I detected a pattern in an arithmetic sequence I was working on (we were adding six each time), so I went from 28 to 28+6. Apparently that was incorrect. When I

I detected a pattern in an arithmetic sequence I was working on (we were adding six each time), so I went from 28 to 28+6. Apparently that was incorrect. When I protested that it was definitely another way of writing 34, the animated tutor then linked me to a video of a man suggesting that I always bubble C on multiple choice exams or something. When I noted that that wasn't really a response to my question, it linked me a youtube video about Einstein. Kafka would be proud. Heaven forfend actual students encounter such teachers who don't know how addition works! Another kafkaesque move: On the traveling salesman problem, I can choose 2 for the number of cities the truck must visit, making the complete graph bipartite. When I fill in the blank that the graph is thus bipartite, I'm told that's not quite right. The fundamental (unfixable?) problem here is that the software doesn't really understand graph theory. It's just a series of syntactic prompts to guess what the software is thinking. That's no way to teach.