, 1983, p. 19.
All of this research focused on the computer as atutor. There is no conclusive research on the effec-tiveness of the computer used as a tool. For exam-ple, little is known on the impact of using acomputer as a word processor to develop writingskills. This is understandable-given thee recent useof word processing in schools. It probably will beseveral years before there are definitive studies inthis area.
For those wishing to review the research on com-puter-based instruction, the following referenceswill serve as an introduction.
28
18
Bracey, G.W. "Computers in Education: WjairTthe Research Shows." Electronic Learning.November /December, 1982, 51-54.
Kearsley, G.; Hunter, B. and Seidel, R.J. "IvoDecades of Computer-Based Instruction Pro-jects: What Have We Learned?" T H E Jour-nal. January, 1983, 90-94. February, 1983,88-96.
Kulik, AA. "Synthesis of Research on Com-puter-Based Instruction," Educational Lead-ership. September, 1983, 19-21.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
rNs
Bradley, Virginia. "Improving Students' Writing with Microcomputers." Language Arts, Volume 59,N umber ober_L982
Caldwell, Robert M. "Evaluation of tvlicrocomputer. Software: How Valid are the Criteria and the Proce-dures?" Paper presented at the National Educational Computer Conference, Baltimore, MD, June,1983.
Collins, Allan, Bruce, Bertram C., and Rubin, Andee. "Microcomputer-Based Writing Activities for theUpper Elementary Grades." In Proceedings of the Fourth Internationai Learning Technology Con-gress and Exposition. Warrenton, VA: Society for Applied Learning and Technology, 1982.
csonnell, Bruce, akd Hurries, Ann. Using Microcomputers for Composition instruction. Los Alamitos,CA: SWRL Ehcational Research and Development, March, 1981.
Engstrom, Kristina. A.Guide to the Use of Technology in Basic Skills Education. Belmont, MA: CRCEducation and Human Development, Inc., August, 1981. , ,
Henney, Maribeth. "Development-and Use of icrocomputer Reading Programs." Paper presented atthe Annual Meeting °gibe Iowa Council o he International Reading Association, Des Moines, IA,March, 1982.
Humes, Ann. "An Interactive Instructional Program for Elementary and Middle School Students." TheComputing Teacher, Volume 10, Number 5, January, 1983.
Kurland, D. Midian. "Educational Softwaie Tools: The Rationale Behind the Development of the BankStreet Writer." In Teaching Writing Through Technology: A Resource Guide. Chelmsford, MA:Northeast Regional Exchange, Inc., 1983.
Latamore, G. Berton. "A Fluid Well for Your Words." Persatlal Computing, Volume 7, Number 1, Janu-ary, 1983.
1 )29
19_
Lawler, Joseph. Computers in Writing. Los Alimatos, CA: SWRL Educational Research and Develop-. ment, 1982.
Levin, Robert, and Doyle, Claire. "The Microcomputer in the Writing /Reading /Study Lab." T H EJournal, Volume 10, Number 4, February, 1983.
Mason, George et. al. Computer Applications in Reading. Newark, Delaware: International ReadingAssociation, 1983.
Marcus, Stephen. "Compupoem: CAI for Writing and St udyine Pdetry." The Computing Teacher, Vol-ume 2, Number 4, March, 1982.
Marcus, Stephen. "The Muse and the Machine." Classroom Computer News, Volume 3, Number 2, No-vember/December, 1982.
Roblyer, M.D. "Recor.- mendations on Remedial Reading/Writing Labs." Educational Computer, Vol-ume 3, Number 3, May/June, 1983.
Southwell, Michael. "Computers and Developmental Writing." The Computing Teacher, Volume 10,Number 3, November, 1982.
Wall, Shavaun, and Taylor, Nancy. "U a Interactive Computer Programs in Teaching Higher Concep-tual Skills: An Approach to Inst uction th Writing." Educational Technology, Volume 22, Number 2,1982.
Watt, Molly, and Parham, Charles. "Child Appropriate Word Processing in the Language Arts Curricu-lum." In Teaching Writing Through Technology: A Resource Garde. Chehnsfui d, NIA-.-Northeast---Regional Exchange, Inc., 1983.
' '3rd Processing: How Will It Shape the Student as Writer?" Classroom Computer News, Volume 3,Number 2, November/December, 1982.
Zacchei, David. "The Adventures of Story Maker and Textman." Classroom Computer News,.Volume 2,Number 5, May/June, 1982.
Zeitz, Leigh E. "Children Should Read by Learning to Writi," InfoWorld. Volume 5, Numbers 21-3, May23, and 30, June 6.
Zsiray, Stephen. "Using the Microcomputer to Develop Library Media/Information Research Skills."The Computing Teacher, 'Volume 9, Number 9, May, 1982.
