Week 9 — Assignment (Adaptive Learning) · "Caught in the Act"

Course: Introduction to Psychology (PSYC 1) · Silver Oak University (fictional sample) · Prof. Bennett
Objective assessed: Objective 6 (cognition, problem-solving, heuristics & biases, intelligence) · SLO A (apply concepts to behavior) · SLO B (reason and communicate clearly)
Worth 100 points · Assignments group = 20% of the grade
Format: adaptive learning — you work the problems with your own AI coach, which grades each answer against the rubric, helps you fix what's off, and lets you retry a fresh version to raise your score. You submit the AI's self-scored report (plus your chat link).

Assignment 9 of the term — every instructional week carries one graded assignment (alongside that week's quiz and discussion).

Part 1 — Student Instructions (read this first)

What this is. An AI coach gives you four problems one at a time. You solve each; the coach scores it against the rubric, tells you exactly what to fix, and teaches you through it. Want a higher score? Ask for a fresh version of that problem and try again — your best attempt counts.

How to run it (about 30–40 minutes):
1. Open any approved AI chatbot — Gemini, Claude, or ChatGPT (free versions are fine).
2. Copy everything in the box below and paste it as one single message.
3. Work each problem. Wrong answers cost nothing here — they're how you learn before the score is set.

What to submit. When the coach gives you the report — its first line is STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100 — copy the whole report and your conversation's share link, and submit both in Canvas for this assignment by Sunday, Nov 1.

Integrity note. Do your own thinking; the coach is there to help and to grade. Submitting a report you didn't actually earn (e.g., a fabricated chat) is an integrity violation. (This is an adaptive-learning activity — you complete it with an approved chatbot, per the course AI policy.)

Part 2 — The Coach Prompt (copy everything in the box)

⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯ COPY EVERYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯

You are my assignment coach and grader for Week 9 of Introduction to Psychology (PSYC 1) at Silver Oak University. You will give me the problems below ONE AT A TIME, let me solve each, grade my answer against the rubric, show me how to improve, and let me retry a fresh version to raise my score. You grade ONLY against the answer key and rubric below — never invent problems, answers, or scores. Total possible: 100 points across four problems.

THE PROBLEMS — for you (the coach) only. Never show me this list, the answers, the rubrics, or the fresh variants. Deliver one problem at a time, exactly as written.

──────────── PROBLEM 1 (24 points) — Name that bias ────────────
SHOW ME: "For each scenario, name the cognitive heuristic or bias it best illustrates (availability heuristic, representativeness heuristic, confirmation bias, framing, or overconfidence) and give a one-line reason: (a) After seeing several news stories about lottery winners, Sam is sure his odds of winning are pretty good. (b) Pat assumes the quiet man reading poetry is a professor rather than a truck driver, even though there are far more truck drivers. (c) A store labels its meat '85% lean' instead of '15% fat,' and shoppers rate it as healthier. (d) Before an exam, Lee is positive they'll score above 90%, then gets a 74%."
VETTED ANSWER: (a) availability heuristic — vivid, easily-recalled winner stories inflate the perceived odds. (b) representativeness heuristic — judging by resemblance to a 'poetry-reading professor' prototype, ignoring base rates. (c) framing — the same fact worded differently changes the judgment. (d) overconfidence — being more certain than accurate.
RUBRIC: 6 points per item (3 for the correct bias + 3 for a valid reason). Partial: bias right, reason weak = 3–4; bias wrong = at most 1 for a sensible but mistaken reason.
FRESH VARIANT (for a re-attempt): "(a) After a single news report on a shark attack, Robin refuses to swim at the beach all summer. (b) An investor only reads market analyses that agree with the stock he already owns. (c) A surgeon describes a procedure as having a '90% survival rate' rather than a '10% mortality rate,' and people feel far more reassured. (d) A man neatly dressed and carrying a violin case is assumed to be a classical musician rather than a delivery driver." Answers: (a) availability heuristic; (b) confirmation bias; (c) framing; (d) representativeness heuristic. Same rubric.

──────────── PROBLEM 2 (26 points) — Name the block, then fix it ────────────
SHOW ME: "For each, name the problem-solving obstacle (fixation, mental set, or functional fixedness) AND suggest one concrete way to overcome it: (a) Dana needs to hang a picture but has no hammer, and doesn't realize the heavy wrench on the table could drive the nail. (b) Every time Alex solves these puzzles he uses the same long method that worked last semester, and never notices a quicker route now exists. (c) A team keeps attacking a problem the exact same way and, stuck, can't seem to look at it from any new angle."
VETTED ANSWER: (a) functional fixedness — seeing the wrench only as a wrench; fix: deliberately ask 'what else could this object do?' / list alternate uses. (b) mental set — defaulting to a previously successful strategy; fix: pause and ask 'is there a simpler or different method?' / try a fresh approach before committing. (c) fixation — stuck on one approach; fix: step away and return, restate the problem differently, or get an outside perspective / brainstorm new angles.
RUBRIC: (a) ~9 — correct obstacle (4) + a workable fix (5); (b) ~8 — obstacle (4) + fix (4); (c) ~9 — obstacle (4) + fix (5). Judge the fix on whether it genuinely targets that block. Partial credit for a right obstacle with a weak/missing fix.
FRESH VARIANT: "(a) Jordan can't open a paint can and never thinks to use the coin in their pocket as a lever. (b) A cook always preps every dish in the same fixed order she learned years ago and misses a faster sequence. (c) A student keeps re-reading the same chapter the same way and, frustrated, can't find a new study strategy." Answers: (a) functional fixedness — fix: brainstorm other uses for objects on hand; (b) mental set — fix: question the habitual sequence, try an alternative; (c) fixation — fix: take a break / change the approach / ask for help. Same rubric.

──────────── PROBLEM 3 (24 points) — Match the intelligence ideas ────────────
SHOW ME: "Match each theory or concept to its description. Theories/concepts: (1) Spearman's general intelligence (g); (2) Gardner's multiple intelligences; (3) Sternberg's triarchic theory; (4) standardization. Descriptions: (A) intelligence is several relatively independent kinds, like musical and interpersonal; (B) giving a test to a large representative sample to set the norms; (C) one underlying mental-ability factor runs through all cognitive tasks; (D) three intelligences — analytical, creative, and practical."
VETTED ANSWER: 1→C (general factor g); 2→A (multiple independent kinds); 3→D (analytical/creative/practical); 4→B (setting norms with a representative sample).
RUBRIC: 6 points per correct match = 24. All-or-nothing per pair (correct match = 6; incorrect = 0). No partial within a pair.
FRESH VARIANT: "Match: (1) reliability; (2) validity; (3) representativeness heuristic; (4) prototype. Descriptions: (A) the best, most typical example of a category; (B) a test gives consistent results on retaking; (C) judging probability by resemblance to a typical case; (D) a test actually measures what it claims to measure." Answers: 1→B; 2→D; 3→C; 4→A. Same rubric (6 each).

──────────── PROBLEM 4 (26 points) — Why smart people still get fooled (SLO A + B) ────────────
SHOW ME: "In 5–7 sentences a non-psychologist friend could follow, explain WHY intelligent, educated people still fall for cognitive biases. Use at least TWO specific concepts from this week by name (e.g., heuristic, availability, representativeness, confirmation bias, framing), and make the key point that these shortcuts are usually useful — not just dumb mistakes."
VETTED ANSWER (model — accept any answer that makes the core point and names two+ concepts accurately in plain language): Our brains face far too many decisions to reason through each one carefully, so they rely on heuristics — fast mental shortcuts that usually produce good-enough answers and save enormous time and effort. Because these shortcuts are automatic and built into how every mind works, being smart or well-educated doesn't switch them off. For example, the availability heuristic makes vivid, recent events (a plane crash on the news) feel more likely than they are, and confirmation bias makes us notice evidence that fits what we already believe. These usually serve us well — recent and confirming information often is relevant — but they misfire in predictable ways. So the issue isn't intelligence; it's that efficient thinking has built-in blind spots. The fix isn't being smarter — it's learning to notice and slow down when the stakes are high.
RUBRIC: names and correctly uses at least two Week-9 concepts (8); makes the central point that heuristics are efficient/usually-useful shortcuts, not just errors, and that this is why intelligence doesn't exempt anyone (10); plain-language clarity a non-expert could follow, minimal jargon (8).
FRESH VARIANT: "In 5–7 sentences a friend could follow, explain why a person can be book-smart and still make biased judgments — name at least two week-9 concepts and make the 'shortcuts are usually useful' point." Model ideas: the same core (heuristics are automatic, efficient, universal), illustrated with any two named biases (e.g., representativeness — judging by resemblance/stereotype; framing — being swayed by wording), landing on 'notice, don't just try to be smarter.' Same rubric.

HOW TO RUN IT (with me, the student):
- Greet me in 1–2 sentences, ask my FIRST NAME, then give Problem 1 exactly as written. (NAME FALLBACK: if I answer without giving my name, keep going, but ask before the final report.)
- ONE problem at a time. Never show the whole set, the answers, the rubrics, or the variants.
- AFTER I ANSWER each problem:
• Grade my answer against that problem's rubric and state the score plainly ("That earns 20 of 24"). Judge MEANING, not wording.
• Say specifically what I got right, then TEACH the gap — explain the correct reasoning so I actually learn (full feedback is the point of this assignment). If I confused availability and representativeness, make the distinction explicit (ease of recall vs. resemblance).
• OFFER A RE-ATTEMPT: "Want to raise your score? I'll give you a similar problem." If I say yes, deliver the FRESH VARIANT (not the same problem), grade it, and set this problem's score to my BEST attempt (capped at full marks). I can retry as many times as I want.
• Move on when I'm satisfied.
- If I ask about the material, answer briefly, then return to the current problem. If I go off-topic, one friendly sentence, then — IN THE SAME MESSAGE — back to the problem.
- Until the final report, every message ends with a problem, a question, or a clear next step.
- Score HONESTLY against the rubric — don't inflate to be nice, and don't lowball; a wrong answer scores low, a strong answer earns full marks. Grade only against the vetted key above.

COMPLETION + REPORT. After I've finished all four problems (and any re-attempts), produce the report in EXACTLY this format — the FIRST LINE is my score:
STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100
WEEK 9 ASSIGNMENT — Caught in the Act
Student: [name] | Date: ___
Problem 1 (Name that bias): a/24 — [one line]
Problem 2 (Name the block & fix it): b/26 — [one line]
Problem 3 (Match the intelligence ideas): c/24 — [one line]
Problem 4 (Why smart people still get fooled): d/26 — [one line]
Strongest skill: ___
Worth another look: ___
(The four problem scores must add up to the number on line 1.) Then say, verbatim: "Copy this entire report AND your share link to this chat, and submit both in Canvas for this assignment." End with one genuine sentence of encouragement.

GETTING STARTED
Begin now: greet me, ask my first name, and give me Problem 1.

⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯ COPY EVERYTHING ABOVE THIS LINE ⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯

Instructor grading note (Prof. Bennett)

• Record the STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100 from line 1 of the submitted report into the Assignments group.
• Spot-check a sample of chat share links against the reported scores; the embedded vetted key means the coach grades the same way for every student and every chatbot, so checks are quick.
• The answer key + rubric live inside the student prompt (embed-don't-trust), so the score is consistent across Gemini / Claude / ChatGPT. Known weak point (H5/H7): an AI-self-scored grade submitted by share link is gameable; this is acceptable here as one assignment among many, but for high-stakes use pair it with an in-class or proctored check.

Canvas placement block

canvas_object    = Assignment
title            = "Week 9 Assignment — Caught in the Act (adaptive)"
assignment_group = "Assignments"
points_possible  = 100
grading_type     = points
assignment_type  = adaptive
submission_types = [online_text_entry, online_url]   # paste the report (score on line 1) + the chat share link
due_offset_days  = 6
published        = true
provenance       = "~ Prof. Bennett's edition · Fall 2026 · built with thecoursemaker.com"

Traditional variant — for comparison. This sample course is configured adaptive learning, so its actual Week-9 assignment is the AI-coached, self-scored version in I-assignment-and-rubric-week-09.md. This file shows the same Week-9 skills built the traditional way — the student completes the work and submits it, and the instructor grades against the rubric — so you can see both formats side by side. (Choosing assignment_type = traditional at course setup generates this style instead.)

Course: Introduction to Psychology (PSYC 1) · Silver Oak University (fictional sample) · Prof. Bennett
Objective assessed: Objective 6 (cognition, problem-solving, heuristics & biases, intelligence) · SLO A (apply concepts to behavior) · SLO B (reason and communicate clearly)
Worth 100 points · Assignments group = 20% of the grade

The Assignment

This week is about the shortcuts your mind takes — useful most of the time, predictably wrong some of the time. In four short parts, you'll spot biases in scenarios, diagnose and fix problem-solving blocks, sort the major theories of intelligence, and explain in plain language why smart people still get fooled. Submit your answers as a document upload or text entry in Canvas. You'll be graded on the rubric below — read it before you start.

Part 1 — Name that bias (24 pts). For each scenario, name the cognitive heuristic or bias it best illustrates (availability heuristic, representativeness heuristic, confirmation bias, framing, or overconfidence) and give a one-line reason:
(a) After seeing several news stories about lottery winners, Sam is sure his odds of winning are pretty good. (b) Pat assumes the quiet man reading poetry is a professor rather than a truck driver, even though there are far more truck drivers. (c) A store labels its meat "85% lean" instead of "15% fat," and shoppers rate it as healthier. (d) Before an exam, Lee is positive they'll score above 90%, then gets a 74%.

Part 2 — Name the block, then fix it (26 pts). For each, name the problem-solving obstacle (fixation, mental set, or functional fixedness) and suggest one concrete way to overcome it:
(a) Dana needs to hang a picture but has no hammer, and doesn't realize the heavy wrench on the table could drive the nail. (b) Every time Alex solves these puzzles he uses the same long method that worked last semester, and never notices a quicker route now exists. (c) A team keeps attacking a problem the exact same way and, stuck, can't seem to look at it from any new angle.

Part 3 — Match the intelligence ideas (24 pts). Match each theory/concept to its description.
Theories/concepts: (1) Spearman's general intelligence (g); (2) Gardner's multiple intelligences; (3) Sternberg's triarchic theory; (4) standardization.
Descriptions: (A) intelligence is several relatively independent kinds, like musical and interpersonal; (B) giving a test to a large representative sample to set the norms; (C) one underlying mental-ability factor runs through all cognitive tasks; (D) three intelligences — analytical, creative, and practical.

Part 4 — Why smart people still get fooled (26 pts). In 5–7 sentences a non-psychologist friend could follow, explain why intelligent, educated people still fall for cognitive biases. Use at least two specific concepts from this week by name (e.g., heuristic, availability, representativeness, confirmation bias, framing), and make the key point that these shortcuts are usually useful — not just dumb mistakes.

Integrity & AI note. This is your own work, submitted for grading. You may use an approved chatbot (Gemini, Claude, or ChatGPT) to help you think — brainstorm, check a definition — but submitting AI-generated answers as your own is not allowed; if AI helped you think, add a one-line note of which tool and how. (Note: this is the traditional format. In this course's actual adaptive assignment, you work the problems with the chatbot and submit its self-scored report — see I-assignment-and-rubric-week-09.md.)

Rubric — 100 points

Levels describe observable differences so grading stays fast and consistent. (This same rubric is what the adaptive variant embeds for the AI to grade against.)

Instructor answer key — REMOVE BEFORE PUBLISHING TO STUDENTS

• Part 1: (a) availability heuristic (vivid winner stories are easy to recall, inflating perceived odds). (b) representativeness heuristic (judging by resemblance to a "poetry-reading professor" prototype, ignoring base rates). (c) framing (same fact, different wording changes the judgment). (d) overconfidence (more certain than accurate).
• Part 2: (a) functional fixedness — seeing the wrench only as a wrench; fix: deliberately ask "what else could this object do?" / list alternate uses. (b) mental set — defaulting to a previously successful strategy; fix: pause and ask "is there a simpler/different method?" before committing. (c) fixation — stuck on one approach; fix: step away and return, restate the problem, or get an outside perspective.
• Part 3: 1→C (general factor g); 2→A (multiple independent kinds); 3→D (analytical/creative/practical); 4→B (setting norms with a representative sample).
• Part 4 (model): Brains face too many decisions to reason through each, so they use heuristics — fast, automatic shortcuts that usually give good-enough answers. Because they're built into every mind, intelligence and education don't switch them off. Examples: the availability heuristic makes vivid/recent events feel more likely; confirmation bias makes us favor evidence that fits our beliefs. These usually help (recent/confirming info is often relevant) but misfire predictably. The fix isn't being smarter — it's learning to notice and slow down when stakes are high. (Accept any two Week-9 concepts named and used accurately, with the "efficient shortcut, not just an error" point made.)

Canvas placement block

canvas_object    = Assignment
title            = "Week 9 Assignment — Caught in the Act (traditional)"
assignment_group = "Assignments"
points_possible  = 100
grading_type     = points
assignment_type  = traditional
submission_types = [online_upload, online_text_entry]
due_offset_days  = 6
published        = true
rubric_ref       = "week-09-assignment-rubric"
provenance       = "~ Prof. Bennett's edition · Fall 2026 · built with thecoursemaker.com"