ExoInquiryby Stellimetry

ExoInquiry / eight-week classroom investigation

Students do the thinking.
The software handles the machinery.

A browser-based exoplanet course for classes of 5–20. Students recover a transit, interrogate telescope data, survey a field, and defend a cautious scientific claim....with no prose responses, command line, or software setup. Sessions 7–16 add one required fixed-choice reading of real Python; typing stays optional.

Open the student pathRead the teacher syllabusInspect methods + readiness
8weeks
16sessions
45minutes
0installs

Choose the timetable, not a different course

One curriculum. Two honest slices.

Sixteen sessions is the packet-aligned default. The daily view preserves the same curriculum as forty shorter missions for schools that meet every day.

DEFAULT PACING / PACKET-ALIGNED8 weeks · 16 sessions · 4 phases

The collaborative capstone is Session 16 inside Phase IV....not a separate course.

STUDENTS LEARN TOAsk whether a signal deserves trust
STUDENTS PRODUCEAutomatic scientific evidence records
THEY FINISH BYGiving a 60-second oral defense

Complete pacing sample / Week 1 / five class days

Every day opened up enough to judge the rhythm.

Two days advance the packet’s core sessions. Three days add model work, comparison, and conference practice. Every day still has a mission, saved evidence, and a check; the answer key remains behind teacher access.

DAY 1

A planet you cannot see

45 MIN
5Hook + forecast
8Just-in-time briefing
22Guided investigation
7Team comparison (teacher dashboard, projected)
3Evidence check
Student mission
Compare three ways a distant planet could reveal itself and decide which signal a small telescope can measure.
Evidence saved
A method-to-observable match card and one locked forecast.
Evidence check
Which signal can this class measure directly with a small telescope?
  1. A repeated brightness dip
  2. The planet’s surface
  3. A radio message
DAY 2

Five ways to find another world

45 MIN
5Hook + forecast
8Just-in-time briefing
22Guided investigation
7Team comparison (teacher dashboard, projected)
3Evidence check
Student mission
Sort transit, radial-velocity, direct-imaging, microlensing, and astrometric evidence by what each method actually observes.
Evidence saved
A five-method evidence map with transit selected for the class investigation.
Evidence check
What does the transit method measure?
  1. A temporary loss of starlight
  2. A photograph of the planet’s surface
  3. The star turning off
DAY 3

Build a transit

45 MIN
5Hook + forecast
8Just-in-time briefing
22Guided investigation
7Team comparison (teacher dashboard, projected)
3Evidence check
Student mission
Change planet size and orbital alignment in the visual model, then compare which choice changes depth and which can remove the event entirely.
Evidence saved
A model-setting card paired with the resulting curve shape.
Evidence check
Which change most directly alters transit depth in the model?
  1. Planet-to-star size ratio
  2. Student number
  3. Graph color
DAY 4

Predict the curve

45 MIN
5Hook + forecast
8Just-in-time briefing
22Guided investigation
7Team comparison (teacher dashboard, projected)
3Evidence check
Student mission
Lock a curve forecast before revealing a modeled observing night, then compare the prediction with the measured signal.
Evidence saved
A prediction-versus-observation card with the result stated at the top.
Evidence check
Which shape is transit-like?
  1. A shallow dip that recovers
  2. A permanent fall to zero
  3. A steady brightening
DAY 5

Transit case conference

45 MIN
5Hook + forecast
8Just-in-time briefing
22Guided investigation
7Team comparison (teacher dashboard, projected)
3Evidence check
Student mission
Compare three team claims, challenge the one that reaches beyond its evidence, and select the strongest bounded conclusion.
Evidence saved
A one-tap case verdict and the evidence limits that support it.
Evidence check
What is the strongest responsible claim after one training curve?
  1. A transit-like signal was recovered
  2. A new planet is confirmed
  3. Every future night will match

Four phases / sixteen sessions

One investigation that grows in scientific responsibility.

Sessions are grouped by what students are trying to accomplish. Status labels describe what is genuinely usable today.

PHASE I

Recover a Transit

Available

Learn the signal, plan a night, and recover a known transit in the guided training observatory.

  1. 01Find the transit fingerprint
  2. 02Separate signal from scatter
  3. 03Plan a night that can answer the question
  4. 04What changes when someone else planned the night
PHASE OUTCOMEA complete prediction-to-evidence bundle for a known transit.
PHASE II

Interrogate Real Data

In development

Inspect vetted FITS frames, preserve source identity, and make photometry choices without command-line setup.

  1. 05Read what a FITS frame claims
  2. 06Keep the target through a moving field
  3. 07Measure starlight with an aperture
  4. 08Build a stable comparison ensemble
PHASE OUTCOMEA traceable reduction recipe tied to real-image evidence.
PHASE III

Survey the Field

Pilot testing

Screen archive fields, reject artifacts, test spatial alternatives, and prioritize the next observation.

  1. 09Use the small telescope's wider field
  2. 10Match each archive source to its real job
  3. 11Ask whether the dip belongs to the target
  4. 12Rank what deserves another night
PHASE OUTCOMEA screened, ranked candidate set with visible rejection reasons.
PHASE IV

Vet and Defend a Candidate

Pilot testing

Compare independent reductions, answer a skeptic card, and defend a bounded claim aloud.

  1. 13Pre-register the candidate test
  2. 14Run independent analytical choices
  3. 15Challenge the favored explanation
  4. 16Defend the candidate
PHASE OUTCOMEAn oral evidence board, challenge response, and tap-only defense record.

What a teacher needs

Small requirements. Real facilitation.

  • A current Chromebook, laptop, or tablet browser
  • Two 45-minute meetings per week for eight weeks
  • At least five students; the shared capstone supports twenty
  • A projector or screen share for class comparison
  • A teacher willing to ask questions before explaining answers

Included now

No curriculum scavenger hunt.

  • Sixteen detailed session plans and opening prompts
  • Forty distinct daily mission outlines for expanded pacing
  • Phase I training observatory with safe retries
  • Tap-only prediction, evidence, and confidence checks
  • One required dip-analysis Python reading in Sessions 7–16; four misses apply the stored interpretation so no student is stranded
  • Optional expanded Code Lens with one guarded edit, three ungraded one-line typing checks, a bug check, and Python export
  • Automatic science notebook and online class progress
  • Twenty-role collaborative capstone and teacher dashboard
  • Week 8 oral-defense room with a tap-only rubric

What “defend” means here

No essay hiding inside the scientific defense.

In Session 16, a student selects a bounded claim, three evidence tiles, one serious alternative, one limitation, and the next decisive test. The site assembles those choices into a speaking board. The student then explains the case aloud for 60 seconds while a peer or teacher taps a three-part rubric.

The scientific defense is the connection between claim, evidence, limitation, and next test....not the production of prose. ExoInquiry stores the choices, not the student’s voice.

Open the defense room →