P2 Thinking Aloud Task: Length (Find the Shortest Path) - Rollout (1.0)
P2 Thinking Aloud Task: Length (Find the Shortest Path) - Rollout (1.0)
Learning Outcome(s)
Subject and Level
|
Mathematics |
Primary 2 |
Content Map and Topic
-
- Acquire mathematical concepts and skills for everyday use and continuous learning in mathematics
- Develop thinking, reasoning, communication, application and metacognitive skills through a mathematical approach to problem-solving
- Build confidence and foster interest in mathematics
- 1.1 measuring
- length in metres
- mass in kilograms/grams
- volume of liquid in litres
- 1.3 comparing and ordering
- lengths
- masses
- volumes
The interactive is a thoughtfully designed activity that encourages students to engage in logical reasoning, route optimization, and spatial visualization. The task requires students to help a character, Susan, find the shortest route that allows her to visit specified locations.
MOE Library
P2 Thinking Aloud Task: Length (Find the Shortest Path) - Rollout (1.0)
1. Slides
MOE Library
P2 Thinking Aloud Task: Length (Find the Shortest Path) - Rollout (1.0)
2. Demonstration
Find_The_Shortest_Path_Demo.mp4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iE848le6Wn4
MOE Library
P2 Thinking Aloud Task: Length (Find the Shortest Path) - Rollout (1.0)
3. Demonstration (Optional)
Q1:
 |
MOE Library
P2 Thinking Aloud Task: Length (Find the Shortest Path) - Rollout (1.0)
4. Task A
Q1:
 |
ITT1
Your comment
Did you use any method to find the shortest path quickly?
MOE Library
P2 Thinking Aloud Task: Length (Find the Shortest Path) - Rollout (1.0)
5. Task B
Q1:
 |
ITT1
Your comment
Did you use any method to find the shortest path quickly?
MOE Library
P2 Thinking Aloud Task: Length (Find the Shortest Path) - Rollout (1.0)
6. Task C
Q1:
 |
ITT1
Your comment
Did you use any method to find the shortest path quickly?
Q2:
Did you change your method when working on Task C?
Yes
No
ITT2
Your comment
Why did you change your method?
MOE Library
P2 Thinking Aloud Task: Length (Find the Shortest Path) - Rollout (1.0)
7. Task D
 |
|
ITT1
Your comment
Did you use any method to find the shortest path quickly?
Q2:
Did you change your method when working on Task D?
Yes
No
ITT2
Your comment
Why did you change your method?
MOE Library
P2 Thinking Aloud Task: Length (Find the Shortest Path) - Rollout (1.0)
8. Notes For Teachers (Optional)
Interactive Inspiration
| Textbook 2A Chapter 3 Length p. 84 | Interactive Designed |
|
|
|
Interactive Overview
The "Find the Shortest Path" interactive is a thoughtfully designed activity that encourages students to engage in logical reasoning, route optimization, and spatial visualization. The task requires students to help a character, Susan, find the shortest route that allows her to visit specified locations.
At its core, this interactive helps develop students’ decision-making skills under constraints. By evaluating and comparing the total distance of different possible routes, students learn to consider multiple variables at once — order of visit, direction, and connection availability. The process mirrors real-life problem-solving situations where careful step-by-step planning is required, such as organizing a set of instructions to complete a task efficiently or planning the sequence of actions in a project. It trains learners to think ahead, anticipate outcomes, and refine their strategies based on logical sequencing.
Feedback From Students
| Question | |||
| Q1: Is the instruction on how to play the Mini-Game clear? | Not Clear: 2 | Somewhat Clear: 16 | Very Clear: 9 |
| Q2: Are the tasks easy to understand? | Not Easy: 2 | Understand Some: 15 | Totally Understand: 10 |
| Q3: Which part of the Mini-Game can be improved or made better? |
Theme: Students want clearer, more straightforward questions with fewer options and better guidance. |
||
| Q4: I enjoyed playing the Mini-Game. | Do Not Enjoy: 2 | Somewhat Enjoy: 12 | Enjoy Very Much: 13 |
| Q5: Which part of the Mini-Game did you enjoy? |
Theme: Students enjoyed the problem-solving and the fun of playing, especially when they succeeded. |
||
| Q6: Which task is the easiest to you? | Task A: 18 Task B: 4 Task C: 1 Task D: 4 |
||
| Q7: Which task is the most difficult to you? | Task A: 2 Task B: 2 Task C: 6 Task D: 17 |
||
| Q8: Why is the task difficult? |
Theme: The main difficulties came from overwhelming options and unclear wording in the tasks. |
||
ITT Analysis
Teachers may also leverage the ITT Analysis tool in SLS, which provides AI-generated overviews to support a deeper understanding of students’ thinking processes
Interactive Activity Data
After completing the interactive activity, students can click the Submit button to view a summary of their activity data.
Example:
Example of a student's activity data:
Using data from the activity, teachers can export the provided data and utilize AI tools, such as ChatGPT/PairChat, to perform further analysis. The following examples illustrate two types of analysis that can be conducted: CAIT and Metacognition.
e21CC - CAIT Analysis
Example:
Critical Thinking Assessment
CAIT 1: Exercises sound reasoning and decision-making
Student demonstrates developing critical thinking skills through his systematic approach to route planning. His ability to persist through 7 attempts in Task A shows reasoning processes, though the multiple incorrect calculations suggest his decision-making could be strengthened. The improvement to only 3 attempts in Task B indicates he can learn from experience and apply better reasoning.
CAIT 2: Uses metacognition to enhance, monitor and regulate thinking
Strong evidence of metacognitive awareness is shown through student's ability to modify his approach between attempts. The dramatic improvement from Task A (7 attempts, 3m 37s) to Task B (3 attempts, 52s) demonstrates he reflected on his learning experience and made effective modifications to his problem-solving strategy.
Adaptive Thinking Assessment
CAIT 3: Assesses different contexts and situations to make connections and draw new insights
Student shows emerging adaptive thinking by recognising that Task B, whilst similar to Task A, required different route combinations. His varied approaches across attempts (changing starting points, route sequences) indicate awareness that different contexts may require different strategies.
CAIT 4: Manages complexities and ambiguities by adjusting perspective and strategies
Evidence of adaptive strategy adjustment is clear in his progression from complex multi-location routes (Attempt 1: 5 locations) to more efficient 3-location solutions (Attempt 7). His willingness to try completely different route sequences shows flexibility in managing the complexity of the navigation problem.
Inventive Thinking Assessment
CAIT 5: Explores possibilities and generates novel and useful ideas
Student demonstrates inventive thinking through his exploration of multiple route possibilities. He generates various combinations of locations and sequences, showing creativity in problem-solving approaches. His routes show both replication of patterns (similar sequences) and modification of existing ideas (changing starting points and sequences).
CAIT 6: Evaluates and refines ideas to formulate novel and useful solutions
His progression shows evaluation and refinement skills. The successful completion of both tasks indicates he can assess which approaches work and refine his strategies accordingly. The significant time reduction between tasks suggests effective evaluation of his problem-solving methods.
Overall CAIT Assessment
Student demonstrates solid foundational skills across all three thinking domains, with particular strength in metacognitive awareness and adaptive strategy adjustment. His persistent approach and clear learning progression indicate good potential for further 21st century competency development in mathematical problem-solving contexts.
Metacognition Analysis
Example:
Metacognition - 3 components
Metacognitive Knowledge
Student demonstrates varying levels of metacognitive knowledge across the different types:
Declarative Knowledge (Knowing What): Student appears to understand the basic task requirements - he knows he needs to visit specific locations and calculate distances. However, his knowledge of the optimal routes and distance calculations seems incomplete initially, as evidenced by the multiple incorrect attempts.
Procedural Knowledge (Knowing How): Student shows developing procedural knowledge. In Task A, he experiments with different route sequences, indicating he understands the process of route planning. His improvement from Task A (7 attempts) to Task B (3 attempts) suggests he's acquiring better procedural strategies for approaching similar problems.
Conditional Knowledge (Knowing When and Why): This appears to be Student weakest area initially. In Task A, he makes several attempts with similar route patterns (attempts 2, 4, and 6 all resulted in 110m), suggesting limited awareness of when to change his strategic approach fundamentally rather than making minor adjustments.
Metacognitive Monitoring
Student demonstrates active monitoring throughout his problem-solving process:
- He consistently tracks his distance calculations and recognises when they're incorrect
- His attempt logs show he's aware of his progress and time spent
- The pattern of attempts suggests he's monitoring his strategies and making adjustments
- However, his monitoring in Task A shows some inefficiency - he repeated similar unsuccessful approaches multiple times before significantly changing his strategy
Metacognitive Regulation
Student's regulatory decisions show both strengths and areas for improvement:
Effective Regulation:
- He persists through multiple attempts rather than giving up
- Shows significant improvement between tasks (Task A: 7 attempts, 3m 37s vs Task B: 3 attempts, 0m 52s)
- Successfully modifies his approach when previous attempts fail
- Makes the decision to continue or change strategies based on feedback
Areas for Improvement:
- In Task A, regulation appears somewhat inefficient - he makes similar attempts (2, 4, 6) before making more substantial strategic changes
- Could benefit from earlier recognition of when a fundamental strategy change is needed rather than minor route adjustments
Overall Metacognitive Development
Student shows clear metacognitive growth between Task A and Task B. His dramatic improvement in efficiency suggests he's learning to better regulate his problem-solving approach and apply knowledge gained from previous attempts. The fact that he didn't attempt Tasks C and D might indicate improved self-awareness about task difficulty or time management, though this would require further investigation to confirm.
His metacognitive profile suggests a learner who benefits from experience and feedback, with particular strength in persistence and monitoring, but with room for improvement in strategic flexibility and early recognition of when fundamental approach changes are needed.
🚦 Blog: Exploring the “Thinking Aloud Road” Simulation for Primary Math
Introduction
Imagine if learning about shortest paths, decision‐making and distance measurement came to life on a virtual road where students travel, think aloud their decisions, and explore how math works in everyday journeys. The Primary Math Thinking Aloud Road Simulation does just that. It’s an interactive tool designed for primary school students to visualize, experiment, and verbalize their mathematical reasoning as they explore travel along roads, distances, and paths.
 |
| demo PrimaryMathThinkingAloudRoadSimulation/ PrimaryMathThinkingAloudRoadSimulation.zip |
 |
| Task A: hint PrimaryMathThinkingAloudRoadSimulation/ PrimaryMathThinkingAloudRoadSimulation.zip |
 |
| Task B: PrimaryMathThinkingAloudRoadSimulation/ PrimaryMathThinkingAloudRoadSimulation.zip |
 |
| Task C PrimaryMathThinkingAloudRoadSimulation/ PrimaryMathThinkingAloudRoadSimulation.zip |
| __Shortest Path:__ Home → Grandmother → Market → Postbox = 20m + 35m + 15m = __70m__ PrimaryMathThinkingAloudRoadSimulation/ PrimaryMathThinkingAloudRoadSimulation.zip |
What Is the Simulation About?
The simulation is housed under “Primary School Math Road → Thinking Aloud Road Simulation”. In it, students are given a road-map environment where they must travel between points, track the “points travelled”, and complete tasks that require them to make decisions about which paths to take. It seems oriented around measuring distance, comparing routes, and thinking aloud—i.e., verbalizing their thought process (“Should I take the shorter road? What obstacles or turns? What’s the total distance?”). The interface has controls like “Check”, “Reset”, etc.—so students can test, reflect, and try again. https://iwant2study.org/lookangejss/math/01_xapi/primaryschoolmathroad/For%20SLS/Primary%20Math%20Thinking%20Aloud%20Road%20Simulation/ OER Physics Singapore
Why “Thinking Aloud” is Powerful
-
Metacognition: Students articulate their reasoning. For instance: Why choose route A over B? What is being minimized (time? distance? turns?). This enhances self‐awareness of their thinking.
-
Decision-Making Skills: They learn to weigh options, compare paths, estimate quantitatively.
-
Mathematical Practices: Concepts like measurement, geometry (shapes of paths, straight vs curved), estimation, addition of segments, perhaps even scaling.
-
Error Learning: Using “Reset” or “Check”, students can test assumptions, recognize mistakes, and adjust strategies.
What Students Learn Through It
| Skill Area | What is Developed |
|---|---|
| Distance & Measurement | Understanding what constitutes “longer” or “shorter” paths; summing distances of segments. |
| Spatial Reasoning | Visualizing routes, turns, curves, possibly altitudes if roads vary. |
| Strategy & Optimization | Choosing among multiple paths, possibly non-obvious shortest paths. |
| Communication | Expressing reasoning, explaining choices, discussing trade-offs. |
| Perseverance | Trying again after mistakes, refining choices. |
How Teachers Can Use This in Class
-
Warm-Up / Think-Pair-Share
-
Present a simple map, ask students to predict the shortest route.
-
Have them discuss in pairs, then try in the simulation.
-
-
Guided Exploration
-
Let students navigate through predefined tasks.
-
Pause frequently to ask: “What made you choose that road? How did you measure your choice?”
-
-
Reflection & Debrief
-
After a few tasks, students share what they did, what worked or didn’t.
-
Teachers can highlight different strategies and show how mistakes are part of learning.
-
-
Extension Tasks
-
Alter the map: change roads, add detours, block some paths.
-
Ask: is the shortest in distance always the fastest or best? (introduce time, turn penalties, etc.)
-
Possible Limitations & How to Mitigate
-
Abstract vs Real-world Context: If roads are unlabelled or “purely geometric”, students may not immediately see real application. Mitigation: relate to actual local roads, map of school area, etc.
-
Only Shortest Path Focus: May give impression that minimization is always best. Teachers can raise trade‐offs (scenic route, safer route, etc.) to broaden thinking.
-
Technical Access: Depends on device, internet quality. Teachers should preview, ensure smooth access.
Conclusion
The Thinking Aloud Road Simulation is more than just another digital tool—it’s a richly interactive experience that blends measurement, strategy, and verbal reasoning. For primary students, it offers an opportunity not only to see what the shortest path is, but to think about thinking—to verbalize, test, adjust, and reflect. When used well, it helps build strong foundations not just in mathematics, but in problem solving, communication, and critical thinking.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/sglearningdesigners POST
MOE Library https://vle.learning.moe.edu.sg/moe-library/module/view/44ebd1ea-9c2f-4d02-9b14-f717439547b6/section/100195729/activity/100195730
P2 Thinking Aloud Task: Length (Find the Shortest Path) - Rollout (1.0) by Dr Loh Mei Yoke and Loo Kang Lawrence Wee
From Talk to Thinking: Scorable “Thinking Aloud” Road Simulation in SLS
We often say we want to make students’ thinking visible. But what if we could also capture, analyse and act on that thinking in almost real time?
This Primary Mathematics “Thinking Aloud” road simulation is a strong example of how e-pedagogy and data analytics can come together meaningfully in the Student Learning Space (SLS).
What makes this powerful?
1. Thinking made visible and scorable
Students do not just give final answers. They explain decisions, justify routes, and reveal misconceptions as they navigate the task. The students are Primary 2 so it is amazing when they figure out the answers demonstrating critical & adaptive thinking skills.
Because responses are structured (demonstration video, task A to task D with ITT to thinking aloud)and scorable (Interactive Response Assistant - Question type) , teachers can now surface patterns in reasoning — not just correctness.
2. Data that informs teaching, not just grading
The interactive generates usable learning data:
- Where students hesitate
- Which strategies they choose
- How they correct themselves
- Common misconceptions across the class
This allows teachers to:
- Identify conceptual gaps early
- Group students responses for targeted support
- Adjust instruction based on real evidence of thinking
- Use student reasoning as discussion material
3. Metacognition built into the design
Students are prompted to reflect on why they chose certain moves.
Over time, this helps them:
- Monitor their own thinking
- Compare strategies
- Develop mathematical reasoning, not just procedural fluency
The data captured becomes a mirror for both student and teacher.
4. Designed for richer exploration
When opened in a full-tab view to, Lim Kim Park was the first educator to tell me it is possible so I went on to develop it, (rather than a small embedded frame), students can interact more freely, test ideas, and revisit decisions — reducing usability friction and encouraging deeper cognitive friction plus engagement.
Why this matters for e-pedagogy
This is not just an interactive. It is a shift from:
- static practice → dynamic reasoning
- answer checking → thinking analysis
- activity completion → learning evidence
When interactive tasks are designed with analytics in mind, they become formative assessment tools that:
- scale across classes
- support teacher decision-making
- strengthen metacognitive habits in students
Looking ahead
As more scorable interactives like this are developed, we move towards an ecosystem where:
- student thinking is visible at scale
- teachers receive actionable insights
- digital tools support real pedagogical moves
This is where e-pedagogy, analytics and classroom practice truly meet.
This is a result of our (CPDD1 and ETD) Senior Specialist Track Research Fund supported by MOE. The students' 21CC can also be inferred and I argue that is it probably one of the stronger ways in SLS today that can access and develop 21CC for future ready citizens for the world.
I look forward to rich discussions on e Pedagogy with interactive Response Assistant - Question type
https://www.learning.moe.edu.sg/teacher-user-guide/author/html5-content-development/
Reference:
https://weelookang.blogspot.com/2026/02/p2-thinking-aloud-task-length-find.html