8 ms·

DragonBox: Algebra beats Angry birds

289 points by aymeric 14y ago

carb 14y ago
Very innovative, I love seeing educational apps that make the player think and solve puzzles instead of just repeatedly showing them rules to memorize.
fallous 14y ago
This is brilliant. You're teaching the mechanics of algebra but initially ignoring "this is math" which lets players avoid the mental barriers they may have erected about that particular subject. Being able to "do" first makes explaining the "why" later much easier and more interesting.
DannoHung 14y ago
Very cool. This actually intensely reminds me of Ed Yang's logitext sequent calculus tutorial: http://logitext.ezyang.scripts.mit.edu/logitext.fcgi/tutorial http://logitext.ezyang.scripts.mit.edu/logitext.fcgi/tutoria... You don't have to know the rules of the sequent calculus, you can just click around, but the theorem prover will ensure that you can't break them. Then, by fucking around and reading through the tutorial, you can pretty much learn how it works. I think that things like this are the right way to start designing interactive education. Create a play space, enforce the rules, provide lessons that act as hints and tips for understanding how the rules work.
ColinWright 14y ago
I have a deep unease about this. It's brilliant that the kids learn the manipulations (although it's unclear if they'll be able to follow the rules when not enforced by the app) but it's detached. It's unconnected, and there's no sense that it's actually potentially useful. It will be fascinating to see where it goes, but I'm worried about how it will translate into actual solving of problems, which is what algebra is about. Too many people think algebra is about mindless manipulation, and this seems to reinforce that. Yet to be seen. Interesting times.
- gms7777 14y ago
  I don't think its intended to teach algebra independently. The article addresses the roles of teachers in potentially using this in classes, to "teach the whys of algebra". And this applies to both the whys of the rules, and the possible real world applications. I think the main reasons that people are turned off of algebra are that they think it is hard and it is boring. An thats the hurdle that must be jumped. This gets around both of those problems. They learn it without realizing that they are learning it. And once they know the rules, it is relatively simple to show how this fun game that they just learned actually has real world applications. I might have been a massively nerdy little kid, but I remember learning the basics of algebra back in the 6th grade and doing problems and thinking how FUN it was. I didn't get how most kids in my class didn't think that this was a new exciting puzzle. Its exciting to see something that manages to put that sense of fun back into math.
- weego 14y ago
  I'm not sure what would make you uneasy about that, almost all infant learning happens this way. The education system we understand is a trade off of educating the masses vs cost, nothing about the education system that we went through was determined to be the best system for everyone (thus you could argue, for anyone though obviously some do excel) and there is no real basis to believe that initially abstracting the pedagogical outcome of a topic from learning the underlying mechanics would have any detrimental effect on the learners long-term understanding. If you extend this concept out you could very well have large impact in the adult learning sector, where often the students have grown to develop a bias towards certain subjects or areas (math especially) which makes them quite difficult to engage. The barriers could potentially be reduced using the same abstraction mechanic.
- TimPC 14y ago
  Disagree strongly. It's not useful as an entire stand-alone, but having a friendly environment that doesn't let you screw up to badly is a great way to start learning by doing. There is a good feedback loop here where getting stuck with what you're doing or not being able to move those skills onto paper or into real world problems ends up motivating learning. The point is to be a tool supported by other resources not to replace all of classroom learning.
patio11 14y ago
I lack words to describe how awesome this game is, both from a pedagogical perspective and from "It's genuinely fun to play." My fiancee has just ordered me to take a bath as a clever way to get me away from the iPad because she wants to do algebra, by herself.
- solutionyogi 14y ago
  You are the master of the words and if you are failing to find words it means that I HAVE to get this game. Thanks.
- dllthomas 14y ago
  "It's genuinely fun to play" is huge, from a pedagogical perspective, when it refers to the actual bits of the game that involve learning.
patrickk 14y ago
When I saw the title, I thought "would it not make more sense to use trigonometry to beat Angry Birds?" http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1043491 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1043491
jessriedel 14y ago
Does anyone have any evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, that gamification is good for teaching STEM ideas in the long term? I am wary of rewarding the brain with in-game loot for memorizing the rules of algebra rather than with the deep satisfaction that comes with understanding. Obviously, this latter type of reward cannot be as consistently provided and requires a certain maturity (maybe), but ultimately I think it's what drives most insightful people. Here's a good example of what bothers me: >As the game progresses, you’ll start seeing cards that are above and below each other, with a bar in the middle — and you’ll learn to cancel these out by dragging one onto the other, which then turns into a one-dot. And you’ll learn that a one-dot vanishes when you drag it onto a card it’s attached to (with a little grey dot between them). These, of course, are fractions — multiplication and division — but you don’t need to know that to play the game, either. That last sentence is especially telling. To me, gamification is suited for making necessary but painful tasks fun (e.g. cleaning your desk, tagging media, memorizing facts), but not for deep learning (e.g. algebra, quantum mechanics, object-oriented programming). But maybe, at 26, I'm just not with the times. EDIT: I think ColinWright is getting at the same worry, and his comment is more fleshed out http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4106567 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4106567
- ezyang 14y ago
  Brett Victor writes: When most people speak of Math, what they have in mind is more its mechanism than its essence. This "Math" consists of assigning meaning to a set of symbols, blindly shuffling around these symbols according to arcane rules, and then interpreting a meaning from the shuffled result. The process is not unlike casting lots. This mechanism of math evolved for a reason: it was the most efficient means of modeling quantitative systems given the constraints of pencil and paper. Unfortunately, most people are not comfortable with bundling up meaning into abstract symbols and making them dance. Thus, the power of math beyond arithmetic is generally reserved for a clergy of scientists and engineers (many of whom struggle with symbolic abstractions more than they'll actually admit). I think gamification is a great way to teach symbol manipulation, and I think (contrary to Bret) that symbol manipulation is a prerequisite for deeper STEM ideas. I do also believe that harder mathematical problems can also be gamified, but this process is much less well understood, and you'll probably want a few theorem prover experts around if you attempt a system like that.
ColinWright 14y ago
I was going to add this as an edit to my earlier comment, but I'm on a crappy connection, and was too late. Let me expand on my comment. I think this is a brilliant idea, and it seems to be well executed. I don't have the necessary hardware to run it, so I haven't played with it, but it looks to be a wonderful game based on algebraic manipulations. I, along with everyone else, expect and hope that it will engage players and allow them to learn the rules and skills of such manipulations. And probably that's a good thing. Let me try to explain the underlying reasons for my sense of unease, as best I understand them. Firstly, I am concerned that this will merely enhance the sense that math is simply arbitrary manipulations with neither meaning nor motivation. Many of the kids I tutor can do the manipulation, but don't get the point, and never connect it with reality. Next, some of the kids I tutor can't do the manipulations without making stupid errors, and I can't help but feel that even after practising with this, they will still make stupid errors. Link that to the apparent meaninglessness, and there's a recipe for frustration. Thirdly, this doesn't help to connect the creation of equations with the physical problem to be solved, and it doesn't help interpret any final answer. These are the steps that the kids I deal with simply can't do. Finally, as someone commented, this isn't intended to be the whole and entire course, and it's supposed to be just one tool to help one stage, and to be built on and leveraged by the teachers. I've lost count of the number of wonderful tools and ideas that I've seen whither and die because the teachers can't make use of them. In some cases the teachers don't really understand them, but I would hope that fate would be avoided by this. So in summary, I think this is a wonderful tool, and it has the potential to be a fantastic aid to learning. I am deeply uneasy about the further divorcing of algebraic manipluation from any sense of meaning, but I look forward with interest to see if it can be used in a meaningful way.
- pacala 14y ago
  You keep using this word, "meaning". What does it mean? ;)
  - jessriedel 14y ago
    The meaning of the equation is that which causes us to study it rather than an arbitrary selection of symbols following arbitrary rules.
jacoblyles 14y ago
I studied pre-Algebra in the 6th grade - about 12 years old. The author's child is learning the same things from Dragon Box at 5 years old. That gives kids nowadays a 7-year jump on the standard American public school curriculum. It's amazing to think of how much more kids will be able to learn and accomplish with their lives with iPad based learning tools.
ph0rque 14y ago
I just bought this for my 5-year-old daughter. She mastered the first level (or chapter, as the game calls levels) in about an hour, with minimal input for me (I just read the minimal instructions at the beginning). I am really excited about this game, and others like it. As someone from the former Soviet Union where we started learning rudimentary algebra in first grade, I remember variables being explained as a box that you have to figure out what is in it by putting everything else on the other side of the equals sign. This game literally takes this concept and gamifies it.
creamyhorror 14y ago
This is awesome, I'm going to buy this for my little brother. I can imagine expanding upon this concept to get kids to solve word problems. Present a simple word problem, give the player some variables/cards and operators to pick from, and let her arrange them into a suitable equation or three. Award points for reaching states like a fully isolated variable, which is basically the solution. Maybe specific guided processes could be created for different varieties of problems, e.g. distance-time problems, simultaneous equations, algebra applied to geometry, combinatorics...each type of problem could be broken up into sub-components which the player first arranges into the right combination, and then returns to the original algebraic solving process as the final step. Hmm. If my current startup idea doesn't work out, I might have to look into venturing into education. I always liked tutoring anyway.
SpencerAiello 14y ago
Who's trying to prove the Goldbach conjecture before they learn the rules of algebra? Most kids in middle to high school math classes aren't worried about their "mathematical maturity" or about having powerful insight. Rather, this obviously shows that the rules of algebra can be applied to other sets of symbols, and that letters and numbers are simply a subset of a much larger set. How is that not a powerful notion? If you're bothered by this, then go back and read Herstein, or any other intro to group theory. Seriously, this is a great way to get kids actively thinking about the rules of manipulation of symbols. The seeds of abstraction must be planted before you can play with more lofty ideas. If games aren't a good way to enjoy mathematics, then you have missed the point of a lot of math.
ph0rque 14y ago
I have an idea similar to this that would secretly teach circuits: The game would be a water-tube building game. Voltage would represent the height drop that causes the water to flow, current would be, well... current, resistance could be marked by notches in the tube section, etc. Each scenario would involve building a water maze to reach a specific objective. Gradually, different tube sections would be replaced by circuit schematics, until at the end of the game, you would be designing straight-up circuits. Feel free to build this, just let me know when it's available :).
jswanson 14y ago
Great idea, look forward to playing this with my daughter. But, from the article: "the flip side to that in the case of DragonBox is that you don’t learn the reasons for the rules. My kids (particularly my five-year-old) have no idea why, when you drag a card below another one, you have to drag it below all the other cards on the screen." Games like this still have a place, but knowing the reasons and the why of things is still incredibly important.
delinka 14y ago
I convinced my mother to purchase the iOS version for all her grandchildren ... and then I played it. There was a distinct change in my behavior when there was a distinct change in the cards - they go from colorful bugs with different backgrounds to different symbols in black on white backgrounds. That's when I had to concentrate on what was actually on the screen and think about what moves to make. I have yet to see what the younger ones do with it, but my 13yo found it somewhat interesting until he had to think - that made it less of a game for him and he became less interested. My anecdotal experience with this game suggests that the same people who would excel at math (with a trait for "why is this wrong? let's try something else; let's dig deeper") will also excel at this game. Those that don't want to think are going to give up when the game changes.
- SudarshanP 14y ago
  This is not a solution for those don't want to think. But many who would gladly think if they cared will now find the transition to algebraic symbol manipulation lot less painful. Kids have their own set of "wants"... In most situations they have no clue how math is a path to satisfy such a want. I once came across a thread on the scratch website where a student was saying he wanted to figure out how to use trig functions because the guys using trig functions wrote much better games. He(she) was complaining that all the explanations on the web made no sense to him(her). These kinds of tools together can ease the path for those who want to think, but never end up paying enough attention to math due to unnecessary hurdles that prevent exposure to deeper ideas. It is not a silver bullet, but definitely a nice tool in the hands of a teacher who wants to stimulate thinking and a student who wants to think.
jbhkb1 14y ago
Hi, as the guy behind the game concept, I am thrilled to read all these comments and discussions. For those interested I can explain how I thought of this game and which goals we try to reach with it. First of all, the game is a direct translation of my view of math. Abstract objects, relations between them, and playing around with it. Obviously there is no One mathematics. Each of us we have our own subjective understanding of it. Secondly, I have three kids, and I want the best for them. Mathematics can be used to understand better our world and can give access to better decisions. The earlier, the better. That means I d like them to learn K-12 math as soon as they can get it. And they could get everything now, if we had the right tools. Just to say that I make sure that the games we create transfer to useful knowledge. I am not here to sell another game, I am here to make children learn. Third, first we teach how to solve equations and then, how to set up equations. 4. Our goal is to make players think and learn. For example, players have to figure out themselves how to solve an equation with x in denominator. I think we are the only ressource that let a kid find out that by herself. School has no time to let kids spend time on high level thinking... 5. most importantly, this game is about discovery learning. Trial and error. The only reason there are texts, is that parents feel unease with textless discovery games. Children and parents learn completely differently. So imagine what a teacher does to our poor kids (i am myself a teacher, so i try to replace myself...). She cant test her teaching as we tested our game... how can you be better without feedbacks? 6. no teacher will be able to beat this game. Because of feedbacks, discovery mechanisms, beautiful symbols, tests etc.. players solve 200 equations in 1,5 hours without any prerequisite... and explanations. This game avoid many pitfalls that communication with words create when explaining algebra. Teaching algebra from arithmetic, concrete to abstract is to my mind crazy. It s an unecessary step. This game is the result of a thinking process where I sat as a big hairy goal to teach K-12 math in less than 20 hours. It is obvious that to do that, we have to think very differently. For example none has noticed that the equation is set up in two dimensions. The game seems simple and obvious and it is easy to start discussing the effect of it. It was pretty complex to make it that simple.... Make complex things simple without oversimplifying, that s the point to discuss to progress in learning science. That s what the game is about. And i hope it inspires many to work with it.

289 points by aymeric 14y ago

carb 14y ago

Very innovative, I love seeing educational apps that make the player think and solve puzzles instead of just repeatedly showing them rules to memorize.

fallous 14y ago

This is brilliant. You're teaching the mechanics of algebra but initially ignoring "this is math" which lets players avoid the mental barriers they may have erected about that particular subject. Being able to "do" first makes explaining the "why" later much easier and more interesting.

DannoHung 14y ago

Very cool. This actually intensely reminds me of Ed Yang's logitext sequent calculus tutorial: http://logitext.ezyang.scripts.mit.edu/logitext.fcgi/tutorial http://logitext.ezyang.scripts.mit.edu/logitext.fcgi/tutoria... You don't have to know the rules of the sequent calculus, you can just click around, but the theorem prover will ensure that you can't break them. Then, by fucking around and reading through the tutorial, you can pretty much learn how it works. I think that things like this are the right way to start designing interactive education. Create a play space, enforce the rules, provide lessons that act as hints and tips for understanding how the rules work.

ColinWright 14y ago

I have a deep unease about this. It's brilliant that the kids learn the manipulations (although it's unclear if they'll be able to follow the rules when not enforced by the app) but it's detached. It's unconnected, and there's no sense that it's actually potentially useful. It will be fascinating to see where it goes, but I'm worried about how it will translate into actual solving of problems, which is what algebra is about. Too many people think algebra is about mindless manipulation, and this seems to reinforce that. Yet to be seen. Interesting times.

gms7777 14y ago
I don't think its intended to teach algebra independently. The article addresses the roles of teachers in potentially using this in classes, to "teach the whys of algebra". And this applies to both the whys of the rules, and the possible real world applications. I think the main reasons that people are turned off of algebra are that they think it is hard and it is boring. An thats the hurdle that must be jumped. This gets around both of those problems. They learn it without realizing that they are learning it. And once they know the rules, it is relatively simple to show how this fun game that they just learned actually has real world applications. I might have been a massively nerdy little kid, but I remember learning the basics of algebra back in the 6th grade and doing problems and thinking how FUN it was. I didn't get how most kids in my class didn't think that this was a new exciting puzzle. Its exciting to see something that manages to put that sense of fun back into math.
weego 14y ago
I'm not sure what would make you uneasy about that, almost all infant learning happens this way. The education system we understand is a trade off of educating the masses vs cost, nothing about the education system that we went through was determined to be the best system for everyone (thus you could argue, for anyone though obviously some do excel) and there is no real basis to believe that initially abstracting the pedagogical outcome of a topic from learning the underlying mechanics would have any detrimental effect on the learners long-term understanding. If you extend this concept out you could very well have large impact in the adult learning sector, where often the students have grown to develop a bias towards certain subjects or areas (math especially) which makes them quite difficult to engage. The barriers could potentially be reduced using the same abstraction mechanic.
TimPC 14y ago
Disagree strongly. It's not useful as an entire stand-alone, but having a friendly environment that doesn't let you screw up to badly is a great way to start learning by doing. There is a good feedback loop here where getting stuck with what you're doing or not being able to move those skills onto paper or into real world problems ends up motivating learning. The point is to be a tool supported by other resources not to replace all of classroom learning.

patio11 14y ago

I lack words to describe how awesome this game is, both from a pedagogical perspective and from "It's genuinely fun to play." My fiancee has just ordered me to take a bath as a clever way to get me away from the iPad because she wants to do algebra, by herself.

solutionyogi 14y ago
You are the master of the words and if you are failing to find words it means that I HAVE to get this game. Thanks.
dllthomas 14y ago
"It's genuinely fun to play" is huge, from a pedagogical perspective, when it refers to the actual bits of the game that involve learning.

patrickk 14y ago

When I saw the title, I thought "would it not make more sense to use trigonometry to beat Angry Birds?" http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1043491 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1043491

jessriedel 14y ago

Does anyone have any evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, that gamification is good for teaching STEM ideas in the long term? I am wary of rewarding the brain with in-game loot for memorizing the rules of algebra rather than with the deep satisfaction that comes with understanding. Obviously, this latter type of reward cannot be as consistently provided and requires a certain maturity (maybe), but ultimately I think it's what drives most insightful people. Here's a good example of what bothers me: >As the game progresses, you’ll start seeing cards that are above and below each other, with a bar in the middle — and you’ll learn to cancel these out by dragging one onto the other, which then turns into a one-dot. And you’ll learn that a one-dot vanishes when you drag it onto a card it’s attached to (with a little grey dot between them). These, of course, are fractions — multiplication and division — but you don’t need to know that to play the game, either. That last sentence is especially telling. To me, gamification is suited for making necessary but painful tasks fun (e.g. cleaning your desk, tagging media, memorizing facts), but not for deep learning (e.g. algebra, quantum mechanics, object-oriented programming). But maybe, at 26, I'm just not with the times. EDIT: I think ColinWright is getting at the same worry, and his comment is more fleshed out http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4106567 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4106567

ezyang 14y ago
Brett Victor writes: When most people speak of Math, what they have in mind is more its mechanism than its essence. This "Math" consists of assigning meaning to a set of symbols, blindly shuffling around these symbols according to arcane rules, and then interpreting a meaning from the shuffled result. The process is not unlike casting lots. This mechanism of math evolved for a reason: it was the most efficient means of modeling quantitative systems given the constraints of pencil and paper. Unfortunately, most people are not comfortable with bundling up meaning into abstract symbols and making them dance. Thus, the power of math beyond arithmetic is generally reserved for a clergy of scientists and engineers (many of whom struggle with symbolic abstractions more than they'll actually admit). I think gamification is a great way to teach symbol manipulation, and I think (contrary to Bret) that symbol manipulation is a prerequisite for deeper STEM ideas. I do also believe that harder mathematical problems can also be gamified, but this process is much less well understood, and you'll probably want a few theorem prover experts around if you attempt a system like that.

ColinWright 14y ago

I was going to add this as an edit to my earlier comment, but I'm on a crappy connection, and was too late. Let me expand on my comment. I think this is a brilliant idea, and it seems to be well executed. I don't have the necessary hardware to run it, so I haven't played with it, but it looks to be a wonderful game based on algebraic manipulations. I, along with everyone else, expect and hope that it will engage players and allow them to learn the rules and skills of such manipulations. And probably that's a good thing. Let me try to explain the underlying reasons for my sense of unease, as best I understand them. Firstly, I am concerned that this will merely enhance the sense that math is simply arbitrary manipulations with neither meaning nor motivation. Many of the kids I tutor can do the manipulation, but don't get the point, and never connect it with reality. Next, some of the kids I tutor can't do the manipulations without making stupid errors, and I can't help but feel that even after practising with this, they will still make stupid errors. Link that to the apparent meaninglessness, and there's a recipe for frustration. Thirdly, this doesn't help to connect the creation of equations with the physical problem to be solved, and it doesn't help interpret any final answer. These are the steps that the kids I deal with simply can't do. Finally, as someone commented, this isn't intended to be the whole and entire course, and it's supposed to be just one tool to help one stage, and to be built on and leveraged by the teachers. I've lost count of the number of wonderful tools and ideas that I've seen whither and die because the teachers can't make use of them. In some cases the teachers don't really understand them, but I would hope that fate would be avoided by this. So in summary, I think this is a wonderful tool, and it has the potential to be a fantastic aid to learning. I am deeply uneasy about the further divorcing of algebraic manipluation from any sense of meaning, but I look forward with interest to see if it can be used in a meaningful way.

pacala 14y ago
You keep using this word, "meaning". What does it mean? ;)
- jessriedel 14y ago
  The meaning of the equation is that which causes us to study it rather than an arbitrary selection of symbols following arbitrary rules.

jacoblyles 14y ago

I studied pre-Algebra in the 6th grade - about 12 years old. The author's child is learning the same things from Dragon Box at 5 years old. That gives kids nowadays a 7-year jump on the standard American public school curriculum. It's amazing to think of how much more kids will be able to learn and accomplish with their lives with iPad based learning tools.

ph0rque 14y ago

I just bought this for my 5-year-old daughter. She mastered the first level (or chapter, as the game calls levels) in about an hour, with minimal input for me (I just read the minimal instructions at the beginning). I am really excited about this game, and others like it. As someone from the former Soviet Union where we started learning rudimentary algebra in first grade, I remember variables being explained as a box that you have to figure out what is in it by putting everything else on the other side of the equals sign. This game literally takes this concept and gamifies it.

creamyhorror 14y ago

This is awesome, I'm going to buy this for my little brother. I can imagine expanding upon this concept to get kids to solve word problems. Present a simple word problem, give the player some variables/cards and operators to pick from, and let her arrange them into a suitable equation or three. Award points for reaching states like a fully isolated variable, which is basically the solution. Maybe specific guided processes could be created for different varieties of problems, e.g. distance-time problems, simultaneous equations, algebra applied to geometry, combinatorics...each type of problem could be broken up into sub-components which the player first arranges into the right combination, and then returns to the original algebraic solving process as the final step. Hmm. If my current startup idea doesn't work out, I might have to look into venturing into education. I always liked tutoring anyway.

SpencerAiello 14y ago

Who's trying to prove the Goldbach conjecture before they learn the rules of algebra? Most kids in middle to high school math classes aren't worried about their "mathematical maturity" or about having powerful insight. Rather, this obviously shows that the rules of algebra can be applied to other sets of symbols, and that letters and numbers are simply a subset of a much larger set. How is that not a powerful notion? If you're bothered by this, then go back and read Herstein, or any other intro to group theory. Seriously, this is a great way to get kids actively thinking about the rules of manipulation of symbols. The seeds of abstraction must be planted before you can play with more lofty ideas. If games aren't a good way to enjoy mathematics, then you have missed the point of a lot of math.

ph0rque 14y ago

I have an idea similar to this that would secretly teach circuits: The game would be a water-tube building game. Voltage would represent the height drop that causes the water to flow, current would be, well... current, resistance could be marked by notches in the tube section, etc. Each scenario would involve building a water maze to reach a specific objective. Gradually, different tube sections would be replaced by circuit schematics, until at the end of the game, you would be designing straight-up circuits. Feel free to build this, just let me know when it's available :).

jswanson 14y ago

Great idea, look forward to playing this with my daughter. But, from the article: "the flip side to that in the case of DragonBox is that you don’t learn the reasons for the rules. My kids (particularly my five-year-old) have no idea why, when you drag a card below another one, you have to drag it below all the other cards on the screen." Games like this still have a place, but knowing the reasons and the why of things is still incredibly important.

delinka 14y ago

I convinced my mother to purchase the iOS version for all her grandchildren ... and then I played it. There was a distinct change in my behavior when there was a distinct change in the cards - they go from colorful bugs with different backgrounds to different symbols in black on white backgrounds. That's when I had to concentrate on what was actually on the screen and think about what moves to make. I have yet to see what the younger ones do with it, but my 13yo found it somewhat interesting until he had to think - that made it less of a game for him and he became less interested. My anecdotal experience with this game suggests that the same people who would excel at math (with a trait for "why is this wrong? let's try something else; let's dig deeper") will also excel at this game. Those that don't want to think are going to give up when the game changes.

SudarshanP 14y ago
This is not a solution for those don't want to think. But many who would gladly think if they cared will now find the transition to algebraic symbol manipulation lot less painful. Kids have their own set of "wants"... In most situations they have no clue how math is a path to satisfy such a want. I once came across a thread on the scratch website where a student was saying he wanted to figure out how to use trig functions because the guys using trig functions wrote much better games. He(she) was complaining that all the explanations on the web made no sense to him(her). These kinds of tools together can ease the path for those who want to think, but never end up paying enough attention to math due to unnecessary hurdles that prevent exposure to deeper ideas. It is not a silver bullet, but definitely a nice tool in the hands of a teacher who wants to stimulate thinking and a student who wants to think.

jbhkb1 14y ago

Hi, as the guy behind the game concept, I am thrilled to read all these comments and discussions. For those interested I can explain how I thought of this game and which goals we try to reach with it. First of all, the game is a direct translation of my view of math. Abstract objects, relations between them, and playing around with it. Obviously there is no One mathematics. Each of us we have our own subjective understanding of it. Secondly, I have three kids, and I want the best for them. Mathematics can be used to understand better our world and can give access to better decisions. The earlier, the better. That means I d like them to learn K-12 math as soon as they can get it. And they could get everything now, if we had the right tools. Just to say that I make sure that the games we create transfer to useful knowledge. I am not here to sell another game, I am here to make children learn. Third, first we teach how to solve equations and then, how to set up equations. 4. Our goal is to make players think and learn. For example, players have to figure out themselves how to solve an equation with x in denominator. I think we are the only ressource that let a kid find out that by herself. School has no time to let kids spend time on high level thinking... 5. most importantly, this game is about discovery learning. Trial and error. The only reason there are texts, is that parents feel unease with textless discovery games. Children and parents learn completely differently. So imagine what a teacher does to our poor kids (i am myself a teacher, so i try to replace myself...). She cant test her teaching as we tested our game... how can you be better without feedbacks? 6. no teacher will be able to beat this game. Because of feedbacks, discovery mechanisms, beautiful symbols, tests etc.. players solve 200 equations in 1,5 hours without any prerequisite... and explanations. This game avoid many pitfalls that communication with words create when explaining algebra. Teaching algebra from arithmetic, concrete to abstract is to my mind crazy. It s an unecessary step. This game is the result of a thinking process where I sat as a big hairy goal to teach K-12 math in less than 20 hours. It is obvious that to do that, we have to think very differently. For example none has noticed that the equation is set up in two dimensions. The game seems simple and obvious and it is easy to start discussing the effect of it. It was pretty complex to make it that simple.... Make complex things simple without oversimplifying, that s the point to discuss to progress in learning science. That s what the game is about. And i hope it inspires many to work with it.