Software Reviews

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

As a first step towards preparation of a collection of reviews of computer-assisted career guidance packages, guidelines for evaluation of such packages were published in the Journal (Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 40–42). Comments on the guidelines, which were prepared by Dr Esther Care, were sought from readers. These and other guidelines formed the basis of a document sent to potential reviewers of packages for this special edition. The process began by consulting practitioners, publishers and others knowledgeable in the field to ensure that as wide a range as possible of systems available in Australia would be covered in the reviews. Letters were sent to publishers and distributors requesting descriptive information about the nature of each system, its intended clients, cost and hardware requirements. For each system, a representative list of purchasers was requested from the distributor or publisher. These lists were used to ensure that a wide range of practitioners and regions of Australia would be encompassed in the reviews. We are also particularly pleased to have information from two neighbouring countries, New Zealand and Singapore, about systems developed and in use there. From the lists provided, two purchasers of each system were selected from different types of organisations and from different states or territories. Letters inviting reviews were sent, together with the document of suggested guidelines for comment. It was stressed that the guidelines were no more than that, and that comment in any form would be welcome. Not all potential reviewers approached were able to undertake the task and a few “reserves” were called upon. Nevertheless a good cross-section of types of users and almost all regions of Australia are represented in the replies. The entries in the Journal are either directly as submitted or have been paraphrased from the summary comments made in response to the guidelines. In each of the latter cases, the paraphrased material was confirmed by the reviewer as an accurate reflection of the comments made.