What’s the catch? Hard to cancel — reported by 30 users.
Analyzed automatically from 3 independent signals that had to agree — not a hands-on test, and not human-reviewed.
This analysis describes version 8.2.23 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 8.2.23, updated 2025-06-13.
What the analysis found
The catch list 1
Charges we publish at a strength we stand behind: measured from an artefact, agreed by independent sources, or reported by enough users to clear that charge's own published bar.
One source only — shown, not confirmed 3
A single kind of evidence. We publish these because withholding them would be the bigger distortion, and we do not treat any of them as a finding we stand behind.
What reviewers said
Verbatim excerpts from public store reviews, shown as corroborating user reports. They are not Appworthy audit evidence, and a quotation is not proof of the finding it sits under.
Hard to cancel
SCAM — The absolute worst. I downloaded it because it was advertised as free. Once downloaded, you open it and it asks for your e-mail and if you are a parent or teacher... and that apparently is when I agreed to a monthly subscription…
They tell you it costs money after you sign up and then make it very difficult to cancel — They tell you it costs money after you sign up and then make it very difficult to cancel
Won’t allow me to cancel subscriptions — My daughter is Pre-k and doesn’t use this app, but there’s no way to cancel as it does t show up in my subscriptions.
Trial converts to a charge
Very bad experience — I downloaded it for my K-year daughter. She loved the beautiful design at first however was very frustrated with the sudden and random system crash. It happened frequently and every time she had to re-do the quest…
Can’t get it to login — After the free trial, they billed me and then despite attempts to restore purchase it wouldn’t allow me to log in. Bummer.
Help! — I only signed up for the free trial but now am being charged $19.99 a month I have tried emailing but have no success in trying to cancel all this!
Reports that the ads misrepresent the app
Misleading advertising — Signed up for 7 days trial by clicking annual subscription with the intention of purchasing it, but instead of providing 7 days free trial to check the app, payment of $144.99 was deducted straightaway which is…
NOT FREE! — Advertised as a free app but the app is only free to download not to use!
False advertisement — Very difficult to cancel and I kept getting random charges long after I have cancelled the prescriptions! The material is also dated and repetitive. Not worth what they charge!
Paywall blocks the basics
Doesn’t even load without payment — Why would you not offer a little bit of content for free so we can tap around and see what the app is all about? I understand there’s a free trial (a very short 7 days) but I don’t want to deal with…
No Good — Everything is locked! How can I know if my child will like it if I can't try it? Not paying for useless app!
Free Trial does not work — What is the point of a free trial if everything is locked. It’s probably a glitch, but I won’t commit to the subscription unless we get to try it first.
How the automated analysis works
This assessment is produced automatically. Three independent signals are read — user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every subscription bills weekly; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Several measurements above say “Not assessed” because no artefact we hold can answer them. A human review is what resolves those — and it can remove a favourable band as easily as add one.
Hands-on inspections are not yet open.