Measure the learning claim—responsibly.

1. The research question

The planned study will ask whether short, targeted training on clues and method triggers improves a student's ability to select an appropriate mathematical method when wording changes.

The primary comparison should separate method recognition—choosing a strategy—from execution—correctly carrying it out. Secondary questions may examine confidence calibration, mistake type, prerequisite gaps, and retention after a delay.

2. A credible first design

• Define the hypothesis, outcomes, exclusions, and analysis plan before collecting outcome data.
• Use a short pre-check, a bounded MethodLens practice period, an immediate post-check, and a delayed PulseCheck.
• Use new but structurally similar questions so memorizing an answer does not look like transfer.
• Report uncertainty, limitations, withdrawals, missing data, and results that do not support the hypothesis.
• Avoid presenting a product metric or tester testimonial as proof of learning effectiveness.

3. Data the study may need

A final protocol may use participant codes, age band, topic, clue, assigned condition, response, selected method, correctness, confidence category, time spent, hint use, mistake category, and assessment timing. It should collect no more identifying information than necessary.

Parent-permission records, student-assent records, and contact information should be separated from performance data. Public or shared results should be aggregated or de-identified, with small groups reviewed carefully to reduce re-identification risk.

4. Safeguards for students ages 15–17

• Obtain written or valid electronic permission from a parent or legal guardian and affirmative assent from the student.
• Explain participation in age-appropriate language, including what happens, time required, risks, benefits, privacy limits, and contacts.
• Make participation voluntary, unrelated to grades, and free of pressure from teachers, coaches, or peers.
• Allow a student to stop at any time without penalty, even if a parent has given permission.
• Obtain school or district approval before recruitment through a school or use of school records, devices, class time, or branding.

5. Review before recruitment

Before enrolling anyone, MethodLens should work with a qualified adult research mentor and obtain a documented determination from an appropriate Institutional Review Board or other authorized ethics reviewer about whether the activity is human-subjects research and what review is required.

Useful official starting points include the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services guidance on research with children, informed consent, and electronic consent.

6. Go/no-go sequence

1. Test the interface personally with fictional data.
2. Fix usability and accessibility problems without collecting research outcomes.
3. Write the protocol, data dictionary, retention schedule, consent materials, and incident plan.
4. Obtain adult mentorship, ethics determination, and any school approval.
5. Run a very small supervised feasibility beta before a larger study.
6. Analyze according to the prewritten plan and publish both positive and negative findings honestly.

7. Research contact

Research planning questions may be sent to pyatharth@gmail.com. Do not send student records or identifiable study data by ordinary email.