RightOn! Overview

I had the opportunity to test the EdTech product inside a real classroom environment. My goal was to observe how students and teachers interacted with our product, observing repeated behavior and measuring these frequencies to uncover product issues.

PROBLEM

Students struggled to engage with math explanations due to dense text and limited interactivity, leading to missed deeper learning opportunities.

SOLUTION

A more interactive learning experience that encouraged students to engage deeper with mathematical concepts.

ROLES

UX Designer
UX Researcher

CONTRIBUTORS

3 UX Designers
1 UX Lead

DURATION

March 2025 - September 2025

Companion Product Model

RightOn! is made up of two apps.

Central, a teacher-facing dashboard for creating or hosting games, and viewing student data.

Play, a student-facing trivia game with two phases.

Phase 1: Students try to answer correctly and then read the correct answer explanation

Phase 2: Students are challenged to pick the trickiest answerand then read the incorrect answer explanation. The objective here is for students to consider common misconceptions and learn from those mistakes.

Initial Classroom Study

RESEARCH METHOD

Moderated Contextual Inquiry

RESEARCH GOALS

  1. Observe students and teachers using RightOn's app for their pedagogical and learning goals

  2. Observe student-teacher learning interactions

Affinity Diagrams for Observed Behaviors

1 teacher, 2 class periods (56 students total)

FINDING #1

Limited Flexibility and Control

Teachers and students lacked the ability to adjust or pause gameplay, making it difficult to support students in real time.

FINDING #2

Text-Heavy Explanations

Lengthy instructions overwhelmed students, often causing them to disengage before interacting meaningfully with the material.

FINDING #3

Classroom Constraints

Physical factors—like shared devices, seating arrangements, and noise levels—impacted students’ ability to fully engage with the app.

Designing For Deeper Interaction

Based on constraints, we will be scoping our redesign to address Text-Heavy Explanations.

Here we can have the most impact for growth while being able to deliver a prototype on time.

Reading explanations take effort

“I don’t want to read all of that.”

“I want to see problems or pictures, not words.”

Students answer without thinking

“I don’t know, I just guessed.”

“I‘m confused, what am I suppose to do?”

Teachers direct student focus

“I pay attention or raise my hand when the teacher leads discussion.”

“I didn’t read the explanation until the teacher pointed it out.”

Creating a Prototype for Validation

Revisiting the Classroom Study

RESEARCH METHOD

Usability Testing & Surveying

RESEARCH GOALS

  1. Assess how students interact with correct and incorrect answer explanations

  2. Validate product design direction

Retesting with the same 56 students, we distributed students into focus groups of 6 students each to get a closer look at their behavior.

We also updated the math trivia question to reduce repeated-testing bias using the same group of students.

Student Feedback

  • "It was easier to read the explanations today because there weren't any long paragraphs."

  • "The pictures and the different colors were helpful."

  • "There's less text in it this time and I like it better."

  • "I liked the reveal answer part. It showed us the mistakes."

  • "I liked how I could see what things might be things to avoid in the future for this type of math problem."

  • "It shows you the mistakes that you made. It's helpful."

57% of students reportedly read the correct explanation from Phase 1.

44% of students reportedly read the incorrect explanations from Phase 2.

67% of students indicated that they understood the explanations.

Next

GPT Ease AI for Content Creators