Several years ago, I was reassured once again that I had married the right person when The (much smaller then but equally) Spoiled One asked him,
“What does the name of your book mean, God created the integers?”
He explained that while one can have 1 rabbit
You can have zero rabbits.
All of those are concrete things that exist in nature. You cannot, however, have one-half of a rabbit or one-seventeenth of a rabbit.
Well, theoretically, you could, if you killed it and chopped it into four pieces, as The Spoiled One gruesomely pointed out. Her father, who watches too much Monty Python countered that then it would not be the rabbit as God made it but, in fact, an ex-rabbit.
All of which brings me to Fish Lake, the game we are working on currently, which involves fractions. It really has not been that difficult to come up with believable examples of how early Native Americans might have used fractions -
“Leave for camp when the lack is three-quarters in the shadow.”
“We used two rabbits to make enough stew for two people. If you are out hunting alone and just making stew for yourself, you would make half as much, so you’d only need one rabbit.”
As our Dakota cultural consultant, Dr. Erich Longie pointed out, of course the Dakota people used math. The traveled over a very wide area and would meet up in the same locations, it was hardly by accident – well, you’ll have to see the next two games.
The part I am having a hard time with, though, is coming up with realistic uses of percentages and decimals. I can see where a chief might have 100 warriors and need to put them into four groups, say, to attack from four different directions. So, 25/100 = 1/4 and maybe then each group would get 1/4 of the food, 1/4 of the war ponies and so on.
I really can’t think of any situations, though, where the chief would sit down and say,
“Okay, 75% of the warriors have a horse, that is the equivalent of 3/4. Thinking of it another way, if I had ten warriors, 7.5 of them would have a horse.”
We have four cultural components – two are Dakota (Sioux) and two are Ojibwe (Chippewa) and they have given us a lot of great examples using math for travel, measurement, building tipis and wigwams, calculating odds when deciding to try to steal a buffalo pony and more. However, I’m still puzzling over how to include realistic problems to meet common core standards on decimals and percentage equivalence with fractions.
God may not have only created the integers, but I am pretty dead certain that it is accountants and engineers who created the decimals.
Any creative suggestions would be much appreciated.
If you have not listened to the TED talk by Conrad Wolfram, I highly recommend you do. If you have any interest in math education, the odds are great that his talk is far more important than anything else you could possibly doing in the next 20 minutes.
If you think the name sounds familiar, it’s because he is one of the masterminds behind Mathematica.
What is so fascinating about his ideas? In a nutshell, he says that we teach calculation – addition, multiplication, exponentiation, logarithms – as math. That takes up 80% or more of our curriculum because it is not easy for most people to learn, it requires memorization and they don’t want to learn it (so it probably requires more badgering).
We spend a few years in childhood learning “math facts” – subtraction, division, multiplication, addition. We spend a few more in adolescence, if we are “good at math” – learning how to compute sines, tangents, logarithms, derivatives. Then, for the rest of our lives, we almost never do that by hand again.
This change occurred during my lifetime and it was one occasion where it actually benefited me to be poor. I could not afford a calculator in high school, so while all the more affluent kids whipped through their homework using calculators, I had to work it all out. When we took the SATs, unlike now, you were not allowed to use a calculator, so I did much better then they did.
Back then, it made sense. Calculators cost hundreds of dollars and you could not just assume you would always have one handy. As I sit here, there is calculator and several types of statistical and mathematical software on my desktop, laptop and iPad. There are even a couple mathematical apps, and, of course, the ubiquitous calculator, on my cell phone. When there are four devices capable of computation I can reach from where I am sitting it really doesn’t make sense to spend years of teacher and student time insuring that every child knows that 13 x 13 = 169.
One use Wolfram sees for computation is estimation. I wholeheartedly agree with him there. In writing our math education games, the next major update is going to have better analysis of student errors.
You are being attacked by rabid wolves. You’re just a kid, you can only hit a wolf about once every 5 times and 7 wolves are coming at you. How many arrows do you need?
There is an important difference between the student who answers this question with 33 and with 5 or 187. If they repeatedly make that type of error, it is clear that in the first case, they are good at estimation but not so good at computation. That is one reason we give two tries for most answers, and we almost never have multiple choice. We want to distinguish among the student who knows the answer but was in a hurry and didn’t read the problem completely, the student who understood the problem and did not get the calculation exactly right and the student who is completely confused.
I just watched this video for the first time a few days ago, and Spirit Lake: The Game was already out to our testers and ready to be uploaded. However, you’ll see some changes based on these ideas in the update in October, and even more in the new game we are making now.
Seriously, what is the point of learning new ways of thinking about math if you don’t do anything about them?
Spirit Lake: The Game is mostly an adventure game that teaches math. However, it has lots of Easter eggs, side quests and spin-offs added because hey, these are kids and sometimes they like to do something different and some of them have the attention span of an ant.
Our idea is to make the game fun, even when you get the answers wrong, you get sent to do something else that’s fun. I saw a Flash game that used refrigerator magnets for division problems which seemed pretty fun, but we are avoiding Flash since we want our game to be easily portable to iPads from the current version that runs on Mac OS and Windows. So … I spent today writing a refrigerator magnet division application. You can see it here. It still could use a bit of tweaking – I need to add the refrigerator background and I think I’ll change the pictures of magnets I have to some that are more cute and fun.
Being our child, The Spoiled One did not even ask why The Invisible Developer was in the kitchen taking pictures of the refrigerator.
Here is the problem I ran into …. it was working fine EXCEPT if I had a problem like 36 ÷ 6 in which case the second value was blank and all I got was
It was as if the image (remember, each number is a picture of a refrigerator magnet), could only be used once. Well, of course, that WAS the problem.
From the enormously helpful Mozilla Developer Network
childis a reference to an existing node in the document,
appendChildmoves it from its current position to the new position (i.e. there is no requirement to remove the node from its parent node before appending it to some other node).
This also means that a node can’t be in two points of the document simultaneously. So if the node already has a parent, it is first removed, then appended at the new position.
I was doing exactly that, the offending statement is shown with *** below
var choose1 = choose2 *temp ;
rightanswer=choose1 / choose2;
w = choose1 + "" ; x = w.substring(0,1) ;
if (w.substring(1,2) )
y = w.substring(1,2) ;
What this snippet does is generate a random number between 1 and 9, then generate a second random number. The two random numbers are multiplied to give me a product of two numbers between 1 and 9 because the game progresses gradually in difficulty from early levels that assume children have not yet mastered division with remainders, and this little applet goes into an early level. So, the number which we use as our divisor should be divisible without a remainder.
The divisor (which, of course goes first in a division problem) divided by the second number shown on the page (choose2, our dividend) gives us the right answer.
Earlier in the program (not shown) I had created an array which was like this
var imgArray = new Array() ;
imgArray = new Image() ;
imgArray.src = "zero.png" ;
imgArray = new Image() ;
imgArray.src = "one.png" ;
The answer is going to be between 1 and 9, so I can take whatever it is, find the same number in the array and put that image into the cell for the dividend.
I need to break the number to be divided down into digits because, remember, these are refrigerator magnets and numbers between 1 and 9, so each digit is a separate image. I did it by making a string variable by adding “” to choose1. I then took the first digit and put that image into a table cell. If there was a second digit, I took the image in the array corresponding to that and put that into another table cell.
BUT …. what happened was when a number was used twice, like in the example of 36 divided by 6, when I appended the 6 to the divisor, it was removed from the dividend cell.
How to solve this? Well, one way is to create another array of images, which I did, both because it was a super simple solution and I immediately thought of several other reasons off the top of my head why that might be useful. I can certainly envision using this code again in the game, for example, to emphasize which is the divisor and which is the dividend. There are lots of points where students confuse the two, or fail to understand that you cannot switch them around and still get the same answer, like you do with multiplication. In fact, I’m already thinking about having the numbers for the dividend being red or flashing (probably not) or from a different set of magnets.
So, there you have a nifty little reminder about how appendChild works and a super-simple way to fix a possible problem.
There is also another point in here I’d like to make. Last night, I attended a meet-up on gaming where some people were positive that they did not need to know anything about math education to write a math game because, “Hey, everybody knows K-12 math and the teachers know how to teach it.”
Yes, most teachers do know exactly what their students should be learning, but do YOU? Because if you have a game that is assuming students can divide numbers that have remainders and the students are not at that point yet, they will be frustrated. It really isn’t the teacher’s responsibility to insure that your game that you say is at fourth grade level really is. Even if it is, at what point in fourth grade? What exactly does it teach? When should he or she be introducing it to the students? At the end of the school year? At the beginning? Do you know what a divisor or dividend is and that students often mix them up? What area of mathematics do most students have problems with in fourth and fifth grade? What should your game emphasize?
I think the fact that many math educational game designers don’t give much attention at all to math is why most math educational games suck at being educational, no matter how cool they may be as games.
We don’t perfect design in our programming until we’re sure we’re going to keep it.
I wrote a post recently about how social media may be overrated for marketing, but that doesn’t mean, paradoxically, that I think social media is over-rated. I think social media is often under-rated for its value as information.
For example, as part of our Kickstarter campaign, I have received a number of questions and suggestions from people, most of them very reflective and thoughtful. Some made us change our design and some made us decide we need to explain our products, company and project better. Some were just amusing.
Probably. However, our games started on the Spirit Lake Nation and half of the people working on the project are from Spirit Lake or Turtle Mountain. Our original intent was to provide an adventure game to teach kids math that would appeal to children on American Indian reservations. It was only after we had developed a prototype with promising results that we started being contacted from parents and teachers off the reservation to find out how they could get the game, too.
2. Is the game installed on your desktop or played over the web?
Both. The game is installed and played on your desktop, which speeds up the graphics much more than streaming video. However, you log in to our server, where your game state and other data – specifically on the math problems you answered and the lessons you took – are stored.
3. Won’t people hate the fact they are paying for a license rather than getting a permanent license? Isn’t requiring internet access a turn off?
Both of these go back to question 1. The schools WANTED a system set up to be as hands off for them as possible so they had minimum work to do. Having an internet connection allows automatic updates. Because multiple students will play the game in the school computer lab, it’s not like your own personal game console where you start the game you left off. A major factor for schools and teachers is having the automated scoring of math problems and the ability to get an average of their class or school, find out if there are problems their students as a group are having. All of this is easier if all of the data go to a central point. It is also backed up automatically. All of the schools have internet, even in very remote reservation schools. There may be some that don’t but we are not working with any of them.
4. How can you have children’s confidential data on your computer? Don’t you need mad security for that?
We don’t have any confidential information. We have a username, a teacher name, age and gender. We send the school a list of usernames and the teacher assigns them. The same with individuals or social service programs. YOU know that Greybear is Samuel Jackson, Jr. but we don’t.
5. Why do you only take payments through Amazon?
That is all Kickstarter is set up to do. We have had people give checks or cash to a friend to back us on Amazon through their account. Yes that isn’t the most convenient way, but there are a lot of other benefits to Kickstarter. They handle the payments, people come specifically to Kickstarter looking for projects to fund.
6. Why is a signed photo with Ronda one of the prizes/ why don’t you offer signed gloves or other prizes?
Kickstarter rewards have to be related to your product. Ronda was involved in helping us design the game and will be further involved modeling some of the poses for fight scenes (not too much fighting, since the game is aimed at children in grades 4-6 right now, and eventually up to grade 8). Read post 3 on our updates page for more information. Since her fight gloves, getting a seminar from Ronda and other UFC-related or MMA-related rewards have nothing to do with the game, under the Kickstarter terms of service, we can’t offer them.
7. Since you are 52% of your target with 8 days left, do you think you will make it?
Yes. According to Kickstarter, 98% of projects that get to 60% end up fully funded. We are almost to that 60%. We have an ad coming out soon on the American Horror channel on FilmOn host Hart Fisher did just out of the goodness of his heart. I just did two radio shows still to be aired plus several interviews with blogs, newspapers. In addition, according to most resources I have read, most campaigns receive a jump in pledges near the end as people who have been meaning to pledge quit putting it off. If you are one of those people, head on over to Kickstarter and pledge now. Get a license for yourself, give one to a school, get a signed photo, a cool poster or even be a character in the game.
8. Now that your game has received more widespread attention are you going to reduce the focus on Native Americans?
@xek tweeted that “Almost everyone who does twitter stats is a fucking moron”.
I was going to say that no one really knows what the hell is going on when it comes to social media, but I believe his estimate adds a greater level of precision.
For example, the tweet reach tool tells me that I reached 17,999 accounts with my tweets from my annmariastat account in the last five days. In contrast, my judo/ personal account reached 30,336 accounts. Does that mean that 18,000 or 30,000 people READ those tweets? I’m pretty certain not.
Ronda’s “reach” is 137,947 even though her number of followers is around 173,000. So I am interpreting this as the number of people you reached OUTSIDE of your followers.
This article says that there are 465 million twitter accounts and that 30% of twitter users have an income over $100,000. Wait, what? Because I know the average income in the US and it is far from $100,000. Maybe richer people have several twitter accounts. I know I have 2. Maybe Bill Gates has 10,000 – but wouldn’t he still just count as one twitter user?
Readwrite.com did have a little more data I could sink my teeth into. They said that 29% of tweets produce a reaction – a reply or retweet. This really surprised me because I had assumed it was far fewer.
I got interested in this because we have a Kickstarter campaign that just started to support our game to teach math. (Go here to watch the video and pledge. It’s awesome. And I know you have an internet connection because you are reading this.)
Here are how the first 33 pledges broke down, which is the first 10% of our funding – $2,000.
Between my two accounts, I have about 3,400 followers. My daughter, Ronda, has 173,000. We both tweeted about this a couple of times. Ignoring the tweet reach Total = 176,400 Number of pledges from twitter = 10 = 0.0006%
I write two blogs. This one averages about 3,100 visits a day and my judo blog is around 1,000. Total in one day I had the widget link up (look at right)
Number of pledges from blog = 3 = 0.073%
Both of us have our twitter accounts post to Facebook. She has 5,000 friends and I, defining friend loosely as someone I have met at least once, have more like 400 friends. Total = 5,400
Number of pledges from Facebook = 5 = 0.093%
Lastly, I emailed a few dozen or so people in my address book, as did my sister, total = 50.
Number of direct link pledges = 10 = 20%
That’s all for what I did. There were an extra five pledges from the Kickstarter site itself, people who looked for games or just clicked on the new projects link.
What can you conclude from this? Well, there is the obvious fact that the more people actually know you, the more likely they are to pledge. If you’re in my address book, we are probably friends or colleagues. Also, at my age, my friends and colleagues are likely to have a job, their kids are grown and they have extra money to pledge. (More about that in my Logan’s Run post later!)
Does that mean social media is useless? Yes and no. It means that your odds of getting funded just using social media probably aren’t that good unless you have a whole lot of friends and followers. Certainly having someone in my corner with 173,000 followers was helpful – as many of them pledged as my friends did – so twitter followers were far less likely to pledge percentage-wise, but there were far more of them.
I do think that social media effects may be over-estimated. When I said I was doing this Kickstarter campaign some of my younger relatives were sure it would be over in a day, they said,
” Just have Ronda tweet it out once, she has over 170,000 followers. If every one of them gives $1 you’ll have made it several times over in a day.”
Ah, the naivete of youth! Now, our campaign just started two days ago, and I know that not as many people read my blog on the weekends (I do keep stats on that). There is also the fact that people on the east coast are buried in snow and have far more to worry about than a Kickstarter campaign of mine.
On the other hand, Ronda has a title fight in two weeks and a TV show on her aired a couple of times this week, so, as far as random events, there has been plenty of random in both directions.
What to make of this? Well, after seeing the numbers, I ran Faker, an application I found on this interesting article on fake twitter followers of athletes. It between Ronda and I we have 72,000 active accounts following us, not fake and actively tweeting. Still, only 10 of them pledged.
According to Blogher, only about half of the visitors to my blogs come to the site long enough for the ads to load, so some of those “visits” are spambots or just not very interested. That still only brings the percent of pledges to .14% .
On seeing the numbers, I am coming to think this way – you need both. And you need them over a period of time. I never did think one tweet was going to make our Kickstarter campaign. However, a couple of dozen tweets over a couple of dozen days, just might.
Since it’s the international year of statistics, I felt a little guilty that I have not done that much in the way of statistics lately. However, I think that is true whether you are an engineer, statistician, biologist or whatever, within a few years after your Ph.D. (at most!) you find lots of your time not being in the area you expected. Let’s look at this week, starting today
Thursday: Kickstarter campaign kicked off. We have been working for a year developing a computer game to teach kids math. (SERIOUSLY CHECK OUT OUR VIDEO HERE & PLEDGE, IT’S AWESOME!) There are statistics in the fifth game in the series – teaching distribution and variability. There was a lot of statistics involved in analyzing the data to back it up – computing item difficulty statistics, internal consistency reliability for the measures, repeated measures ANOVA to test whether the students who played the game progressed in math faster than those who didn’t. (Short answer: Yes.)
However, the biggest part of my day today was spent on Facebook, twitter and phone calls about the Kickstarter campaign, setting up filming for a commercial to be aired next week that a wonderful sponsor offered to do for free.
Wednesday: We’re submitting a grant proposal to USDA to create a series of video games. It will involve a good bit of text mining and data mining to create propensity scores to identify the best match of instructional videos, web pages or games for students based on their mathematics achievement level and characteristics of the instructional resources. Before we get to the statistics, though, there is a lot of writing – literature review, how it relates to Joe Bob Briggs (2011) study of similar stuff, logic models, etc. etc. Wrote blog post on documentation.
Tuesday: Grant-writing. Wishing I was doing mixed model analysis of some interesting data. Grant-writing. Wishing I was doing PHP program for client. Grant-writing. Wishing I was doing text-mining. Wrote blog post on idiots who annoy me. Internet said that was Wednesday but since I hadn’t gone to bed yet, it was Tuesday to me.
Monday: See Tuesday.
Sunday: 7 hours of video editing using Garageband and iMovie with the assistance from a wonderful video editor the folks from the American Horror channel on FilmOn sent out as part of their service to the community. (Thank you guys!) As much as the help was greatly appreciated I must say that anyone who does film editing for a living must put the hyphen in anal-retentive. By the end, I wanted to shoot myself. Then, I did more grantwriting.
Saturday: Heard darling daughter #3 downstairs talking to The Spoiled One. Came down wearing nothing but The Rocket Scientist’s shirt to be met by a photographer from a national magazine who asked,
“Do you mind if I take your picture?”
“I’m not wearing pants, but, whatever.”
Random fact: Darling daughter #3 has a world title fight in the UFC coming up this month so photographers, film crews and journalists have been all over our house like white on rice.
Second random fact: I also had a book published this week, Winning on the Ground – which is about matwork in judo and martial arts.
So, where the hell is the statistics in here? Well, sadly, not nearly in as many places as I would like. In the grant research design sections, there are lots of statistics mentioned. Come February 28th when the Kickstarter campaign is over and the grant proposals are done, I can get back to doing statistics 50% or more of the time. My points though, are;
1. A good bit of being a statistician at the senior level is writing – writing research papers, writing reports, writing proposals.
2. Another good bit of being a statistician is working collaboratively, whether it is with video editors, like this week, or other researchers writing proposals, like last week.
3. You are NOT too old to do a start-up and anyone who thinks you are washed up by 30 can kiss my ass. If you agree, please go to our Kickstarter site and pledge.
Now, I have to get off the computer and go watch this program on TV on darling daughter #3.
We’re waiting by the phone, um, computer to find that our Kickstarter project is (we hope!) approved. In the meantime, our Chief Marketing Officer asked me why there was a need for documentation, which is one of the expenses that would be funded from the crowd.
It’s like this – we started writing a game and we had certain deadlines to meet. We’d promised to have a playable game in the school by October. And we did. And the kids really liked it. And their math skills improved.
In the process, though, we did everything that had to get done to meet those deadlines and other things had to be put off until later.
Version control – later. User’s manual – later. FAQ – later. Anything that wasn’t promised was put on a backburner while we kept our promises.
We have scripts that validate the answers students give to each question and then route them to the appropriate place – either back to play the game or to a site to study whatever math concept they missed. I know what those scripts are named and what they do – but it’s not written down anywhere. The Rocket Scientist has written a lot of C# code for the 3-D world and I know where the latest version is – but it’s not written down anywhere. I also do NOT know where the previous version is (although I could probably guess, or I could go upstairs and ask him).
My point is that we can’t go past the current level of complexity without documenting everything we have done up to this point or we are going to be royally screwed because:
- The further in time we get from when we wrote the first few game levels, the more likely we are to FORGET where stuff is and have one hell of a time fixing any bugs that come up because we won’t be sure what exactly File X does or where the script that does Y is saved.
- As we write new levels, we probably want to re-use code that does certain things like making the character do a little dance to pow-wow music, but we won’t quite remember why we wrote that bit in the middle, so, best leave it in – this is how one ends up with spaghetti code that is impossible to really maintain as no one knows exactly what it does.
- We are getting to the point of scaling up. This means bringing on another programmer or two. That future person is going to need to know where stuff is and what it does.
The truth is that we need to stop and write stuff down before we go any further. It’s kind of like when you are in college and you forego cleaning your apartment because you have to work and study for finals. Well, after finals are over, there is a point where you need to buckle down and clean your place before the fungus on the dishes in the sink evolves, forms its own government and evicts you.
What will anyone who donates to our eventual (we hope!) Kickstarter project get out of this? In front-end visible terms, they will get an on-line, downloadable user’s manual in pdf and html that explains how to play the game, all the levels, has an index to find answers to questions. We think you could probably figure everything out from playing the game, but some people like to read, and lots of people get stuck some times. We’ll have a Frequently Asked Questions page up on our site, and answers (since just the questions aren’t too helpful), for those people like me who don’t want to read a whole manual but just want an answer.
We’ll have a technical support wiki that you won’t see directly but which will help you indirectly because if you do run into a question not covered on our FAQ or a bug that needs to be fixed, one of us will be able to answer it a whole lot faster and better than, “Your guess is as good as mine” or, the one that always drives me crazy, “Well, it works on my machine.”
The other way documentation will help our supporters is that we really won’t be able to progress much farther nearly as fast without it – again, think about your post-finals trashed apartment. Eventually you realize that you are spending more time looking for your keys and cell phone than it would take to clean the place up.
So…. that is why we need funding for documentation.
It never ceases to amaze me that intelligent people will spend huge amounts of time doing a literature review, designing elaborate theories, generating elegant hypotheses, selecting a three-stage stratified random sample, performing multivariate analyses, and their measures on which this brilliant study rests are some questions they made up with their three best friends over Chardonnay during happy hour one Friday night. This is also known as the “panel of experts” method and it has the added benefit that it allows you to deduct the wine on your taxes. (Not actual tax advice. Consult your accountant. Of course, if you are doing your 1040 based on reading this blog, you are probably beyond help.)
We did not go with this approach. Our original idea was to use released items from the state standards test from North Dakota but, unfortunately, that is one of the states that never releases items. What we did was find standards that were the same, verbatim, as other states and then found items from those states that had been released. For example,
” Compute a given percent of a whole number”
and the problem would be
“What is 40% of 250?”
with the same four multiple choice options that had been used on the state test.
As someone pointed out, even if the same test had not been previously, since we pulled only the items that tested exactly what we included in the game, the individual items had been validated. So, we had content validity.
One bit of evidence for construct validity came from the item difficulty levels. Here is one of several charts. This shows what percentage of the fourth-grade students answered each item correctly. The items are broken down by grade level. It is also important to know that the state tests showed the majority of students at this school to be low-performing in mathematics. What we see is that as students go from second-grade level items, all of which the majority of the students answered correctly, to fifth-grade items, the percentage correct declines. We see that for the fifth-grade items, only one of them did the students exceed the 25% that would be answered correct by random guessing (remember, there were four multiple-choice options).
Since the state’s test have shown these students to be performing poorly, we should see that they generally are not at grade level, that is, they do not answer many of the fourth-grade items correctly at a rate exceeding chance. That, as you can see from the chart, is the exact situation.
Of course, we did more than this, beginning with replicating this identical chart with fifth-graders, who showed pretty much the same pattern but, as would be expected, answered a higher proportion correctly at each grade level than did the fourth-graders.
That’s the sort of thing that too many studies take for granted and never test. This isn’t the exciting part of creating a game, the part where you make an attack scene and the kid gets to shoot flaming arrows. So, what good does this do us? Well, the combination of the different analyses of the measure confirms that the measure we used for students to test whether or not their mathematics achievement increased is, in fact, a valid measure of mathematics achievement.
Also, this method has the advantage of not being required to share any of the wine with our best friend/ expert panel so we get to drink it all ourselves.
On twitter, where I probably spend too much of my time, Dave Winer suggested that start-ups write about themselves, thus cutting out Tech Crunch as the middle man. Since Dave wrote the original blogging software and the first blog on the Internet (really!), his advice is worth considering. So, this week is all about our progress.
The most important thing to know is – we finished our pilot test and it works.
As you can see from the graph, both intervention groups increased substantially more from the pre-test to the post-test than did the control group.
Here is what we did:
The reservation had exactly two schools. One was our control group which simply got tested on specific math concepts and then tested again eight weeks later. The other group played our game over the eight week period. Not continuously because there was a break for Thanksgiving and a mid-way break we had planned to do updates. So, after about six actual weeks of hands-on, the kids math scores went up.
We did a repeated measures Analysis of Variance and the time by group interaction effect was significant – meaning there was a statistically significant improvement for our group that played the game. You might wonder (if you were a statistician) if there was an interaction with grade. There are a couple of possible reasons why the fourth-grade did better. One is that the whole class used the game, in their classroom (we provided laptops). The fifth-graders were pulled out of their classroom and only five from each class participated. Also, the fourth-grade teachers, on their own initiative, got much more involved and used the supplemental materials we provided them, increased their own time spent teaching math.
Looking at teacher effects and the effect of whole-class versus pull-out instruction are two things we will be doing next.
TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THE GAME AND OUR NEW START-UP, PLEASE CHECK OUT www.7generationgames.com