Step 1: Online Article In their article, Predicting the Quality of Educational Software, Squires and Preece cite Nielsen's (1994) version of the ten usability heuristics. At the end of their paper, they also note an initial set of “learning with software heuristics.” I have identified additional key questions based on eight of these guidelines that I believe should be considered when evaluating classroom software.1. Does the software have “system status visibility”? Will my students know what is happening while using the system?2. Is there a “correspondence between the system and the real world”? Will my students understand the language used by the system?3. “User Control and Freedom” - Will my students be able to undo actions independently and without having to retrace unnecessary or unwanted steps? Is the system easy to navigate and/or child-friendly?4. “Consistency and Standards” – Will my students need to ask themselves if a term means different things or will system terms be used and defined consistently?5. “Recognition rather than repetition” – Is the system visually set up in a way that allows my students to find their way? Are the road signs also visible and clear?6. “Flexibility and Efficiency of Use”: Will the system easily accommodate both my beginner and advanced students? Will it automatically adjust levels based on my students' responses?7. “Aesthetic and minimalist design? - Does the system contain an abundant amount of elements that are not necessary for learning? Do they interfere with the elements that are actually relevant to student learning?8. "Help users recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors" - My students will be able to resolve their errors independently without my... middle of paper...... district/state standards.Tool ISTE assessmentThis module was probably the most comprehensive of all the modules. It included plenty of space to detail the strengths and weaknesses, the learning strategy in the design, and the final recommendations. It also included detailed instructions on how to use the form, along with a list of acronym definitions. It was similar to Kathy Schrock's form and the computer software evaluation form above because there were sections to note the software's promotion of real-world connections, critical thinking, problem-solving skills, and creativity. This reminded me once again of Squire and Preece's embrace of social-constructivist methods and those that promoted cognitive abilities. Finally, I would say it was also partly related to the SRI guidelines because it related to student grouping and assessment guidelines.