← Back to inquiries
Technology inquiryInquiry 19

Algorithms for patterns

Computational thinking on real inquiry data

What pattern in our inquiry data can an algorithm reveal — and when does it mislead us?

Start investigation

Technology inquiry

Algorithms for patterns

Computational thinking on real inquiry data

Digital Technologies · Computational thinking · Algorithms

Wero

What pattern in our inquiry data can an algorithm reveal — and when does it mislead us?

First step

Define inputs/outputs; write pseudocode; test empty, typical, and edge cases before polishing code.

What you will show

Test-case table with pass/fail evidence and honest failure modes documented.

Local place context

What decision or pattern are you automating — and how will you test fairness?

Digital Technologies · Computational thinking · Algorithms

First step

Define inputs/outputs; write pseudocode; test empty, typical, and edge cases before polishing code.

Expected outcome

Test-case table with pass/fail evidence and honest failure modes documented.

You will design, code, test, and visualise science data — documenting each step so others can trust your process. Whether your algorithm correctly processes a real science dataset and what debugging reveals. Design documents, trace tables, code commits, and visualisation output.

Five ways you could investigate

Pick one to start — or write your own question. The AI mentor supports you gently inside your investigation.

  1. Idea 1

    Sort algorithm fairness

    Does your sort treat equal inputs consistently?

    Start with this question →
  2. Idea 2

    Edge case hunt

    What input breaks your program — and how do you handle it?

    Start with this question →
  3. Idea 3

    Efficiency comparison

    When does a simple loop beat a clever trick for your data size?

    Start with this question →
  4. Idea 4

    Test data design

    Did you test empty, single, and messy inputs on purpose?

    Start with this question →
  5. Idea 5

    Output vs expectation

    Where do actual outputs differ from predicted — why?

    Start with this question →

Five things you could build

Fabrication ideas linked to makerspace tools — 3D print, laser cut, Arduino, data products, and more.

  1. Build 1

    Flowchart poster

    Show algorithm steps tied to your test cases.

    Open in outcome selector →
  2. Build 2

    Test case table

    Publish inputs, expected, actual, pass/fail.

    Open in outcome selector →
  3. Build 3

    Debug log infographic

    Visualise where the program spent time or failed.

    Open in outcome selector →
  4. Build 4

    Engraved desk plaque

    Vinyl-cut team name + challenge title for showcase.

    Open in outcome selector →
  5. Build 5

    Physical sorting demo

    Laser-cut tiles to demonstrate your algorithm live.

    Open in outcome selector →

AI mentor (inside your investigation)

No separate mentor page — support appears in your investigation workspace. It starts gentle: short prompts about your research context, data, and analysis. You or your teacher can turn assistance off for unassisted work, or request more help when you need it. It also guides fabrication choices tied to your evidence.

What you will investigate
You will design, code, test, and visualise science data — documenting each step so others can trust your process.
What you will collect
Commit or version, Test case
What you might make or share
A working script, a trace table