April 1970. Three astronauts — Lovell, Swigert, Haise — are 200,000 miles from Earth when an oxygen tank explodes. The command module is dying. The only space they can survive in is the tiny lunar module, built for two people for two days. Three need it for four. CO2 is rising toward poisonous levels. The lunar module's air filters are round. The spare filters from the command module are square. They will not fit. Mission control engineers at Houston dump every item the astronauts have aboard onto a table — a sock, plastic bag, cardboard from the flight plan, a hose, duct tape — and tell the team: build a way to fit a square filter into a round hole using only what they already have. Hours, not days.
Objective: When you can't change the parts, change how they fit together.
Parent, read this first. This page shows every question, every option, every score, and the reasoning behind every answer. Your child sees the same questions and options — but without the parent notes in red, without the tier labels, and with the four options shuffled into a different order each time. They have to find the strongest answer using only their own thinking. After they pick, they see the rationale for every option (including the ones they didn't pick), which is where the learning happens. This page is the version YOU see so you know exactly what the program is teaching.
Educational thinking practice, not advice. Lessons sometimes touch real-life topics. The scoring evaluates reasoning quality — not the right thing to do in a specific real situation. If a child may be in distress, contact a qualified professional or call/text 988 in the U.S.
Decision 1 of 6 · Tests reasoning
What this decision is measuring: Tests evidence weighing and cause-and-effect tracing. The frontal-lobe analytical skill every other one builds on.
Why did engineers dump out only items the astronauts already have on the spacecraft, instead of designing the perfect adapter?
Strongest3 ptsBecause nothing new can be sent into space mid-flight — any solution must use materials already aboard, or it doesn't exist.
Why this is the strongest answer: The real physical constraint defined the solution space. The constraint isn't a teaching tool, it's the entire problem
Strong2 ptsEngineers wanted to test the team's creativity for fun, like a puzzle challenge. Watching smart people scramble for clever fixes is honestly more interesting than just shipping up the right part.
Why this is strong but not strongest: Creativity was a side effect that emerged from the constraint, not the goal of the exercise; survival was the actual target, with cleverness as the byproduct of having no other path
Partial1 ptsThere wasn't enough time to ship the right parts up to them, and rockets take days to launch. The astronauts would be dead before any rescue cargo cleared the launch pad.
Why this is only partial: 'shipping' implies it could be done slowly — it can't be done at all in a 200,000-mile mid-flight emergency
Weak0 ptsThe space agency was trying to save money on emergency parts since launching extra cargo costs a fortune. Building from junk on hand keeps the rescue budget low.
Why this is weak (most kids' fast-answer). Cost was nothing compared to three lives in immediate danger; nobody at NASA was checking spreadsheets while astronauts suffocated, so this wasn't a budget decision in any meaningful sense
Decision 2 of 6 · Tests judgment
What this decision is measuring: Tests impulse control under pressure and risk evaluation before action. The 'should I really do this?' muscle.
Should the crew stay crammed into the lunar module and adapt the wrong filters, or switch back to the damaged command module to use the right ones?
Strongest3 ptsStay in the lunar module and adapt the filters — the command module has no working power, oxygen, or heat to support life.
Why this is the strongest answer: The command module is functionally dead; staying and adapting is the only option that keeps three people alive
Strong2 ptsSwitch back to the command module since the filters there fit perfectly. The wrong filters in the lunar module were never going to work, and matching parts is the obvious move.
Why this is strong but not strongest: The right filters in a dead module don't help anyone; if the command module has no working power or heat, swapping into it just kills the crew faster than the CO2 would
Partial1 ptsTake turns breathing through the one working filter so two people can rest while one cycles fresh air. Rotating shifts spreads out the CO2 risk across the crew.
Why this is only partial: Half-solutions in a closed atmosphere only delay the poisoning rather than prevent it; the CO2 builds back up regardless of who's breathing through which filter at any given moment
Weak0 ptsHope CO2 levels stop rising on their own without intervention. Maybe the leak slows, maybe the gas vents somewhere, and panicking about it just wastes oxygen anyway.
Why this is weak (most kids' fast-answer). Hope without action against rising CO2 ends in three deaths; the gas doesn't notice optimism, and waiting passively while levels climb is the one option guaranteed to fail
Decision 3 of 6 · Tests pattern recognition
What this decision is measuring: Tests cross-domain analogies and noticing what's 'off.' The fluid-reasoning skill IQ tests measure.
What pattern in problem-solving saved Apollo 13, and applies to most engineering crises?
Strongest3 ptsAdapt what you have — don't try to replace it. When parts can't change, change how they fit together.
Why this is the strongest answer: This is the core lesson NASA still teaches — constraint-based problem solving uses what exists rather than wishing for what doesn't
Strong2 ptsAlways use the simplest tool available, regardless of context. Complicated solutions break more often than basic ones, so reach for the duct tape before anything fancy every time.
Why this is strong but not strongest: Simplicity matters and often helps under pressure, but isn't the core principle here; the actual lesson is adaptation — using what exists rather than reaching for what's simplest in theory
Partial1 ptsTrust the original design and wait for it to work itself out. Engineers built the spacecraft with redundancy, so the systems will probably stabilize if you give them time.
Why this is only partial: The original design had already failed; trusting it was no longer an option
Weak0 ptsWait for a smarter person to come along and solve it. Genius shows up under pressure, and crowding the room with regular engineers just slows the real expert down.
Why this is weak (most kids' fast-answer). No smarter person was coming; the team in the room was the team that had to solve it
Decision 4 of 6 · Tests problem solving
What this decision is measuring: Tests divergent thinking and iterating after failure. The creativity circuit — making, not consuming.
What was the smartest first move for the engineers on the ground, with hours to invent a fix?
Strongest3 ptsLay out the exact same items the astronauts have aboard, and test combinations physically until something works.
Why this is the strongest answer: Matching the constraint exactly is the only way to test a real solution — anything else produces a fix that won't work in space
Strong2 ptsTell the astronauts to breathe shallowly to slow CO2 buildup while engineers think. Buying time with calmer breathing keeps everyone alive long enough to find a real fix.
Why this is strong but not strongest: Shallow breathing buys a handful of minutes, not the hours required for a real fix; it's a stopgap that doesn't address the underlying filter problem the engineers actually had to solve
Partial1 ptsHave one expert engineer guess at a solution alone in a quiet room. Big rooms full of people just argue, and the smartest person works fastest without distractions slowing the thinking.
Why this is only partial: Solo guessing rejects the parallel-team advantage that real-time crises depend on; one engineer alone can't iterate fast enough when multiple subsystems need testing simultaneously against a hard deadline
Weak0 ptsConcede and prepare the families for the worst. The math is brutal and pretending you can fix this will just make the eventual phone call to relatives even more painful.
Why this is weak (most kids' fast-answer). Surrender at this stage with three lives at stake is never the right move
Decision 5 of 6 · Tests emotional intelligence
What this decision is measuring: Tests reading tone and intent before reacting. Self-regulation under stress.
The crew is cold, exhausted, scared, and 200,000 miles from home. How should mission control communicate with them through the rescue?
Strongest3 ptsCalm voice, simple step-by-step instructions, brief reassurance — fear and complexity together produce mistakes.
Why this is the strongest answer: Cognitive load research is unambiguous — fear plus complex instructions produces errors. Calm plus simple is the only mix that works
Strong2 ptsCheerful jokes to keep their spirits up despite the danger. Laughing in the dark beats panicking, and a few good one-liners from Houston might be the only thing the crew remembers later.
Why this is strong but not strongest: Cheerful jokes misread the moment entirely; the crew needs precise step-by-step help to execute delicate procedures, and humor at the wrong time reads as deflection rather than support
Partial1 ptsStrict, short commands without explanation to maintain discipline. Astronauts are trained military pilots, so cutting the chatter and giving direct orders keeps the chain of command tight.
Why this is only partial: Strict commands save seconds and cost morale and trust; the crew has to perform delicate steps under stress
Weak0 ptsHonest panic, so they understand exactly how serious this is. They deserve the truth about how bad it looks, even if hearing it from Houston makes them lose it.
Why this is weak (most kids' fast-answer). Panic from mission control would crush the will of three exhausted people whose only lifeline is the voice on the radio
Decision 6 of 6 · Tests decision quality
What this decision is measuring: Tests outcome forecasting and tradeoff comparison. The integration skill that uses the other five.
Why is the Apollo 13 rescue still studied as one of the great decisions in engineering 50 years later?
Strongest3 ptsLimited materials plus tight time plus full teamwork plus calm-under-pressure creativity all worked together — the rare case where every quality of a great decision lined up.
Why this is the strongest answer: Great decisions integrate constraint-recognition, teamwork, communication, and creativity. Apollo 13 hit all four
Strong2 ptsThe duct tape happened to hold; mostly luck. A different roll, a slightly worse seal, and the whole thing comes apart — they got fortunate and people remember the lucky ones.
Why this is strong but not strongest: The tape held because the underlying design was sound and tested against the actual constraints, not because of luck; calling it lucky misses the disciplined engineering that made it work
Partial1 ptsTom Hanks made a famous movie about it later, and Hollywood is what made the story stick around. Without the film, nobody would still be talking about a 1970 mission.
Why this is only partial: Fame from a Hollywood movie is a side effect of an already-great decision, not a measure of decision quality; the rescue would still be studied even if Tom Hanks had never heard of it
Weak0 ptsNobody died, so it must have been a good decision. The astronauts came home alive and that's the only standard that actually matters when you're judging a rescue.
Why this is weak (most kids' fast-answer). Outcome alone doesn't validate process — many good decisions fail and many bad ones succeed; the rescue was good independent of the outcome
What happens after your child completes this lesson. The 6 decisions roll into their monthly skill profile — one decision per skill, scored on a 0–3 scale. You'll see them on the calendar (today's square turns green if they scored 80%+ across all 6). The monthly report calls out one decision worth talking about as a strength and one as a growth area, with the exact prompt and what they picked. You'll also get 3 conversation prompts to use at the dinner table that week.
We use only strictly-necessary cookies to keep you signed in and to process payments. No advertising, no tracking. Cookie Policy.