• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

site logo
The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language
search
  • Home
  • About TESL-EJ
  • Vols. 1-15 (1994-2012)
    • Volume 1
      • Volume 1, Number 1
      • Volume 1, Number 2
      • Volume 1, Number 3
      • Volume 1, Number 4
    • Volume 2
      • Volume 2, Number 1 — March 1996
      • Volume 2, Number 2 — September 1996
      • Volume 2, Number 3 — January 1997
      • Volume 2, Number 4 — June 1997
    • Volume 3
      • Volume 3, Number 1 — November 1997
      • Volume 3, Number 2 — March 1998
      • Volume 3, Number 3 — September 1998
      • Volume 3, Number 4 — January 1999
    • Volume 4
      • Volume 4, Number 1 — July 1999
      • Volume 4, Number 2 — November 1999
      • Volume 4, Number 3 — May 2000
      • Volume 4, Number 4 — December 2000
    • Volume 5
      • Volume 5, Number 1 — April 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 2 — September 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 3 — December 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 4 — March 2002
    • Volume 6
      • Volume 6, Number 1 — June 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 2 — September 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 3 — December 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 4 — March 2003
    • Volume 7
      • Volume 7, Number 1 — June 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 2 — September 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 3 — December 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 4 — March 2004
    • Volume 8
      • Volume 8, Number 1 — June 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 2 — September 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 3 — December 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 4 — March 2005
    • Volume 9
      • Volume 9, Number 1 — June 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 2 — September 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 3 — December 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 4 — March 2006
    • Volume 10
      • Volume 10, Number 1 — June 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 2 — September 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 3 — December 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 4 — March 2007
    • Volume 11
      • Volume 11, Number 1 — June 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 2 — September 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 3 — December 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 4 — March 2008
    • Volume 12
      • Volume 12, Number 1 — June 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 2 — September 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 3 — December 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 4 — March 2009
    • Volume 13
      • Volume 13, Number 1 — June 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 2 — September 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 3 — December 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 4 — March 2010
    • Volume 14
      • Volume 14, Number 1 — June 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 2 – September 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 3 – December 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 4 – March 2011
    • Volume 15
      • Volume 15, Number 1 — June 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 2 — September 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 3 — December 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 4 — March 2012
  • Vols. 16-Current
    • Volume 16
      • Volume 16, Number 1 — June 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 2 — September 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 3 — December 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 4 – March 2013
    • Volume 17
      • Volume 17, Number 1 – May 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 2 – August 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 3 – November 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 4 – February 2014
    • Volume 18
      • Volume 18, Number 1 – May 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 2 – August 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 3 – November 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 4 – February 2015
    • Volume 19
      • Volume 19, Number 1 – May 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 2 – August 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 3 – November 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 4 – February 2016
    • Volume 20
      • Volume 20, Number 1 – May 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 2 – August 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 3 – November 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 4 – February 2017
    • Volume 21
      • Volume 21, Number 1 – May 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 2 – August 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 3 – November 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 4 – February 2018
    • Volume 22
      • Volume 22, Number 1 – May 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 2 – August 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 3 – November 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 4 – February 2019
    • Volume 23
      • Volume 23, Number 1 – May 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 2 – August 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 3 – November 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 4 – February 2020
    • Volume 24
      • Volume 24, Number 1 – May 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 2 – August 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 3 – November 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 4 – February 2021
    • Volume 25
      • Volume 25, Number 1 – May 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 2 – August 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 3 – November 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 4 – February 2022
    • Volume 26
      • Volume 26, Number 1 – May 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 2 – August 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 3 – November 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 4 – February 2023
    • Volume 27
      • Volume 27, Number 1 – May 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 2 – August 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 3 – November 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 4 – February 2024
    • Volume 28
      • Volume 28, Number 1 – May 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 2 – August 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 3 – November 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 4 – February 2025
    • Volume 29
      • Volume 29, Number 1 – May 2025
      • Volume 29, Number 2 – August 2025
      • Volume 29, Number 3 – November 2025
      • Volume 29, Number 4 – February 2026
  • Books
  • How to Submit
    • Submission Info
    • Ethical Standards for Authors and Reviewers
    • TESL-EJ Style Sheet for Authors
    • TESL-EJ Tips for Authors
    • Book Review Policy
    • Media Review Policy
    • TESL-EJ Special issues
    • APA Style Guide
  • Editorial Board
  • Support

SoftChalk in ESL Classrooms: Is It “The One”?

November 2014 – Volume 18, Number 3

Title SoftChalk Create 8.03
Authors Sue Polyson Evans, Robert Godwin-Jones, & Peter Huneke
Contact Information http://softchalk.com/contact
Type of product E-Content Authoring Software
Platforms OS: Windows 7/8, VISTA, Macintosh OS X 10.6.3 or higher Browsers: IE 9+, Firefox, Safari 1.2+, Chrome (with some limitations)
Supplementary software SoftChalk Cloud: http://softchalk.com/products/cloud
SoftChalk Share: http://softchalk.com/products/share
Price Pricing details: http://softchalk.com/buy-now

Product Description

SoftChalk Create (also called SoftChalk) is an e-content authoring tool that offers non-programmers a chance to easily develop and create e-content with different features using a simple and user-friendly interface. Content created via SoftChalk can include different types of data, like images, PDF documents, audio files, and YouTube videos. One can also incorporate different types of interactive activities and question formats into the program. As can be seen in Figure 1, the final product is produced in the form of a webpage that is accessible using any almost any modern device, platform, or browser, with minor limitations using Google Chrome.


Figure 1. An example of a final product created with SoftChalk

As there are many e-content authoring tools offered in the market, it is important to outline what sets SoftChalk apart from other options.

Interface

As can be seen in Figure 1, SoftChalk’s interface is very similar to that of most word processors like Microsoft Word. Adding text is done in a manner similar to any word processor. Adding questions or other activities is self-explanatory with easy to understand options. In some activities, the program offers a how-to menu to show an example of how an activity will be displayed in the final product, and offers a link for extra support (see Figure 2).


Figure 2. Support is easily accessible in most activities

Activities

What is unique about SoftChalk are the various kinds of interactive activities that can be integrated into lessons (see Figure 3). There are quiz poppers, which offer an e-version of basic question formats: true/false, multiple choice, short answer, matching, and ordering. SoftChalk also offers a variety of interactive activities that take the electronic capabilities of the activities to another level, including pairing activities, sorting, labeling, word search, jigsaw puzzles, drag and drop, timeline, and other features. These activities utilize touch features, if available. When tested out with beginner to elementary-level second language learners, the activities were perceived as easy to understand, although a few students who preferred working from a paper textbook needed help with some types of activities.


Figure 3. SoftChalk offers traditional questions and a variety of interactive activities

Questions (quiz poppers) can be added in sets or individually, as well as assigned points, which are tracked throughout the set. As can be seen in Figure 4, teachers can also add customize the feedback for each question to help give students hints or explain the correct answer. However, feedback needs to be manually entered for each and every question.


Figure 4. Customized feedback can be added for individual questions

If integrated into a Learning Management System (LMS) like Blackboard, reports will be generated via SCORM or ScoreCenter and will include great detail about learners’ performance, as displayed in Figure 5. On the other hand, if reports are designated to be sent by email, they are brief and include only basic feedback on learners’ performance (see Figure 6). Names are manually entered by students in that case, and the email to which reports are sent should be pre-configured before publishing the content.


Figure 5. An example of detailed reports delivered in Blackboard using ScoreCenter


Figure 6. An example of brief reports sent via email by the script

Final Product

Content generated by SoftChalk can be displayed in a single page or on multiple pages. An option is provided to create a table of contents listing all available pages, although pages are, by default, linked to each other using “previous” and “next” links at the bottom of each page. Final products are output in the form of a folder that contains a number of files (webpages, audios, pictures, etc.) and folders. Webpages are designed in a responsive manner; that is, the design responds well by adapting to different devices and/or screen widths (see Figure 7).


Figure 7. Example of content presented in a device-sensitive (table) layout

SoftChalk in ESL Classrooms

SoftChalk is not designed for language teachers or learners specifically, but rather is a general program that can be utilized for any purpose. However, with SoftChalk’s support for audio and video, almost all language skills can be successfully practiced using SoftChalk, except for speaking skills. Reading passages can be included as texts or images, and comprehension questions can be added on the same page either below the text or beside the reading text. SoftChalk’s feedback features and the option to try questions again motivates students to keep looking for correct answers and identify possible mistakes in their strategies for locating the answers. Grammar skills can be practiced using various kinds of interactive activities that give students a variety of tasks and an added element of fun (see Figures 8 and 9). When piloted with beginner to elementary-level second language learner students, the interactive activities were received positively and students reported being encouraged to continue trying the activities until they received the best score possible on a task.


Figure 8. Traditional activities covering grammar skills

     
Figure 9. A variety of activities that allow students to learn in different ways

Listening skills are one of the most suitable skills to be covered using this software. Students have the capacity to repeat an audio recording as many times as needed in order to understand the content (see Figure 10). Teachers can also limit the students and the content (see Figure 10), audio files, limiting students’ options to only replaying an audio from the start rather than rewinding it a few seconds, for example.

     
Figure 10. An example of an activity targeting listening skills

Limitations

Despite the plethora of valuable features offered by SoftChalk, the software does have a few limitations that need to be considered. One limitation is that questions or activities cannot be copied; instead, a potential instructor must repeat the exact same steps over and over again even if she/he only needs to change the question stem, which makes the process of creating sets of activities time consuming. For example, when preparing a set of activities for a 30-minute class, a teacher could easily spend more than an hour adding activities and questions.

Another limitation is that, unless using SoftChalk Cloud, content created by SoftChalk Create can only be shared with students if uploaded to a website or shared via a supported Learning Management System like Blackboard. Content cannot be shared via email without a direct link to the content.

Yet another drawback is that when an activity containing much audio or video data is loaded, the page could crash, necessitating a reloading of the page. This is an issue when completing scored activities. Reloading a page for any possible reason will result in losing all previously earned points; therefore, learners must do the same activities again if they need to submit their results. Some technologically savvy students testing out SoftChalk found ways around this by taking screenshots of each activity with the given score, just in case the page crashed. When the page did crash, they emailed the instructor their screenshots as a proof of documentation of their results. However, such a process is not always feasible and results in an additional burden for instructors in calculating scores.

Finally, although it could be considered an advantage by some, the layout and content display are completely controlled by the software; this could make repeated use of SoftChalk activities with the same layout look boring, possibly resulting in a loss of appeal to users. Users may only change the colors and backgrounds that are used in a pre-defined layout using a feature called StyleBuilder (see Figure 11).


Figure 11. An example of available options that may be restyled with the default layout

Conclusion

Using SoftChalk to create in-class materials can be time consuming and tedious; however, the softwared tability to offer students’ individualized learning environments is a unique and fascinating feature. Piloting SoftChalk with students gave me a chance to cater to learners of various proficiency levels in one class. More advanced learners do not need to wait for less advanced learners to finish an activity to move on; instead, every student moves at his/her own pace, allowing learners to focus their energy and spend time practicing what they really need to improve. Students find these activities useful, because they can keep track of their own progress and see themselves getting better at certain skills over time. Given that unlimited attempts at activities are allowed, students can do the tasks as many times as they want and use as much time as they need to practice their language skills. Finally, SoftChalk might not be the ultimate language learning program, but it surely offers much help for teachers who want their students to “practice, practice, practice” language skills until they are mastered.

About the Reviewer

Sebah Al-Ali <sebah.alaligmail.com> is an English faculty member at Sharjah Higher Colleges of Technology in the United Arab Emirates. She has published a few articles and presented at numerous conferences sharing her instructional technology experience. She is mainly interested in how technology can be utilized to to facilitate active learning, develop interactive curriculum, and train teachers.

© Copyright rests with authors. Please cite TESL-EJ appropriately.

Editor’s Note: The HTML version contains no page numbers. Please use the PDF version of this article for citations.

© 1994–2026 TESL-EJ, ISSN 1072-4303
Copyright of articles rests with the authors.