The research involved evaluating the usability of modern educational software in two European countries (Italy, Poland). The research was conducted in the first quarter of 2022 by carrying out an online questionnaire using the LimeSurvey system. The online questionnaire was completed by 1209 prospective teachers. The software evaluation was limited to 22 types of teaching and learning support solutions, namely: Quizizz, Mentimeter, Wakelet, Padlet, Canva, Emaze, Answergarden, Jamboard, Coggle, Creately, Wordwall, LearningApps, Prezi, Kahoot, Plickers, Trimino, Dobble, Genial.ly, ClassDojo, Explain Everything, KhanAcademy, Easelly. The quantitative analysis of the collected data allowed us to draw the following conclusions: 1) In both countries, the most effective tools evaluated as: Canva, Quizizz, Prezi, Kahoot, Wordwall; 2) Canva software is the most well-known digital teaching tool in both countries; 3) There is a large variation in the evaluation of software in both countries; 4) In Poland and Italy pre-service teachers evaluate Canva, Answergarden, ClassDojo, KhanAcademy in a similar way; 5) The vast majority of respondents in both countries have no experience with educational software or rate the software low; 6) Among Italian respondents there is a constant tendency in the evaluation of educational software - a positive evaluation of one type of software is in a positive relation with the evaluation of another type of software; 7) Polish pre-service teachers are more diverse in their evaluation of software - a positive evaluation of one software does not necessarily condition a positive evaluation of another digital teaching resource.

Evaluation of the Quality of the Educational Software From the Perspective of Experiences of Italian and Polish Pre-Service Teachers

Fedeli, L.;
2022-01-01

Abstract

The research involved evaluating the usability of modern educational software in two European countries (Italy, Poland). The research was conducted in the first quarter of 2022 by carrying out an online questionnaire using the LimeSurvey system. The online questionnaire was completed by 1209 prospective teachers. The software evaluation was limited to 22 types of teaching and learning support solutions, namely: Quizizz, Mentimeter, Wakelet, Padlet, Canva, Emaze, Answergarden, Jamboard, Coggle, Creately, Wordwall, LearningApps, Prezi, Kahoot, Plickers, Trimino, Dobble, Genial.ly, ClassDojo, Explain Everything, KhanAcademy, Easelly. The quantitative analysis of the collected data allowed us to draw the following conclusions: 1) In both countries, the most effective tools evaluated as: Canva, Quizizz, Prezi, Kahoot, Wordwall; 2) Canva software is the most well-known digital teaching tool in both countries; 3) There is a large variation in the evaluation of software in both countries; 4) In Poland and Italy pre-service teachers evaluate Canva, Answergarden, ClassDojo, KhanAcademy in a similar way; 5) The vast majority of respondents in both countries have no experience with educational software or rate the software low; 6) Among Italian respondents there is a constant tendency in the evaluation of educational software - a positive evaluation of one type of software is in a positive relation with the evaluation of another type of software; 7) Polish pre-service teachers are more diverse in their evaluation of software - a positive evaluation of one software does not necessarily condition a positive evaluation of another digital teaching resource.
2022
978-986-972-149-3
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
TOMCZYK_Evaluation-quality-educational software_2022.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza: Copyright dell'editore
Dimensione 565.13 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
565.13 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11393/303349
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact