They talk about how the difficulty in teaching is in knowing what the students know. But just asking them doesn't give us enough information:<p>> So we have the kernel of a good idea—asking students to read back their understanding—but words are a poor medium for it.<p>Their solution, of making students come up with examples, basically serves to map out their understanding and whether they are falling into common misconceptions<p>> we think of Examplar as performing what we call conceptual mutation testing: we only want to make sure they have the right conception of the problem, and avoid misconceptions about it.<p>This seems really powerful to me. In some ways it's like test driven development. In another way, it's like going into reading a complex article with a list of guiding questions, mapping out what you think the article is saying, and having a system (either automated or a human teacher) correct you/guide you in the right direction