smart phone banner

iPAC Rubric for Evaluating Educational Apps

The purpose of this instrument is to assist school teachers in evaluating educational applications (‘apps’) for mobile devices. It could also be used for teacher education purposes. Evaluators should ideally use this instrument after thoroughly exploring an app, and if possible, after using the app in their teaching.

The evaluation should take approximately 10-15 minutes to complete. There are two sections:

Responses will be recorded (anonymously) into a database for other teachers to use.


Part A Background



1. Which of these roles best describe you?



1a. If Other - please specify



2. What is the name of the app you are evaluating?



2a. If Other - please specify



3. Is the app free?



4. What platform does the app operate on?



4a. If Other - please specify



5. Is the app Discipline-specific (e.g. Maths, History, etc. ) or Generic (e.g. Filmmaking or Mind mapping etc.)?



5a. If you answered 'Discipline specific' in Q5, please specify the discipline it is mostly targeting



5b. If you answered 'Generic' in Q5, please specify the discipline in which you plan to use your app.



6. Is this app easy for students to use? e.g. is the navigation intuitive and user-friendly; is the design consistent with menus, buttons, etc; is the layout and organisation simple?



7. Does the app require access to the Internet (3G or wifi) to be fully functional?



8. What is the most suitable age group for students using this app? (You can choose one or more options)


9. Where would your students most likely use this app? (You can choose one or more options)


10. To what extent have you explored the features of the app?


10a. If you answered 'Thoroughly' in Q10, how often have you implemented a learning activity with your students that uses the app?


10b. (Optional) - If you answered 'Thoroughly' in Q10, describe the most common teaching context in which you have used this app e.g. age of students, discipline area(s), a brief description on how it was used


11. All things considered, how would you classify the
pedagogical design of this app?Classification system from Goodwin & Highfield (2013). For further information, see this short video.
(NB. Further notes and assistance will 'pop up' when your cursor or finger 'hovers' over underlined words)

1. InstructiveDrill-and-practice, prescriptive, reinforcement activities encouraged e.g. Maths Bingo, Quick Maths, Mathletics;
2.
3. ManipulableGuided discovery & experimentation, scaffolded activities encouraged; Learners can manipulate digital elements / representations e.g. search engine, reference apps, databases, e-books, geo-tagging, Augmented reality apps
4.
5. ConstructiveOpen-ended, creative, design-based, composition activities encouraged e.g. Explain Everything; ShowMe apps


Part B The iPAC rubric: Examining pedagogical opportunities

Use the following rubric to examine how use of the app’s design features might facilitate students' experiences

NB. Further notes, including examples of design features, will 'pop up' when your cursor or finger 'hovers' over each section of the rubric.


COLLABORATION


Collab image 3 2 1

The features of this app are likely to support:

The features of this app are likely to support:

The features of this app are likely to support:

Learners talking with peers onlinePedagogical features of the app design that may promote online peer learning conversations e.g. role-play design encourages communication; or technical features such as extensive, networked chat or discussion facilities e.g. in social media or multi-player game apps.

Limited, online peer discussionPedagogical features of the app design that promote online peer learning conversations in a limited way; or technical facilities such as SMS, texting & message boards; & access to camera and microphone to support small group video- conferencing.

No online peer discussionPedagogical or technical features promoting online peer learning conversations are absent.

Learners working together to create/modify digital contentPedagogical features of the app design promote co- creation of digital artefacts; or technical features such as co-editing facilities e.g. in a wiki or multi- player simulation app.

Limited opportunities for learners to work together to create/modify contentPedagogical features of the app design promote limited ways of co-creating digital artefacts; or technical features such as single-user editing features e.g. in iMovie app or Kahoot app.

No creation/modification of content togetherPedagogical or technical features promoting co- creating digital artefacts are absent.

Learners sharing/exchanging digital content onlinePedagogical features of the app design that may promote online sharing of digital artefacts with others e.g. multi-player game suggests learner sharing; or technical features such as in-built links to social media or online communities; or screen sharing facilities e.g. in multi-player game apps.

Limited opportunities for learners to share/exchange digital content onlinePedagogical features of the app design that may promote online sharing of digital artefacts with others in a limited way; or technical facilities to share content on a small scale, such as use of email or screen sharing e.g. in Skype or Google Hangout apps.

No opportunities for learners to share/exchange digital contentPedagogical or technical features promoting sharing of digital artefacts are absent.



PERSONALISATION


Pers image 3 2 1

The features of this app are likely to support:

The features of this app are likely to support:

The features of this app are likely to support:

Learner choice/control over the activityPedagogical features of the app design that may promote learner autonomy, such as allowing learners to choose a question or problem to explore. Also, technical features such as access to a range of ways to work / express (write, draw, narrate, animate etc.)

Restricted learner choice / control over the activityPedagogical features of the app design that may promote restricted learner autonomy, such as allowing learners to adjust limited parts of the activity. Also, technical features allowing learners to make minor activity adjustments such as challenge/difficulty levels, grade/age levels or time limits / rate of progress.

No learner choices/control. External control onlyPedagogical or technical features promoting learner autonomy are absent.e.g. Features suggest teacher control e.g.‘remote presentation’ apps like Nearpod

Learner customisation of the appPedagogical features or (more likely) technical features of the app design that allow learners to customise the app or user interface, such as access to numerous app settings or preferences for learners to tailor to their individual liking e.g. background images/music, building personal profile using motif or avatars.

Restricted access to app settings or preferencesPedagogical features or (more likely) technical features of the app design that allow learners to customise the app in a restricted way, such as turning location settings on/off.

No possibilities for learner to modify/personalise the app. 'One size fits all'.Pedagogical or technical features promoting app customisation are absent.

Learner access to unique information tailored to themPedagogical features of the app design that promote personalised information to learners informed by their past use (e.g. adaptive feedback), or technical facilities presenting personal information to learners based on their location, such as real-time weather data based on the user’s geographical position; or facilities collecting and showing user's heart rate or personal travel information (e.g. activity tracker apps)

Similar / identical information provided to all learnersPedagogical features such as limited choice of pathways / feedback based on past use; or technical features of the app design that allow learners access to personalized information in a restricted way e.g. facility to trigger information based on learner's location, or an image / QR code.

No access to personalised information for learnersPedagogical or technical features promoting personally tailored information are absent.



AUTHENTICITY


Auth image 3 2 1

The features of this app are likely to support:

The features of this app are likely to support:

The features of this app are likely to support:

Learners' participation in real-life activitiesPedagogical features of the app design that may promote meaningful, relevant activities for the learner e.g. community projects; or technical features such as facilities to collect/access ‘real data’ for/from experts e.g. citizen science apps; in- built links to real-life ‘online communities’ / experts.

Some realism and relevancy in activitiesPedagogical features of the app design that promote meaningful, relevant activities in a limited way e.g. prompts to record a 'selfie' or publish work to a real audience beyond the class; or technical features such as simulations resembling a real-world activity; or learners' adoption of realistic avatar profiles.

Artificial activities onlyPedagogical or technical features promoting meaningful, relevant activities are absent.

Realistic use of the mobile device by learners, similar to real-world expertsPedagogical features of the app design that promote realistic use of the device in a similar way to experts (e.g. inquiry approach encourages collection of real data); or technical features such as links to 'professionally relevant', discipline- specific tools e.g. the camera facility to support observation process (like real scientist); or the microphone to take audio notes in the field (like real historian) or translate speech to text (like journalist).

Restricted real-world use of the mobile device by learners; only similar to experts in a small way.Pedagogical features of the app design promote use of device in only a minor realistic way; or technical features such as limited in-built links to 'real-life' tools such as Google Maps, Calculator & clock e.g. 'timestamping' student- generated reports

Contrived use of the mobile device by learners, unrelated to discipline/real-life.Pedagogical or technical features promoting realistic use of the device are absent.

Opportunities for students to learn in a realistic learning space, relevant to the topic / real-lifePedagogical features of the app design that promote numerous opportunities for situated learning (e.g. astronomy apps that suggest learners go outside at night to analyse the stars); or technical features such as Augmented Reality (AR) facilities to enhances relevance of physical setting.

Restricted opportunities for learning in a realistic learning space, relevant to the topic / real-lifePedagogical features of the app design promote limited opportunities for use in an authentic learning space; or technical features such as Virtual Reality (VR) facilities create a relevant, albeit simulated, virtual space, such as in Google Cardboard apps.

Learning in a decontextualized learning space, unrelated to the topic / real-lifePedagogical or technical features promote irrelevant setting to topic / learners.e.g. Features suggest use in a classroom or contrived online space, such as a LMS.


12. (Optional) Describe any further information about this app, or use of this app, for prospective users



Thank you for your thoughtful responses. Please submit your responses by clicking on the 'Submit' button.



Unless explicitly stated otherwise, all material is copyright © Richard Procter