Story Debugging Sprint

Overview

Students finalize their Micro:bit story or game from the mini-unit, then play-test with peers and revise based on specific feedback. The math focus is on using and interpreting fraction-based quantities in game/story prompts and computing how changes affect outcomes (division of fractions).

Learning intentions

• Students will be able to revise a Micro:bit story or game using peer feedback.
• Students will be able to test their program and record what works and what needs improvement.
• Students will be able to interpret and compute quotients of fractions that appear in story/game rules.
• Students will be able to explain the relationship between division and multiplication to justify their fraction answers.

Success criteria

• I can run my Micro:bit program and explain what happens at key steps/levels.
• I can collect feedback from at least two peers and identify at least two concrete changes to make.
• I can compute fraction-division problems that match my story/game rules and describe what the quotient means.
• I can revise my code and demonstrate improvements during a second play-test.

Curriculum links

• Number — division of fractions and solving word problems.
• Math for real-world meaning: absolute value and signed quantities when used in story prompts (CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.6.NS.C.7c, CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.6.NS.C.5) as applicable.
• Coordinate-plane reflections and sign interpretation if a mini “movement” mechanic appears in student projects (CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.6.NS.C.6b).

Lesson structure (45 minutes)

1. 0–5 min · Warm-up and goal check. Teacher displays 1 short fraction story prompt tied to game rules (for example: “2/3 of a cup of yogurt is shared equally into 3/4-cup servings. How many servings?”) and asks students to choose which operation is needed and what the answer represents. Students respond on a mini whiteboard, then share one reason.

2. 5–12 min · Micro:bit “finalize checklist.” Teacher reviews a simple revision checklist: working inputs (buttons/tilt), clear outputs (LED/buzzer), and a “win/lose” or story-completion condition; also remind students to keep a math-reasoning note if their rules involve fractions. Students open their project, quickly run it, and circle 2 issues they will fix today.

3. 12–20 min · Build time: first revision pass. Teacher circulates with targeted prompts: “What is the player supposed to do next?” “What message tells the player they succeeded?” and “Where did feedback last time suggest changes?” Students revise code and update their “math note” only if they need to correct a fraction-based rule.

4. 20–28 min · Fraction quick check (embedded into engineering). Teacher gives 2 fraction-division questions on the board connected to common game mechanics (sharing, grouping, scaling difficulty). Students solve individually, then quickly compare answers with a partner and justify using an equation or an area/part model drawing. Teacher calls on 2–3 students for explanations.

5. 28–36 min · Peer play-test (round 1). Teacher pairs students and assigns roles: “Player” runs the game/story on a Micro:bit simulator or real device if available; “Debugger” records feedback using a sentence frame: “When I pressed ___, I expected ___, but I saw ___.” Students rotate every 4 minutes, aiming for at least 3 feedback items total per partner.

6. 36–43 min · Build time: second revision pass. Teacher sets a focused target: fix at least one feedback item that affects playability and one that affects clarity of instructions/outcomes. Students revise again and add a brief comment in their notes: “I changed ___ because ___.”

7. 43–45 min · Exit demo + exit ticket. Teacher has each student show one improved feature (or run one “level” once). Students complete a 2-item exit ticket: (1) one sentence describing what they changed, and (2) one short fraction-division computation aligned to the day’s prompt.

Resources

• Student Micro:bit devices (or approved simulator + teacher devices if limited hardware)
• Laptops/tablets with the coding environment for Micro:bit
• Printed “finalize checklist” and peer feedback recording sheet
• Mini whiteboards or scrap paper for quick math checks
• Fraction-division practice cards (2 problems for the embedded quick check)
• Timer for play-test rotation
• Optional: LED/buzzer test cards (common behaviors examples)

Assessment

• Formative checks during the warm-up and embedded fraction quick check: students show operation choice and reasoning.
• Peer feedback sheets: teacher scans for specificity (expected vs observed) and at least 3 items.
• Exit ticket: verifies both revision thinking and fraction-division accuracy/interpretation.

Differentiation

• Support: Provide sentence starters for debugging (“I expected… I saw… I think the cause is…”), plus a fraction model reference strip (number line/area/parts) for students who need visual support.
• Support: Offer a “common bug list” (wrong input condition, missing else-case, unclear end state) so beginners can choose likely fixes quickly.
• Extension: Students who finish early can create a second difficulty mode or add a new story event that includes an additional fraction-based rule; they must also compute the correct quotient for that rule.
• EAL/SEN considerations: Allow oral explanations and model one example of fraction division with a visual; accept partially completed math reasoning as long as the quotient meaning is correct.

Extension (optional)

• Students present for 1 minute in small groups: “One play-test problem we found” and “One change we made” plus a final fraction-division explanation for how their rule works.