https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/xyflyer/id643079974?mt=8&ign-mpt=uo%3D2

Here’s a demo video:

And you can play it here:

http://puzzleschool.com/puzzles/xyflyer

As always feedback is appreciated

—————————————————————————————————————————————————–

I think parents are scared.

At the very least I know that I’m scared.

I get scared when I discuss education with colleagues who have older kids. Almost universally they talk about a class that is too boring, where their child is acting out and the teacher is complaining, or of excessive amounts of homework leading to fighting in their homes and a sense that their kids are stressing out too much. They talk about friendship concerns when a friend of their child begins to express a disdain for school or of parents who have approached them because the situation is reversed and their child is becoming a bad influence on the friend.

I get scared by the thought that my daughter may become disinterested in school, possibly doing well in school as I did, but never really connecting with the learning, simply getting a grade and moving on.

I’m really scared of the possibility that my daughter could develop the idea that she is “bad at math” or that girls don’t do programming. I hope my influence in these areas will be enough to prevent this from happening, but it’s a lot to ask parents to effectively combat the patterns that a child sees as truth in the world around them.

Mostly I’m scared of a system that will be difficult to work with. I’m scared that my daughter will come home with a great deal of homework and I’ll tell her not to worry about it because I know, thanks to the work of educators such as Alfie Kohn, that hours upon hours of homework after a full day of school is not an effective use of her time. It won’t help her learn significantly more, can prevent her from getting the rest and recuperation she needs to internalize the learning from school, can prevent her from exploring the extraordinary amounts of learning and activities that schools don’t offer, and, maybe most importantly, can prevent her from having some time to just be herself, to reflect, and dream, and let her mind wander. But if she doesn’t do her homework, what does that mean for the teacher and for her time in the classroom?

Even if I can win the homework battle, I’m scared that the rigidity of most school systems will lull her in to a sense of complacency, where she is better off just doing the assigned work then exploring something of interest or trying to make too many decisions for herself. Looking back this was my biggest issue with the 19 years I spent in formal education. I just wish I had that time back to explore more. I am now 32, have a child and numerous financial responsibilities, and I feel like I’m just getting started.

I’m scared that my confidence in her ability to learn without any homework, grades, or requirements will not be welcomed by just any school system leading to numerous battles with teachers and school administrators.

At the same time, though, I’m scared of removing her from the main stream educational system. Although I know at an intellectual level that thousands of students have gone through extremely progressive educational systems such as Sudbury Valley or Summerhill, it still scares me to death that having my daughter go through such a different childhood experience as the vast majority of her peers could be wrong, that she may not appreciate such a decision later in her life, that such a decision may close future opportunities to her.

I become frustrated when I speak to parents about progressive school systems, hearing them agree with the idea that we children need more time to play, to express themselves creatively, and to explore without boundaries and bells going off every hour. They agree that we need to allow students greater opportunity to develop hypotheses about the world around them and test those hypotheses, learning from failure, being persistent, and iterating toward better solutions.

I become frustrated because these same parents will agree with all of this, but then, when I ask them if they would feel comfortable with their child not receiving homework or grades, they immediately shut down. They’re just not sure if that is the right thing to do. Maybe they’re just as scared as I am.

I can’t speak for why exactly they feel that way, but I do recognize in myself a deep nervousness about stepping off the beaten path. It’s one thing for me to step off the path because I have chosen such a path for myself, but it’s another thing for me to choose such a thing for my child. The unbeaten path is unbeaten for a reason. It’s challenging and it’s difficult to feel confident that, while you may be introducing significant benefits, you may also be increasing the chances that something goes very wrong. At the end of the day I’m scared of something going wrong. How can you not be a little bit nervous about sending your child down a path that you yourself did not go down, that you have little to no experience with or insight into?

I’ve chosen to put all of my professional efforts in to moving society away from homework, grades, requirements, and maybe most importantly, excessive authority and control within education. I strongly believe that students can and will learn an enormous amount even if we do not force them to do so, that our society would be better off if students truly enjoyed school. But I can’t say confidently that there will not be unintended consequences if such thoughts are widely adopted. And I certainly can’t claim that I’m not scared, as a parent, to have my children progress through their education, either as it is today or as I am hoping it will look in the future.

Luckily students, and people in general, are incredibly resilient. They are capable of adapting to numerous environments and finding happiness within a wide range of circumstances. In the end my daughter will likely be fine, even great, looking back on her education positively, regardless of how it plays out. I hope I can affect some change to help ensure that she walks away from her formal education with her love of learning intact, but I really should practice more of what progressive education preaches and recognize that she can handle this. That as long as she has unconditional love and support from her family along with the basic resources that an upper middle class life provides then she is more than capable of creating a great life on her own.

The blog post references another blog post by Stephanie Chang (an engineer at Khan), Takeaways From My Latest Project. In her blog post she describes how she was able to witness students simply pattern-matching as a way to solve the problems her program was presenting. In doing so they were “gaming” the program, making their way through the challenges without really engaging with the learning.

Herein lies my frustration. Every time I observe students working on Khan or talk to teachers about it, or try it myself, I see a strong desire to learn through the exercises, instead of watching the video and then validating one’s understanding of the material through the exercises.

Khan Academy, though, seems to be completely against this strategy. They do not want students to use the exercises in order to learn. They do not want students to look for patterns as they solve problems and then test those patterns on future problems. They only want the exercises to be used as a means of proving mastery.

As I tried out the exercises that Stephanie had put together I was impressed by the design. It was an interesting approach to learning about derivatives, that allowed me to see how the derivatives related to the original equation visually. It has a limited option set that makes it easier to pattern-match by limiting the amount of information in which one can look for a pattern. It even had a hint system that allowed me to learn about some of the techniques for figuring out the derivative through explicit content that was presented when I asked for it.

I leverage all of these techniques in my own work. I think they can be very conducive to effective learning.

As I went through the challenges, though, it became quite evident that a lot of thought went in to preventing students from being able to discern patterns. Challenges jumped around so that if you did discern a pattern it would not apply to the next challenge and the limited option set is significantly compromised by providing a catch-all “none of the answers are correct” option.

I had started out enjoying the process, learning quite a bit as I was going, but quickly became frustrated by the anti-pattern-matching efforts and soon stopped my exploration.

Now I can appreciate these efforts if your goal is verification of mastery, which is the stated goal for this exercise, so they are doing a good job of meeting the goal they set out to achieve.

In doing so, though, they are ignoring, even fighting, against their own users, the students. Instead of embracing the natural inclination of students to engage with the content through the exercises, developing and testing hypotheses in a search for patterns that will give them a more intuitive understanding of the material, they are putting in measures at every turn to stop this from happening.

Now I appreciate that understanding simple patterns is not the same thing as understanding the underlying material and how those patterns arise, but there’s nothing wrong with a student gaining greater comfort with material through pattern-matching. And pattern-matching can lead to a deep understanding of material as the patterns become more nuanced.

This is how all of us learn our first language. We start with very basic patterns, calling every animal with four legs and a tail a dog. Over time our patterns become more nuanced, allowing us to communicate in very complex and nuanced ways with hardly any effort at all.

So please Khan Academy, stop disrespecting pattern-matching. It is a natural and very powerful process that humans enjoy doing a great deal and is at the heart of learning and mastery.

And, even more importantly, stop disrespecting the students. Stop trying to fight their natural inclinations to use your product in a way that you did not originally intend. Embrace their natural inclinations and try to work with them. I think it will pay off quite well, making the process of learning both more enjoyable and more effective.

In fact I’m more nervous that she won’t be able to reach such a place if she is forced down certain paths. Anytime someone is forced to do something it’s much more likely that they’ll develop negative associations with that activity. If it they then struggle with it they may reach the conclusion that they are “bad” at it, that they “hate” it.

If I can get my children through school without them saying to themselves “I hate math” or “I hate foreign languages” or “I hate writing” or “I hate science” I think I’ll be satisfied with their education.

I don’t really have a strong preference about what my kids do with their lives. I just don’t want them ever to isolate some subject and say “I’m just bad at that”. If I can keep them from reaching that conclusion so that they’re always interested in learning more on a wide range of subjects then I think they’ll be as prepared as I can help them get to deal with the challenges in front of them.

Interestingly enough one of the main arguments that the teacher I spoke with used to defend required homework was her own hatred of math, that homework was necessary to teach kids about fortitude and diligence and getting through something you hate.

I really believe that it’s so hard for us to imagine all students actually enjoying learning something as challenging as mathematics that we immediately feel that such learning must be forced. In the end it may be this forcing that actually accelerates students toward a hatred for such learning.

Making learning “unhatable” seems like such a low bar, but at the same time it seems like an impossibly challenging goal. If we were able to eliminate the idea from a students mind that they are “just bad at math” or that they “hate science” I think it would be a very satisfying accomplishment. Personally it’s what I’m dedicated to improving.

As a note this demo was created for the NYC Schools Gap App Challenge. Here’s my submission: XYFlyer.

They would be able to push a dial up to 10, with 10 meaning extremely bored. A computer would receive the feedback and aggregate it across the entire class, giving the teacher instant feedback about how bored the class was.

This may be a ridiculous situation, but personally if I were a teacher, I think it would be an interesting experiment. If I receive a lot of “bored” feedback, what would I do about it, though?

Which brought me to the question, what is the antithesis of boring?

The immediate thought I had would be to entertain the students. Jump on the tables, do a dance, maybe have them stand up and do a more physical activity.

But the more I thought about it the more I realized that entertainment wasn’t truly the antithesis of boring. It seemed to be more of a distraction from boring.

I think the real antithesis of boring is actually challenge. Appropriate challenge.

As in it can’t be too easy (boring) and it can’t be too hard (stressful / frustrating). That sweet-spot of challenge, though, what might be described as stimulating or engaging, is the more substantive way to combat boredom.

I’m not exactly sure how I would create appropriate challenges for students in a classroom. It depends on the subject being taught, but I think I would focus my efforts on creating appropriate challenges in order to combat boredom.

Anyways just food for thought.

(there’s really nothing more nerve-wracking as 60 8th graders using your website for the first time. they have an amazing ability to find bugs.)

Although they certainly made me feel like XYFlyer has plenty of room for improvement, I was very happy to see that they easily engaged with the site, despite the fact that there are no scores/points, no badges, no explosions or shooting, and no timers to keep them focused.

This was one of my main theses with The Puzzle School. That you can you engage students, even middle schoolers, in learning without any extrinsic motivators by providing an interesting challenge and increasing the perception that you can solve the challenge using option sets and feedback loops.

That’s it.

All XYFlyer does it present a challenge that is perceived to be solvable and provides an option set and feedback loops to help students work through it. That’s all that’s needed to engage and stimulate.

Maybe you can create an engaging environment with less than that, but I think it’s close to the bare minimum.

I find it very interesting.

Update
Some people have asked me about the differences between Light It Up and Refraction. They are almost exactly the same, but there are some differences. Those differences are described here: Light It Up – The Puzzle School.

Also this is just one approach to Puzzle-Based Learning. There are many other valid approaches. The primary key is “appropriate challenges” – neither too easy or too hard – with feedback loops to enable the learning through the testing of hypotheses.

The Simulator
The simulator is similar to a board game environment with built in feedback loops and rules that are exposed to the player as they try to solve the challenge.

The Option Set
The option set is one technique for limiting the amount of new information a student has to grapple with in order to solve the challenge. In this example the student has eight pieces that can be dragged into the simulator to try and direct the correct amount of laser in to each of the light bulbs to light them up. It is implied that the challenge can be solved with just these pieces, allowing the student to quickly gauge how challenging the goal will be to achieve.

The Goal
All puzzle-based learning environments have a goal. In this example directing the correct amount of laser into the light bulbs achieves the goal.

Feedback Loops
Tight feedback loops are essential to puzzle-based learning. They allow for the student to quickly test hypotheses and iterate using the learning they derive from the feedback loop.
In this example applying a piece from the option set to the simulator immediately affects the laser (e.g. changing its direction, splitting it, etc.) and immediately labels the resulting lasers with the appropriate fractions. This allows students to quickly understand how each piece interacts with the simulator and can be used to solve the challenge.

Explicit Content
Another component of this project will be a library that makes it easy to include explicit content in to the puzzles. Clicking on items in the simulator or option set will display content explaining the item, how it functions and interacts within the simulator, as well as related content. These “tips” can also provide links to related material that is available on the web.

Appropriate Challenges
A primary goal of puzzle-based learning is to present the student with appropriate challenges, that gradually get harder and harder as the student progresses. The framework developed in this project will make it easy to implement the “Escape Valve” and “Level Selector” strategies described below in order to accomplish the goal of offering appropriate challenges.

The Escape Valve
The Escape Valve is simply a mechanism that makes it possible for a student to declare that a challenge is too hard and get additional help with it. This project will build out libraries that will make it easy to include a hint system that gives students one piece of the puzzle, allowing them to work their way closer to a solution. This technique only works if there are enough puzzles of similar difficulty so that a student can get hints on one and still be able to assess their proficiency by taking on another level of similar difficulty.

Level Selector
The Level Selector is another mechanism that will be easy to leverage with the components and libraries that will be developed by this project. It allows a student to choose from a limited range of puzzle levels so that they can attempt to take on more challenging puzzles without jumping too far ahead and becoming overwhelmed.

Level Editor
The Level Editor serves multiple purposes. Primarily it allows content experts who lack programming skills to create puzzle levels that can teach concept for a wide range of knowledge levels, thus providing more personalized learning.

It is important to be able to offer a wide range of novel challenges so that students can test their knowledge against numerous puzzles as they progress with their learning.

The Level Editor also allows students to create their own levels and challenge their peers. This takes advantage of the protégé effect, where students make greater effort to learn for their peers than they do for themselves.

You can play around with all of these components in the Light It Up game.

As always you can follow our progress on Twitter

Currently in this game there is a piece that takes two fractional lasers and adds them together in to one laser. In order for the piece to add the fractions the fractions must have a common denominator.

Using this approach forces students to add fractions by creating a common denominator and can effectively teach the idea that a common denominator is necessary through the rule, but because the piece simply requires this to happen, students likely aren’t going to understand why finding a common denominator is necessary, just that it is necessary.

This isn’t the end of the world. Once the pattern is firmly established then it makes it much easier to explore the explanation of why a common denominator is necessary. Still I would much rather find a way for the students to figure out that a common denominator is necessary rather than simply forcing such a rule.

You could imagine having students try to add fractions without a common denominator. They might just add the numerators and the denominators. You could create a situation where there would be a natural feedback loop showing that this doesn’t reflect reality and help them explore how to do the calculation more accurately. I just haven’t yet figured out a good practical metaphor and feedback loop to accomplish this.

I’ll continue to think about it. If anyone has any ideas I would love to hear them.

Patterns are also at the heart of stereotypes and numerous other human behaviors such as loss aversion, which can frequently lead to negative outcomes.

I think we need to embrace our amazing ability to pattern-match, we need to educate our students how to leverage it as effectively as possible, we need to develop feedback loops that allow us to explore and discover nuanced patterns in all professions, etc.

We also need to approach our pattern discovery from the position of disproving a pattern. If we only look to prove out our patterns, we tend to ignore any new information that doesn’t fit the pattern. This leads to us relying on patterns beyond what is appropriate and making mistakes. If, however, we focus on disproving out patterns we’ll pay closer attention to the edge cases where a pattern starts to break down. Focusing on the edge cases allow us to gain a more nuanced understanding of a pattern, which is the goal of every expert.

I truly believe that an educational system that focuses on helping students develop their ability to discover patterns while encouraging students to constantly try to disprove their own patterns will serve students far more effectively in life than one that focuses on the memorization of facts or even the understanding of material.

An individual who is constantly trying to disprove the patterns they see around them will gain wisdom and experience much more quickly. With more nuanced patterns at their disposal they’ll be able to make a larger and more impactful contribution to society.