Wuzzit – EDUC 342: Child Development & New Technologies https://ed342.gse.stanford.edu Thu, 18 Feb 2016 06:40:26 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.6.1 Week 7 Discussion https://ed342.gse.stanford.edu/week-6-discussion/ https://ed342.gse.stanford.edu/week-6-discussion/#comments Wed, 17 Feb 2016 18:40:06 +0000 http://ed342.gse.stanford.edu/?p=1443 In Using Games to Break the Symbol Barrier, Keith Devlin provides Wuzzit as an example of an educational math game that uses a game’s visual affordances to convey math concepts without abstract math symbols in the way. I found Devlin’s concept of the “symbol barrier” to be accurate and compelling, and perhaps a leading cause for the math anxiety that Berkowitz et al describe. Moreover, I believe Wuzzit is an excellent example of educational technology that actually uses the affordances of technology to do away with a barrier in traditional math classrooms. This increases accessibility to people who are fully capable of mastering Everyday Math without having to master mathematical notation first.

Wuzzit provides a good contrast to coolmath-games.com, which I actually researched for my technology redesign project. A lot of the points made in Understanding the Relationships Between Interest In Online Math Games and Academic Performance by Berkowitz et al about the credibility of math content in CoolMath’s games came up in my analysis as well. The website has a few math related games, but a lot more games just geared towards entertainment that do not provide learners with the opportunity to “process mathematical content actively” (Zhang 255). Thus, I feel that the website does not capitalize on the affordances of technology to provide meaningful learning experiences for its users. From an equity standpoint, and especially because this website has a lot of traffic from minority/lower socioeconomic background students, should standards or regulations exist for products that claim to be educational?

]]> https://ed342.gse.stanford.edu/week-6-discussion/feed/ 2 Week 7 DQC https://ed342.gse.stanford.edu/week-7-dqc/ https://ed342.gse.stanford.edu/week-7-dqc/#respond Wed, 17 Feb 2016 16:05:32 +0000 http://ed342.gse.stanford.edu/?p=1484 In Breaking the Symbol Barrier Devlin compares math to piano music. Music is merely represented on paper, while it is experienced when someone plays a piano. The instrument is engaging and provides immediate feedback to the learner. Math is similarly represented on paper with symbols but experienced through mathematical thinking.

Devlin argues that Everyday Math can be more efficiently represented on devices like iPads through mathematical games. Symbolic representation is abstract and devoid of meaning for students. Devices like the iPad allow games to represent a more meaningful experience with math. Devlin believes that these games require math mathematical thinking, children learn faster, and enjoy the experience more.

While I absolutely agree that games like Wuzzit Trouble have created a much more engaging and meaningful way to experience algebra I wonder, when do students make the transition into symbolic math to master higher level math (which Devlin does not believe can be well represented through iPad games)? If we transitioned to teaching all Everyday Math skills using games like Wuzzit Trouble, would some children never encounter symbolic math? Would equity issues in tracking students into higher level symbolic math courses arise?

]]> https://ed342.gse.stanford.edu/week-7-dqc/feed/ 0