Review Criteria and ProceduresThank you for coming to our site, and we hope you will find our reviews valuable. Here is an overview of our review procedure. If you want to get right to reviews, go to the Home page, click on a category, such as Physics, and then the available reviews will show up there and you can click on any name or icon to go to that review.
As we revitalize this site over the coming months, it is an opportune time to provide the review guidelines we use. As we conduct each review we ask ourselves the following questions.
- Is the science correct?
- Does the app provide a sophisticated, effective and creative view?
- Does the software offer good value for cost?
- Is the interface engaging and intuitive?
- Does the app fill a valuable niche in the ecosystem of existing software?
- Is there evidence of validation by the developer?
- Do negative aspects such as intrusive advertisements or update requests interfere?
The relative importance of each element depends on the app being reviewed, and our overall score for each review is not simply an average of scores on each of these elements. The meaning of our overall numerical score is indicated below.
- 10: This software is outstanding. We see few areas that could be improved.
- 8-9: Excellent. We strongly recommend the software.
- 6-7: Good. If the software is appropriate to your needs, you should consider it, but there are aspects that could be improved.
- 4-5: Marginal. While some users may find the app useful, there are significant concerns.
- 0-3: Not Recommended. Issues are so significant that we do not recommend purchase.
- We review apps that help scientists or the general public do science, as well as apps that enhance learning of scientific ideas. That is, we review apps aimed at scientists, citizen scientists, the general public and children.
- We only provide reviews after we have fully engaged with the software, never on the basis of press releases or other secondary data. In most cases we only write reviews after an extended period of use, since first impressions are sometimes misleading.
- If the review is of an app intended for children, we only write the review after we have evaluated the app when used with children.
- While we are not opposed to receiving a code from developers for an app, we will never agree to give a positive review for such consideration. If we have received a code for free access, this is indicated in the review. Most reviews are on software that we have purchased at the normal price.
- While we review apps in all disciplines, the reader should keep in mind that my main scientific expertise is in physics, astronomy, space science, atmospheric science, educational research and electronics.
- My background includes M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees in physics, as well as a B.Ed. (and some M.Ed. level individual courses). I have won multiple local, regional and national teaching awards, as well as a regional award for science communication. I have extensive solar system astrophysics research over many decades, and also have conducted research in science teaching, physics education research, informal science learning and educational technology. I have taught at both the high school and university levels, as well as in a teacher preparation program where I taught science methodology and educational technology.
We welcome your suggestions at any time, either ideas for apps you would like to see us review, or comments on our review methodology or reviews. Please leave a comment here, contact us directly by email (address below in image format to discourage spammers), or direct message us through our Twitter account (@AppsScience)