🎓 Online Education

The classroom workhorse: add teams, rename them by clicking, and hand out points in steps of 1, 5, or 10. Whoever’s ahead gets an orange rule and a LEADING flag, ties are called honestly, and the whole game is saved to the browser so an accidental refresh doesn’t wipe your review session.

Answer checking ignores case, punctuation, and a leading “the”, and each card can list alternate spellings it should accept. The flip is pure CSS: perspective on the scene, rotateY on the card, backface-visibility hidden on each face.

Built for phonics and language practice: a big prompt on the front, a tone cue generated with the Web Audio API, and a set of labeled details on the back. Learners mark themselves right or wrong to advance, ending on a tally screen.

Write your sentences as plain text with asterisks around the target word and the engine does the rest: it builds the dropdowns, pools all the answers together as distractors, and grades the set. Good for vocabulary, terminology, and any place you’d otherwise print a word bank.

Works for history, process stages, or project phases. The rail tracks three states per node — unvisited, visited, and active — and collapses into a horizontally scrolling row of chips on phones.

A close-reading exercise that distinguishes three outcomes after checking: words you correctly found, words you marked in error, and words you missed entirely. Each state uses both color and styling, plus a legend — an accessibility habit worth copying into your own work.

The same asterisk syntax as the cloze activity, but learners physically move words into position. Worth stealing: it handles real drag-and-drop and a tap-select-then-tap-target fallback, so it works just as well on a classroom iPad as on a laptop.

A classification drill for taxonomies, branches, phyla, genres — anything with buckets. Chips mark themselves green or red in place when checked, so learners see exactly which ones they misfiled without losing their other work.

The generator places the longest words first, lets them overlap where letters match, and fills the rest with random letters, so every press of New puzzle gives a genuinely different grid. Drag-to-select accepts words forwards or backwards and only allows true straight lines. Worth stealing for the placement algorithm alone.

The classic find-the-hidden-object activity, solved for people who don’t have artwork to work with: it generates a forest of scattered trees and hides one orange-roofed cabin at a random spot. Hit detection is aspect-ratio aware, so the tolerance stays fair at any screen size. A comment explains how to swap in a real photo.

The capstone: one seamless assessment rather than four activities stapled together. Items lock after checking, learners can page back through their marked answers, and the results screen breaks down exactly what they got right. Add items of any type to the same list and the engine handles the rest.

Click a tile, read the clue aloud, reveal the answer, then award or deduct points for any team with one tap. Tiles retire as they’re played, negative scores are allowed for a bad buzz, and the last tile triggers final standings. Rename the teams by clicking them and add more mid-game.

Twenty-four spaces around a 7×7 board with a control console in the middle: two dice, property groups, Vol Draw chance cards, a Study Hall that costs you a turn, and real bankruptcy rules that put a busted player’s deeds back on the market. Rename the spaces for your own campus or subject and the whole game re-themes itself.

Built to the eight evidence-based rules in the guide below, and the engine enforces them rather than just aspiring to them. Every decision probes the same competency — whether you make your AI use visible before someone asks — so it’s one moment of truth examined three times, not a string of unrelated choices. Nothing is marked right or wrong while you play; you get consequences instead, and the theory waits for the debrief.

The scenario itself is about transparency, not compliance. One professor permits AI and asks for disclosure; another forbids it without defining what counts. You’re stuck at 11pm with a group deadline. The tempting choices are the rationalisations capable students actually use, the worst ending is fully reachable, and in it nothing bad happens to you at all — the cost is paid quietly by a teammate, a professor with an unclear syllabus, and a classmate who stops posting.

Worth stealing: transparency, trust, and belonging are tallied silently and only revealed at the end, because showing meters mid-story turns consequences back into a score. They come back as a temperature reading rather than a grade — cold to warm, plus how much each individual decision added or cost, so you can see what you built each time instead of only where you finished. The context is front-loaded onto the opening page so every screen after it is short and the decisions arrive fast. Illustrations are framed placeholders describing the art that belongs there, so the whole thing is playable before anyone opens a design tool.