From a page from a math online game that parents need to sign their kids up for. You can upgrade to the premium versus by paying monthly fees. (Of course.) Apparently students who did the paid upgrade improved 84% more than those who did not. Which begs two question. 1 - How much did the free users improve. 84% of not much is still not much. For this to be on a MATH program page is so incredulous to me - that MATH academics are using half statistics to sell math games on the premise that kids are not good at math. Heres a thought - stop using crap stats in marketing and infiltrating the public with examples of bad math. Some of us are good at math, and realize this is insufficient data. Im getting rather upset at the science and stats are a marketing tool. Science should search for truth. When academics use lack of knowledge to up their sales game, Im sorry, but I think it destroys the credibility of researchers. I know and respect some very good ones. That is not how they behave. They believe in education and would give an accurate recounting of any claimed efficacy. (And why are we paying for math games to get optimal teaching results? Some families cannot afford to upgrade. What are their kids...chopped liver?)
Posted on: Wed, 08 Oct 2014 13:32:54 +0000