Reusable AI capability
Reconstruct Quantitative Solution Errors and Test Transfer
Trace a learner’s quantitative work to the earliest unsupported step, test competing error explanations, and design a fresh transfer task that measures reasoning rather than answer imitation.
This Skill packages a reusable way to use the linked Prompt or Workflow; Amo.ng does not run it for you.
# Reconstruct Quantitative Solution Errors and Test Transfer Skill ID: AMO-S-000035 Skill URL: https://amo.ng/skills/reconstruct-quantitative-solution-errors-test-transfer Purpose: Give educators and learners a reusable diagnostic method for distinguishing conceptual, prerequisite, representational, procedural, arithmetic, notation, and instruction errors, then testing whether the learner can transfer the repaired reasoning. Required inputs: - Original quantitative problem, expected concepts, permitted methods, and assessment restrictions. - Learner work in its original order, including calculations, symbols, diagrams, explanations, and any assistance already received. - Authorized reference method, answer key, rubric, or source material. - Learning context, prior instruction, accommodation requirements, and the authorized educator or assessor. - Learner responses to diagnostic probes, repair attempts, and transfer task when those stages occur. How to use: When to use: - A worked mathematics, statistics, accounting, economics, engineering, or other quantitative solution contains an unexplained error. - An educator needs to distinguish a misconception from a slip before selecting an intervention. - A learner has corrected an answer and needs a changed task to test transferable understanding. When not to use: - Do not complete a restricted live assessment or provide a prohibited worked answer. - Do not diagnose learner intent, disability, effort, confidence, misconduct, or mastery from one artefact. - Do not assign an official grade or replace the authorized educator’s assessment process. Instructions: 1. Preserve the original order of the learner’s evidence and model the problem’s givens, target, constraints, and governing concepts. 2. Locate the earliest unsupported step rather than focusing only on the final wrong answer. 3. Form a small set of competing error explanations and identify evidence for, evidence against, and one discriminating question or micro-task for each. 4. Ask one probe at a time. Do not invent an absent learner response or proceed as if a probe succeeded. 5. Select the least-assistive repair consistent with the evidence and ask the learner to reconstruct the reasoning in their own notation or words. 6. Design a new transfer problem that preserves the target concept while changing numbers, representation, or context. Withhold its solution until the learner attempts it. 7. Record actual transfer reasoning, assistance used, error signatures, remaining uncertainty, and the next teaching action. Expected output: A problem model, ordered step trace, earliest unsupported point, competing error-hypothesis table, discriminating probe, bounded corrective sequence, fresh transfer problem and rubric, observed transfer result when supplied, and educator handoff. Constraints and boundaries: - Use only supplied work and responses; never fabricate omitted steps, checks, or learner evidence. - Preserve course rules, accessibility accommodations, privacy, and an equivalent way to demonstrate the target reasoning. - A correct answer alone is not proof of understanding; completion requires observable reasoning on a suitably changed problem. - The learner or authorized educator controls assessment, feedback, grading, and further intervention. Powered by Prompt: Quantitative Solution Error Reconstruction and Transfer Test Source ID: AMO-P-000328 https://amo.ng/prompts/quantitative-solution-error-reconstruction-transfer-test Completion criteria: Complete when the earliest unsupported step is evidence-linked; alternative explanations have been tested or remain explicitly uncertain; the learner has attempted a genuinely changed transfer problem; assistance is recorded; and the status reflects actual reasoning as Demonstrated, Demonstrated with help, Not demonstrated, Pending, or Blocked. Without learner responses, return a provisional diagnosis and test plan. Use this Amo.ng Skill with your preferred AI tool. Supply the required inputs and follow the usage instructions. # Reconstruct Quantitative Solution Errors and Test Transfer Skill ID: AMO-S-000035 Skill URL: https://amo.ng/skills/reconstruct-quantitative-solution-errors-test-transfer Purpose: Give educators and learners a reusable diagnostic method for distinguishing conceptual, prerequisite, representational, procedural, arithmetic, notation, and instruction errors, then testing whether the learner can transfer the repaired reasoning. Required inputs: - Original quantitative problem, expected concepts, permitted methods, and assessment restrictions. - Learner work in its original order, including calculations, symbols, diagrams, explanations, and any assistance already received. - Authorized reference method, answer key, rubric, or source material. - Learning context, prior instruction, accommodation requirements, and the authorized educator or assessor. - Learner responses to diagnostic probes, repair attempts, and transfer task when those stages occur. How to use: When to use: - A worked mathematics, statistics, accounting, economics, engineering, or other quantitative solution contains an unexplained error. - An educator needs to distinguish a misconception from a slip before selecting an intervention. - A learner has corrected an answer and needs a changed task to test transferable understanding. When not to use: - Do not complete a restricted live assessment or provide a prohibited worked answer. - Do not diagnose learner intent, disability, effort, confidence, misconduct, or mastery from one artefact. - Do not assign an official grade or replace the authorized educator’s assessment process. Instructions: 1. Preserve the original order of the learner’s evidence and model the problem’s givens, target, constraints, and governing concepts. 2. Locate the earliest unsupported step rather than focusing only on the final wrong answer. 3. Form a small set of competing error explanations and identify evidence for, evidence against, and one discriminating question or micro-task for each. 4. Ask one probe at a time. Do not invent an absent learner response or proceed as if a probe succeeded. 5. Select the least-assistive repair consistent with the evidence and ask the learner to reconstruct the reasoning in their own notation or words. 6. Design a new transfer problem that preserves the target concept while changing numbers, representation, or context. Withhold its solution until the learner attempts it. 7. Record actual transfer reasoning, assistance used, error signatures, remaining uncertainty, and the next teaching action. Expected output: A problem model, ordered step trace, earliest unsupported point, competing error-hypothesis table, discriminating probe, bounded corrective sequence, fresh transfer problem and rubric, observed transfer result when supplied, and educator handoff. Constraints and boundaries: - Use only supplied work and responses; never fabricate omitted steps, checks, or learner evidence. - Preserve course rules, accessibility accommodations, privacy, and an equivalent way to demonstrate the target reasoning. - A correct answer alone is not proof of understanding; completion requires observable reasoning on a suitably changed problem. - The learner or authorized educator controls assessment, feedback, grading, and further intervention. Powered by Prompt: Quantitative Solution Error Reconstruction and Transfer Test Source ID: AMO-P-000328 https://amo.ng/prompts/quantitative-solution-error-reconstruction-transfer-test Completion criteria: Complete when the earliest unsupported step is evidence-linked; alternative explanations have been tested or remain explicitly uncertain; the learner has attempted a genuinely changed transfer problem; assistance is recorded; and the status reflects actual reasoning as Demonstrated, Demonstrated with help, Not demonstrated, Pending, or Blocked. Without learner responses, return a provisional diagnosis and test plan.Copy skill copies the Skill details. Use with AI adds a short instruction for your preferred AI tool; neither action runs the Skill.
Purpose
Give educators and learners a reusable diagnostic method for distinguishing conceptual, prerequisite, representational, procedural, arithmetic, notation, and instruction errors, then testing whether the learner can transfer the repaired reasoning.
Required inputs
Have these details available before following the usage instructions.
- Original quantitative problem, expected concepts, permitted methods, and assessment restrictions.
- Learner work in its original order, including calculations, symbols, diagrams, explanations, and any assistance already received.
- Authorized reference method, answer key, rubric, or source material.
- Learning context, prior instruction, accommodation requirements, and the authorized educator or assessor.
- Learner responses to diagnostic probes, repair attempts, and transfer task when those stages occur.
How to use this Skill
When to use:
- A worked mathematics, statistics, accounting, economics, engineering, or other quantitative solution contains an unexplained error.
- An educator needs to distinguish a misconception from a slip before selecting an intervention.
- A learner has corrected an answer and needs a changed task to test transferable understanding.
When not to use:
- Do not complete a restricted live assessment or provide a prohibited worked answer.
- Do not diagnose learner intent, disability, effort, confidence, misconduct, or mastery from one artefact.
- Do not assign an official grade or replace the authorized educator’s assessment process.
Instructions:
1. Preserve the original order of the learner’s evidence and model the problem’s givens, target, constraints, and governing concepts.
2. Locate the earliest unsupported step rather than focusing only on the final wrong answer.
3. Form a small set of competing error explanations and identify evidence for, evidence against, and one discriminating question or micro-task for each.
4. Ask one probe at a time. Do not invent an absent learner response or proceed as if a probe succeeded.
5. Select the least-assistive repair consistent with the evidence and ask the learner to reconstruct the reasoning in their own notation or words.
6. Design a new transfer problem that preserves the target concept while changing numbers, representation, or context. Withhold its solution until the learner attempts it.
7. Record actual transfer reasoning, assistance used, error signatures, remaining uncertainty, and the next teaching action.
Expected output:
A problem model, ordered step trace, earliest unsupported point, competing error-hypothesis table, discriminating probe, bounded corrective sequence, fresh transfer problem and rubric, observed transfer result when supplied, and educator handoff.
Constraints and boundaries:
- Use only supplied work and responses; never fabricate omitted steps, checks, or learner evidence.
- Preserve course rules, accessibility accommodations, privacy, and an equivalent way to demonstrate the target reasoning.
- A correct answer alone is not proof of understanding; completion requires observable reasoning on a suitably changed problem.
- The learner or authorized educator controls assessment, feedback, grading, and further intervention.
Powered by an Amo.ng Prompt
Quantitative Solution Error Reconstruction and Transfer Test
Open the linked prompt to use the instructions that power this Skill.
Completion criteria
Complete when the earliest unsupported step is evidence-linked; alternative explanations have been tested or remain explicitly uncertain; the learner has attempted a genuinely changed transfer problem; assistance is recorded; and the status reflects actual reasoning as Demonstrated, Demonstrated with help, Not demonstrated, Pending, or Blocked. Without learner responses, return a provisional diagnosis and test plan.
Was this useful?
Related Prompts
Browse PromptsUniversity AI Initiative Portfolio and Academic Impact Review
Reconcile teaching, research and administrative AI initiatives against mission outcomes, cost, risk, duplication, inclusion and evidence quality for a bounded portfolio decision.
AI Curriculum Currency and Graduate Competency Gap Audit
Compare a programme with dated primary standards, credible research and labour evidence to separate durable AI competencies from short-lived vendor fashion.
Educational AI Procurement and Student Data Decision Gate
Evaluate an educational AI purchase against learning need, evidence, accessibility, privacy, security, equity, retention, lock-in and total cost before an accountable decision.
University AI Policy-to-Practice and Appeals Map
Translate supplied university AI policy into traceable role-specific rules, evidence requirements, escalation routes and fair appeals without inventing institutional authority.
Student AI Prototype Readiness and Handoff Review
Test whether a student AI prototype has documented users, data rights, evaluation evidence, limitations, risks and a safe accountable owner before demonstration or reuse.
AI Club Workshop Facilitator and Learning-Evidence Pack
Turn a defined AI topic into a practical club workshop with source-grounded explanations, exercises, facilitator cautions and observable before-and-after learning evidence.