Title: Math Bomber Version 1.0.1
Overall Rating:
D-
Source: http:
//www.macintoshos.com/shareware.library/educational/math.shtml
Playing Time: varies, number of problems
determined by player
Date: January 22, 1996
Cost: $5.00 (donation requested by 12
year old who wrote the program; e-mail address - wjia@unixg.ubc.ca)
Number of Players: 1
Special Equipment/Facilities Needed: none
Subject Area: mathematics (addition,
subtraction,
multiplication, and division facts)
Objectives: to provide user practice in
basic mathematics facts
Brief Description: The player is a helicopter
and the objective is to shoot down the bomb with the answer to the question,
before it hits the city. The player begins the game by selecting
the number of questions to be answered, the basic operation to be drilled
(you can only select one), the level of difficulty of the questions, and
the speed of the game. A plane flies out pulling a banner with a
math question and drops four bombs with different numbers on them.
One bomb has the correct answer. The player needs to aim the helicopter,
by moving vertically, and fire his/her gun at the bomb with the right
answer.
The player clicks the mouse button to fire. After the player finishes
all the questions, a report is displayed showing percentage correct, number
of correct answers, and number of wrong answers.
Entry Capabilities Required: basic addition,
subtraction, multiplication, and division facts
Rating: (1-5)
Relevance to objectives:
5
(All problems are directly related to the drill of the four basic operations)
Provides practice of relevant skills:
4 (Game does provide practice in the four basic
operations. However, the game often enters cycles of failure following
the first incorrect response and then does not provide practice of relevant
skills.)
Likely to arouse/maintain interest:
2
(Use of helicopter to shoot bombs is likely to arouse the interest of the
student. The game's bug that results in cycles of failure following
the first incorrect response will definitely kill that interest and result
in frustration.)
Likely to be comprehended clearly:
1
(Text file instructions that accompany the game are incomplete and difficult
to understand.)
Technical quality (durable, attractive):
1 (Program's bug which results in mouse click (to
continue) firing the next problem's shot automatically is a major setback
for the game!)
Game: Winning dependent on player actions (rather
than chance): 2
(Again, mouse click bug makes winning dependent on chance, specifically,
the chance that if a player misses one problem s/he will miss all the rest)
Simulation: Validity of game model (realistic,
accurate depiction):
NA
(Software not intended for simulation, but rather for drill of basic operation
facts.)
Evidence of effectiveness (e.g. field-test
results):
not available
Clear directions for play:
2
(Directions for play incomplete and difficult to understand)
Effectiveness of debriefing:
2 (Report only provides
percentage correct, number of correct answers, and number of wrong
answers.
No insight into patterns of errors or suggestions for correction are
given.)
Strong Points:
+ The game offers a novel method of reviewing basic mathematics facts.
&nbs
p;
+ If the player's overall percentage is 100%, the game plays a jingle,
"Woow...I feel good!"
Weak Points:
- If a problem is answered incorrectly, the program gives you the answer
in horizontal number sentence format and says "Click the Mouse to
Continue."
When this is done, the game continues and the next problem's gun is fired
automatically. This results in a cycle of failure following the first
incorrect answer.
&nbs
p;
- The game does not analyze the player's responses to determine patterns
of error and make suggestions to correct these discrepancies.
&nbs
p;
- The game says "Don't be silly!" when you miss a problem .
&nbs
p;
- If the player's overall percentage is 0%, the game says "nuh uh huh!"
&nbs
p;
- If the player's overall percentage is better than 50% and not 100%, the
game says, "Oh my your good!"
&nbs
p;
- Speed levels 6-10 are ridiculous. The student may misinterpret
inability to function at such a large number of levels as personal
incompetence,
rather than unrealistic game expectations.
Reviewer: Douglas Saber
Position: student GRED 518 Summer Session
I 1999
Date: June 7, 1999
Computer System Reviewed on: Macintosh
Power G3, 233, 64mb ram.