chose to play "Addition at Level 4," which means they are answering problems such as 50 +30 =_. Players type in answers to number problems that appear on the windshield of the spacecraft and then zap the trash floating outside the spacecraft. It is like a traditional math worksheet of multiple similar-type problems. and P., are entering the "Trash Zapper," the first activity encountered in Math Blaster. In the following dialogue the players, G. Players choose the mathematical content (addition, subtraction, multiplication, fractions, decimals, percents, estimation, or number patterns) and the level of difficulty. In Math Blaster, the player must save Spot and the environment from the Trash Alien by guiding the protagonist through four math activities. What math are the players working on? Do we see evidence of students' mathematical thinking? How are the players interacting with each other? What is their discussion focused on (e.g., strategy, speed, reasoning, getting the right answer, the story line of the game)? As we examine the dialogue, our focus is on mathematical content and the ways in which students express their ideas and learn from one another. The transcripts that follow are examples of what we consider typical play sessions of these two games. But looking at the dialogue of a pair of children playing each game reveals differences in the type and quality of the mathematics the children are engaged with. They involve slapstick violence, and in both games the players spend the majority of their game play on mathematics.
They begin with stories that put the player in the role of savior or protector of characters introduced in the story. Two of the games we observed children playing are Math Blaster: In Search of Spot, published by Davidson & Associates, and Logical Journey of the Zoombinis, developed by TERC and published by Brøderbund Software.
#WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU WIN LOGICAL JOURNEY OF THE ZOOMBINIS SOFTWARE#
To examine the games in action, we observed middle school children working with the software in informal after-school settings, where playing the games was a voluntary activity. We are studying how children interact with these games and what mathematics they learn as they play in an effort to develop some criteria for evaluating the software. Finding such games, however, is not easy.Īs part of a project funded by the National Science Foundation, TERC researchers have reviewed a large set of mathematical computer games. Games that make playing with mathematical ideas integral to the real play of the game can provide an arena for rich mathematical problem solving, and at the same time, be fun for children. They have the potential to engage children in a much broader range of mathematical content, including data analysis, logic, programming, 2- and 3-D geometry, and pattern finding. We believe that games can be both intellectually demanding and entertaining. Because the focus of many of these games is narrow and the presentation repetitive, many developers resort to using elaborate "bells and whistles" to keep children interested. They emphasize arithmetic, speed, and instant recall of facts, giving parents and children the message that computation is all there is to mathematics.
The critical question, one that needs more attention by software designers and educators alike, is "Where is the significant mathematics in math-based computer games?" Many games are entertaining and claim to be mathematical, but their math content is limited. So what should parents look for and expect from good math-based computer games? Software packages entice parents with claims such as "Makes math skills a no-brainer" and "Learn the math you need to know for real life." Bombarded by this type of marketing, many parents find it difficult to choose software that can help their children with math. "Edutainment" products that promise to beef up children's mathematics skills are proliferating. Market research reports that families are spending an increasing amount of money on computer games that are intended to educate as well as entertain their children. By Megan Murray, Jan Mokros, and Andee Rubin
0 kommentar(er)
