AL CUOCO and CELIA HOYLES (EDITORS)

SOFTWARE CRITICISM

Traditional software reviews have tended to concentrate on the descriptive and technical aspects of software. In this department we would like to attempt a new brand of software review, dealing with deeper issues of designing and using software, the learning theory it serves, the disciplinebased connections it can be used to make, and the kinf of classroom culture that is needed for its effective implementation. In other words, we want to encourage reviews of software for mathematical learning which are in the style of literary criticism. In line with the general objectives of this journal, mathematics and mathematical learning are considered in a broad sense encompassing new or non-standard topics and approaches and embracing related content domains such as music and physics. Software reviews will be subject to formal peer review, and may be subject to some length limitations.

W H A T WILL SOFTWARE REVIEWS LOOK LIKE?

They must: • be scholarly reviews which describe the features of the software: how they take into account the potential users, how they relate to (or illuminate) a theory of learning underpinning the software design, the mathematical domain and its representation. For example, how can the software be used in a constructivist classroom? Does the software favor geometric visualization over non-geometric thinking? Is it extensible? How does its syntax and interface compare with natural language and common mathematical convention? • include some discussion of how the software mediates mathematical learning and the development of mathematical thinking and the implications of this mediation. For example, how can the software be used to develop a knack for abstraction? For moving beyond data-driven conjecture? For developing algebraic (or analytic, or combinatoric, or geometric) International Journal of Computersfor Mathematical Learning 1: 133-135, 1996. (~) 1996 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

134

AL CUOCO AND CELIA HOYLES

thinking? To foster reflection on the tools themselves as well as promote links beyond the software environment?

They may: • situate the software and its application within a broader, cultural context. For example, can it help address equity issues? How will it affect the classroom as a "community of learners"? How will it affect the teacher's role? Can it be used to promote a constructive attitude to students' alternative conceptions? • be comparisons of different software or debates about the relative merits of different software. • include a student perspective or student activity with the software. • include what is considered 'poor' software with the rationale as to why it is so assessed. • be passionate or visionary while maintaining a scholarly structure of reasoned arguments (sales pitches for particular software are not appropriate nor are tutorials or lists of features for software environments). • be presented in innovative formats including interviews with designers, teachers, students, parents • include anecdotes as well as (or rather than) systematic evidence. • include a discussion of what mathematical objects or processes are foregrounded or made salient through the lens of the software, and which are backgrounded or less in focus. • include discussions of implications for the curriculum. • discuss software targeted for the home as well as at more institutionalised learning settings. • contain expositions of mathematical theories and domains that may not be familiar to the readership and that become more accessible in the reviewed computational environment. • contain expositions of epistemological theories that may not be familiar to the readership and that can be implemented in the reviewed computational environment. • centre around mathematical domains (algebra, for example), comparing and contrasting several software environments and their uses with respect to this domain. • center around a computational environment, describing various mathematical domains in which the software might provide added value with respect to student understanding.

SOFTWARE CRITICISM

135

• discuss misuses of software and ways that certain environments can set up obstacles to students understanding. • discuss the historical and intellectual evolution of a computational environment.

University of London Institute of Education, ([email protected] ) Educational Development Center, Newton, Mass., USA ([email protected])