Showing posts with label product review. Show all posts
Showing posts with label product review. Show all posts

Friday, November 11, 2016

Multiplication & Fractions Math Games from Denise Gaskins (a review)

I really like Denise Gaskins's new book: Multiplication & Fractions Math Games (links to paperback edition and accompanying printable.) How much do I like it? Well, I had already written a lengthy review that, somehow, I managed to lose and am now back writing another one.

I'm going to forego my preferred Good (what I liked), Bad (arguable weaknesses) and Ugly (unforgivable sins) because I don't really have anything to say in those two negative categories. Instead, let me just talk about who would find the book useful and why.

Group 1: Parents who feel their own math skills are weak.

Maybe you never really understood what multiplication means or what fractions are? As long as you start with an open mind and are willing to engage playfully, the activities in the book can help you as you help your kids. It starts with models that are visual explanations of the concepts. Gaskins also breaks learning these concepts into comfortable steps that emphasize patterns and relationships, the real ideas that are behind properly understanding multiplication and fractions (indeed, math generally). The sequence of games in each section starts by building familiarity and then fluency (speed) to solidify all of that work.

Group 2: Parents who worry about their kids struggling with these concepts

Anecdotally, these two areas are the first major stumbling point for students in their math studies. As I noted above for parents themselves, the sequencing in the book will help kids develop a strong foundation, beginning by understanding what multiplication means (and what fractions are). Beyond that, playing the games will make these concepts familiar and, I believe, lead them to recognize examples around them in their daily lives.

Group 3: Families who like to play games

Kids (and parents!) find these games fun. I've been field testing math games for the last 18 months and keep seeing how engaged kids get when playing math games. I have played many, though not all, the games in Multiplication & Fractions and strongly believe the games in the book will be winners with most kids.
Now, let's face it, you might not be thrilled with every game. For example, I wasn't so excited by the idea of playing War variations. However, a lot of other games in the book that are strategically and mathematically rich. Also, truth be told, my kids and students have really enjoyed playing multiplication war!

So, there's really nothing weak in this book?

There is only one worry I have about making a blanket recommendation: parents who start with a completely wrong mindset. If you believe in speed over understanding or mathematical gifts instead of effort, then this book is the wrong place to start. Instead, read Dweck's Mindsets and spend time with Jo Boaler's website. Maybe also re-watch Karate Kid (no joke, this is what I'm currently playing.)

A disclaimer, sort of

I'm friends with Denise Gaskins and got a review copy of this book. However, you should understand that we're friends because I'm a fan of her math teaching work and not the other way around. We've never even met in real life and, in fact, live in different continents. I know of her because advocacy of play-based math learning. I admire her because she is one of the best at creating resources that bring this material into the reach of the typical parent.

Sunday, July 24, 2016

Beast Academy and Dreambox (reviews)

Conflict of interest statement: I do not have a current or pending financial relationship with Art of Problem Solving, but I have several friends on their board and have had direct contact with several other people there. We purchased and currently own all of the books I review below.

I have no relationship with Dreambox. We tested the program using their free trial and then paid for a 6 month subscription.

Beast Academy

What is it?
Beast Academy (from Art of Problem Solving) is a book series with 10 "guidebooks" and 10 parallel "practice" books targeted to 3rd, 4th, and fifth graders. Note that the first of 4 books for fifth grade has only recently come out and they are planning to extend to 16 x 2 books covering 2nd to 5th. We do not have either 5A or 5B yet.

We have read all 8 books from 3a to 4d; J1 and J2 have gone through practice books 3A - 3C.

While these are not math exercise apps, I'm going to borrow some of the elements I've used in past app reviews. One key point I want to emphasize for both books and apps: the way you use them can also determine their benefits or costs.

TZB3
To drive this point home, let's start with Tracy Zager's Big Three criteria (see here):

1. No time pressure: Neutral since this is really up to you, parents.
Do you set a timer when they start a page of practice or a question? Do you require a certain amount of time spent on math practice? While the books do not suggest or impose a sense of time pressure, there are story segments involving math competitions that imply speed is important.

One time element that is and has always been great about physical books is that they sit around. This means they are available and tempting. Almost every day, there will be someone flipping open one of the BA guidebooks, even J3 for whom the material is too advanced right now.

2. Conceptual basis: yes (pass)
The books introduce models, contexts, and conceptual ways of considering problems and techniques. 

3. How are mistakes handled: again, this depends on you and your kids
My approach is to go through the problems and select ones to discuss. I don't use the answer key, so I do the problems myself. This means we have three categories of questions to discuss (a) answered correctly and I found interesting, (b) answered incorrectly, (c) answered correctly by the kid, but I made a mistake. 

Also, I am very positive in how I talk about mistakes. The key message is that these are actually the best learning opportunities and create a chance for us to understand our own thinking.

Preliminary summary: whether Beast Academy (or any printed material) passes the thresholds depends on how  you plan to use it. If you want to deviate from Tracy's guidelines, either adding time pressure or incentives based on minimizing mistakes, you probably should think carefully about whether that's wise.

The good

For my kids, the stories and themes in the guidebooks hit the right tone. They are engaging and funny, with a humor that is occasionally silly or corny. An extended quote from The Princess Bride certainly wins some extra points as well. More bonus points for becoming, via malapropism, the source of J3's current catch-phrase, "I get it: pointillism!"

For me, the organizing theme of the material seems to be "ideas you encounter when playing with math." In some cases, the exercises create "aha moments," like when J1 realized he didn't always have to calculate side lengths of a polygon to use his knowledge of its perimeter in a challenge. In other cases, like calculating (n+1) x (n-1) there are interesting patterns to notice and connections to make.

I'd note that the workbooks are absolutely essential as there is a lot of material that is introduced in the context of exercises. I think these books are excellent, well selected, well sequenced, with enough repetition to facilitate mastery and enough variation to avoid boredom. In fact, I really enjoy doing the problems myself.

Overall, we find the practice books an especially good source of cues for quick (5-15 minute) math conversations.

The Bad
Any worksheet-based system is weak in generating exploration and deeper investigation. Beast Academy partially addresses this by including open-ended games and an occasional investigation. While nice, this point remains a weakness. I don't want to belabor this point, since it is not a unique problem with Beast Academy. Indeed, I think it is a universal issue with static educational material.

Unfortunately, the only solution I know is to involve a human guide. Fortunately, I am able to play that role, asking their thoughts about interesting problems, helping them form connections with earlier or other material, getting them to follow useful side-branches or to continue more deeply into a particular area.

Eventually, of course, we hope to develop enough mathematical habits of mind that the kids will do these things on their own. Realistically, I don't think that will happen until they are well clear of any elementary age material!

The Ugly
I don't see any fatal flaws in Beast Academy.

Grand Summary
If you can use the material the way we do, I highly recommend Beast Academy.
If you can't or don't feel comfortable engaging as your kids' mathematical guide, these books are probably still one of the best options. Just don't set up a timer and demand perfect answers to all the questions!

Dreambox

Dreambox is a math facts, basic skills system. It has material from pre-school through high school. We have spent a lot of time with the elementary grade material and a little sampling of the high school content.

TZB3
Dreambox was one of Tracy Zager's positive examples in her app post, so we already expected it would pass these three criteria. After spending so much time with the system, though, we've seen that not all activities within DreamBox completely satisfy the checklist:

1. No time pressure
Some activities do include time pressure. For example, there are a family of "games" around multiplication automaticity where a collection of calculations stream across the screen. This really does raise the stress level for kids.

In a slightly different form, there are other activities involving virtual manipulatives that require the student to do something using the minimum number of moves. Like the time pressure, this seems to create confusion where the kids can get something right, but still get it wrong.

2. Conceptual Basis
I mostly concur with Tracy's original assessment. Almost all activities have a conceptual component. The timed calculations mentioned above don't, so those get a double demerit.

3. How errors are handled
Again, mostly agree with Tracy. However, there are some activities where, for a minor mistake, one is required to redo a number of manipulations, rather than fix the earlier work.

The good
The underlying math curriculum here is solid, if basic. The clear strength of this system is the pictorial representation of manipulatives offering models that build number sense, reflect operations, and show place value. In the early years section, where we have been spending most of our time, almost every activity is based around one of the manipulatives.

The other thing Dreambox does well is present a sensible progression for the different activity streams. I think this works especially well for J3 who is going through much of the material for the first time. As she encounters a new formulation, she will study it for a while and then there is a clear moment when she has figured out the new complication.

I'll give two examples. For J3, there is an activity to replicate a number bead pattern and then click the number of beads in the arrangement. Her primary tool is to count the beads one-by-one. In the most recent module, she gets a short view of the arrangement and then it is hidden (it can be revealed again, if you choose). This is forcing her to build new skills, either memorizing the arrangement to mentally count or a more advanced counting technique.

For J2, one of the place value exercises involves grouping items into pallets (1000s), cases (100s), boxes (10s) or loose items (1s). The current module asks him to consider multiple different ways to pack a given number. For example, 1385 items could be packed in 1 pallet, 3 cases, 8 boxes, and 5 loose items, or 13 cases and 85 loose items (among many other options).

One other strength of DreamBox is the email feedback to parents. Christopher Danielson recently noted this in a post: Parent Letters.


The Bad
I have seen three areas of weakness with Dreambox: the way mathematical tasks are presented, the pace of adaptive adjustment, and the absence of rich tasks. I'll talk about each of these in turn.

The theme gives an irritating appearance of choice. For example, in the early elementary section, the kids can play with dinosaurs, pirates, pixies, or animals. Under each of these, they have a further choice about what story to explore. Those choices, at least, lead them to different narratives and animated sequences.

At that point, all of the stories involve finding missing items. Users then see another choice asking where in 6 map regions they want to look for the missing items, but this isn't really a choice as there are no differences between regions and they will have to go through each region eventually.

Similar to Prodigy Game, the math tasks are presented as an annoyance to be overcome, the cost the student has to pay to move on with the story. Again, I find this creates unfortunate subtext to the mathematical experience.

Second, the adaptive adjustment is very slow, if it actually exists. In their FAQ, I see that they get questions about how to increase the challenge level, so this seems to be a common experience. Part of the problem is that they intentionally start students with material below their grade level.

Finally, the tasks in Dreambox are basic. While they may present a challenge for a new learner, as J3 is experiencing, they should eventually become so easy that they are boring. In some way, this feels like learning to solve math class tasks without having to develop or use any mathematical habits of mind.  Further, the thrill and fun of playing Dreambox lies in unlocking the animated stories and collecting tokens, not in doing math.

For J1 and J2, this thrill has worn off after about 2 months with the system.

The ugly
Nothing in Dreambox is a show-stopper.

Summary
Properly understood as a basic curriculum substitute or source of practice exercises, Dreambox is a solid application. Just don't make the mistake of thinking it will either foster a love of math nor deeper mental habits.

*Update* A quick comparison with ST Math
I was sitting on this review, partially written, for a long time. One thing that got me to finalize the review was going through the demo challenges on ST Math with J2. We had previously tested ST Math many years ago with J1 and it was really good. Once again, this is what I saw with J2: really cleverly presented scenarios that gave us good models for the math and a really fun user experience. After playing for about 30 minutes, J2 said: "this is a lot more fun than DreamBox."

If I can get a subscription, we'll test it more extensively and write a review to see whether that really holds up.

Tuesday, April 12, 2016

Powers of a permutation and Santorini review

Two unrelated topics today. Or ... I guess one could argue that everything in math is related, but I don't see direct connections myself. If you spot some, let me know in the comments.

Rainbow permutations

We have a collection of crayons that can stack. Well, to be honest, mostly the kids break the tips off. The second most common use is to stick them on fingers as fancy fingernails. The fourth most common use is to actually draw or color with them.

J2 was engaged in the third most common use, stacking, when he noticed something new. He started with the colors stacked in rainbow order (R O Y G B Purple Pink). Then, he took 2 off the bottom and moved them to the top. Then, he took the bottom two and moved to the top and repeated. He noticed that, eventually, he got back to the starting order. Experimenting further, he tried the same process moving 3 from the bottom and repeating. Again, he eventually got back to the starting order.

Here is an example of the crayons stacked together:


In this case, he is moving blocks of 5:


After showing me, he suggested trying 4, 5, 6, then 1. He noticed a couple of things:

  • moving 6 is like moving 1 backwards (from the top to the bottom). 
  • Similarly, 5 and 2 are related, 4 and 3
  • 7 is prime, so maybe that is the reason the arrangement repeats
To test his hypothesis, he added another crayon (for 8) and tested. Again, he got back to the original arrangement. Hmm, doesn't need to be a prime!

Where should we take this first foray into group theory?

Santorini

Gordon Hamilton of Mathpickle, one of our favorite game and puzzle resources, has a Kickstarter for the newest version of his game, Santorini.


I encourage you to check it out. (For what it is usual disclaimer applies, I'm not financially related to this game or producers in any way.)

For reference, this is what the previous version of the game looks like:



Our DIY board (version 1)
While this version of the game will have nice custom pieces, the underlying game can be played with almost any collection of stackable objects. For our introduction to the game, we tried using our TRIO blocks:


To explain what you're seeing:

  • 1x1x1 cubes are used for building levels. I originally thought we would color coordinate (red for first level, pink second, etc), but J1 and J2 liked mixing up colors.
  • 4 unit straight connectors for our builders: magenta versus green.
  • Angle or arc connectors are radio antenae to serve as the fourth building level and block further building
  • Flags and wings as boundaries of the 5x5 board
Reactions
Both older Js enjoyed the game play. We quickly played 5 or 6 times. This game clearly has a lot of depth. We will have to play a lot more to see what patterns we can identify and whether we can develop any opening strategies. They are also very eager to play with some god powers. Perfect way to spend the rest of the holiday this week!

The TRIO blocks have pros and cons for this game. One of the best features is that it makes the game set-up robust to tipping the board, knocking the pieces off, or otherwise unsettling the position. It was clear to see the sizes of the levels and also immediate to identify towers that had already gotten killed (with a fourth level antenna).

In our play, there were two drawbacks. First, the straight connectors are a bit hard to remove from their positions. Second, the higher towers (2 and 3 levels) sometimes obscured allowed diagonal moves in a way that the stacking tiles version didn't. I wonder if this will also be the case with the new version of the game as the building levels seem tall relative to the size of the builders.

Longer-term, I wonder about buying customized games vs playing with generic materials. It is easy for the kids to grab a box off the shelf and start playing. Somehow, I suspect they will be less likely to grab a building set and a notecard with rules.

More thoughts on DIY game versions

Before Santorini, I had gotten excited about making DIY versions of the GIPF project games. I was thinking:

  1. these games will be fun to play, so great motivation to replicate them
  2. interesting challenge to make our own triangular grid board (squares we already have in abundance)
  3. good creativity prompt as we repurpose items
  4. it would make the kids feel power over the game structure and rules, leading to exploration of variations and deeper thinking about structure.

However, the kids, particularly J1, were surprisingly unenthusiastic. With Santorini, again, they didn't take much initiative in developing our DIY version. However, I wonder if they will be more motivated to modify or replace the TRIO blocks board since they now see that the game is fun and have experienced some of the limitations of our current version.

On the other hand, maybe they'll just push me to buy the commercial version.

Thursday, April 7, 2016

Prodigy Math game (review)

Upfront,  I guess I'll reveal that I'm not being paid or otherwise sponsored to write this review. Once you read it, you'll be surprised that the idea ever occurred to you.

A good friend and fellow PROMYS supporter recently asked me to take a look at an online math game: Prodigy. The background sounded great: play, math, monsters, magic, adventure. What could be better? I spent a couple hours going through it and came away very disappointed.

Tracy Zager Big 3
Top 3 non-negotiable criteria, from this post:

  1. Time pressure: none (Prodigy Game passes this hurdle)
  2. Conceptual basis: none (PG fails this hurdle)
  3. Mistakes handled productively: no (PG fails this hurdle)

So Prodigy Game score 1/3 against Tracy's Big 3. In case you don't want to bother to read her post, passing grade is 3/3.

The good
Clearly, the team has spent a lot of time and effort on development. There are some aspects that reflect this:

  • Teacher back-end: this is where they put in their effort. Decent reports about student activity and teacher ability to pick focus questions (assignments) is nice. This functionality seemed on par with other edtech products I've used.
  • Look and feel/animation: pretty good, clearly another area they prioritized. The standard is well below a popular commercial/non-education game, but I would say their work here is only slightly below the cutting edge in edtech products. It is much better than the huge crowd of flash animated drill and kill games. 

The bad
Game theme: weak.

I think one reason I was so disappointed is that the premise starts out rather promising. We are going to explore a new world, gain experience, learn new spells, rather loot.

Unfortunately, each of these turns to disappointment. Most game play is driven by railroaded mini-storylines where we follow a guiding pointer along a linear path to retread locations we've seen before. There is limited opportunity or in-game reason to explore the world.

Gaining experience gives us extra hearts (capacity to take damage in magical duels), but this just makes the inserted mini-math quizzes longer. More experience feels like it makes the game less fun. Also, the way we gain experience is dueling random forest creatures, an activity that quickly seems pretty uninteresting and unmotivated (the forest creatures are just hanging out, they aren't bad/evil or doing anything wrong per se).

For each new spell, there is a cute animation showing the effects of that spell. However, they all have exactly the same in-game effects, so we never have a reason to care about the extra spells (though we do have to waste time and clicks choosing one each time).

Finally, they make two mistakes with the loot. First, we don't have a counter to keep track of how much gold we've collected, so it becomes hard to pay attention to that. Second, the vast majority of items you can collect or buy are only available for paid users.

The ugly
There is no math integration with game and theme. During each magic duel, we are forced to answer a math question as the hurdle to casting a spell successfully. That's right, doing math in this game is a cost that you have to pay!

This mechanic forces \math questions into the game play, but doesn't create any relationship relate to anything else about the game. The same format could be used for spelling, history, driver's ed, etc questions just as easily as math.

The math content itself is very weak. Unfortunately, the material included is pure drill, and even includes a lot that is really recall rather than skills practice. The questions had no context, no conceptual framework, were tedious. I literally found myself forming an active dislike of the material. Imagine what damage that could do for a kid who thinks this is a good representation of what math is!

What about....
Don't even get me started about the name "prodigy." Did the name bias me against the game from the start? Maybe, but I felt that my enthusiasm for games and the promised theme were stronger biases, so I still feel I gave the product a good chance.

Conclusion
This is a math "game" that I will never show to the three J's and I suggest you avoid it. Play Lure of the Labyrinth instead!

Thursday, March 12, 2015

Castle Logix (product review)

This is in the spirit of Chris Danielson's product reviews at Talking Math with Your Kids.

Who: J2
Where: dining room
When: after lunch
What: Castle Logix block set.

Ok, this is Castle Logix:


There are 4 cuboids with holes in their sides and pictures on other sides, three different length cylinders with cones topped by spheres on one end, and the cylinders fit into the holes in the cuboids.

J2 has found two new uses:
1. Rhythm sticks
2. Combinatorics challenge

Rhythm sticks

Really, this is just a fancy way to say that he started beating them together. Or maybe I did? Anyway, he found it a good instrument for listening to Suzuki violin pieces and practicing the rhythm along with the video:


Of course, you can bash together any two things, so what makes these blocks so perfect?
They are a good size, relatively large, but still comfortable for a small 5 year old to hold. They are a bit heavy, so you have to commit to each beat and can't be halfhearted about the game. Most importantly, the holes seem to amplify the sound and make a very satisfying clack. Oh, they are also sturdy enough to take the abuse and seem unaffected.

Conclusion: Two thumbs up (but keep those thumbs on the outside when you are bashing)!

Note: mommy was not around at this time. Your experience may vary depending on who is present during play and time of day. . .

Combinatorics challenge

This is something we are just starting, but the basic questions are:
  • How many ways can you put together the Castle Logix pieces?
  • What do we even mean by "put together" anyway?
  • When do two configurations count as the same?

I will report back as we work through these questions.