EASEBRAIN ACADEMY — OFFLINE MISSION PACK Build a better version https://easebrain.live/curriculum/build-a-better-version CHALLENGE Integrate your team’s work into a prototype or service model. Test it against the original criteria and document an improvement caused by evidence. LEARNING OBJECTIVES Link a design change to a failed requirement and a comparable retest. Write handover instructions another learner can use. LEARN & APPLY 1. Return to the criteria Use the success criteria from the problem brief. A polished demonstration can distract from whether the solution actually works. Give each learner a specific test responsibility. Practice: Match each criterion to a test and a responsible team member. 2. Invite useful feedback Ask reviewers to attempt a task or challenge an assumption. Record what happened, not only whether they liked the result. Use supervised reviewers and avoid collecting unnecessary personal information. Practice: Run the test and log findings without changing the results. 3. Show the difference Change one important aspect and retest using a comparable method. Explain what improved, what did not and whether the original problem still needs a different solution. Practice: Document the before-and-after result and your own contribution. WORKED EXAMPLE An alert misses 4 of 15 prepared trials. After a justified revision it misses 1 of 15 new comparable trials. That is promising but limited evidence, not universal reliability. Record requirement, test, result, change and retest. YOUR PRACTICE QUESTION Why is a new feature alone not evidence of improvement? Write your answer before reading the explanation below. EXPLANATION Improvement needs a relevant criterion, a reason for the change and a fair retest. A feature can add complexity or fail to address the original problem. STRETCH Ask another learner to follow your setup instructions without verbal help. Record where they become stuck and revise the handover. PRACTICAL: Improve a failure, then hand it over Suggested time: 75–120 minutes Illustrated crew scenario (fictional learning example) Two of our five tests failed in version one. I was going to add a feature. Let’s fix one failure and rerun the same tests first. PREDICT: If you change three things and the result improves, which change caused it? STARTER: Use any earlier artifact. Fictional example: calculator v1 handles 3 and 0 units but accepts blank as zero and −2 as a negative total. Start a version log and keep v1 intact. 1. Make failure reproducible Give each requirement and test an ID. Record input, expected output, actual output and version. Ask another person to reproduce one failure from your instructions. 2. Change and compare Make one purposeful change, such as blank-input validation. Rerun the original tests plus a new boundary case. Report regressions as well as improvements. 3. Hand over Write setup, use, test and limitation notes. A supervised fresh reviewer or role-play follows them without verbal rescue. Record where the notes were insufficient and revise them. COMPARE AFTER TRYING: Builder v2 fixes blank input but still accepts −2. The honest report is one failure fixed and one remaining, not ‘all done’. After v3 rejects negatives, the old valid cases must still pass. This is regression testing. SELF-CHECK The old and new versions can be compared. A change is linked to a repeatable test. Handover notes include setup and remaining limitations. TRANSFER: The next person has no internet. Adapt the artifact or instructions and test that route. WORKBOOK TEMPLATE Requirement | Test ID | Version | Expected | Actual | Pass/fail Suspected cause: One change: Regression result: Fresh-user handover observation: Remaining limits: EVIDENCE CRITERIA Tests linked to success criteria Before-and-after evidence Individual contribution and remaining limitations Deliverable: Version history, test results and individual contribution record SESSION PLAN (adapt with your facilitator) Recall & plan: 30 minutes Model & discuss: 45 minutes Guided practice: 75 minutes Build & test: 120 minutes Feedback & revise: 60 minutes Reflect & next step: 30 minutes RESOURCES EEF: feedback that supports learning — https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/education-evidence/guidance-reports/feedback micro:bit project library — https://www.microbit.org/projects/make-it-code-it/ AI DISCLOSURE TEMPLATE Tool/version; date; task; information shared; claims checked and sources; what I changed; what I can explain myself. No AI or equipment purchase is required. Keep personal information out of project evidence.