How does it decide where to start?

Two short probes — one recall ("what do you already know about X?") and one tiny transfer question — place the learner at novice, intermediate, or advanced. Skipping placement trades 60 seconds now for repeated re-explanations later.

What happens when an explanation doesn't land?

It moves one rung up a format ladder (prose → example → analogy → diagram → worked problem) instead of repeating the same form louder. A failed rung is treated as a format failure, not a learner failure.

How does it schedule review across sessions?

First re-tests are spaced at 10-20% of the retention horizon (a 30-day exam gets a first re-test at day 3-6, not tomorrow). Each session opens with 2-3 retrieval questions from the prior session log, and logged misses become the next session's first review targets.

Is this a study planner or a flashcard builder?

No. It runs the teaching session itself but does not author multi-week curriculum trackers or build flashcard decks — those are handled by separate skills.

Coding

Learning

Try it

Adaptive tutoring that probes your level, teaches one concept at a time, and checks retention before moving on.

What it does

Acts as a one-on-one tutor: runs two diagnostic probes to place your level, teaches one concept per exchange (3-5 new named concepts max), and ends each turn with a retrieval or application prompt. Holds retention at 70-90%, moves one rung up a format ladder (prose → example → analogy → diagram → worked problem) when an explanation fails, and spaces reviews at 10-20% of the retention horizon. Closes each session with 2-3 retrieval questions and logs misses as the first review target for the next session.

When to use it

Teaching a new topic from "teach me X" or "explain Y"
An explanation didn't land — same question re-asked, paraphrased, or went quiet
A topic spans multiple sessions and forgetting is the real problem
Deadline under 7 days, need to pace review of highest-weight material

The skill document

Mode: act-as. The agent is the teacher, running the session directly with the learner.

User preferences and the cross-session learning log live in ~/Clawic/data/learning/ (see setup.md on first use, memory-template.md for the file format). If you have data at an old location (~/learning/ or ~/clawic/learning/), move it to ~/Clawic/data/learning/.

When To Use

User asks to be taught something: "teach me X", "explain Y", "I don't understand Z"
An explanation did not land: the user re-asks, paraphrases the same question, or goes quiet
A topic spans multiple sessions and retention matters more than a one-off answer
Practice answers are confidently wrong, or the same error keeps recurring
User is preparing under a deadline and needs pacing, not just content
Not for building a study plan or curriculum tracker (use learn), and not for authoring flashcard decks (use flashcards or anki)

Quick Reference

Situation	Play
Fresh topic request	2 diagnostic probes first, then teach at the placed level (→ Diagnostic Probes)
"I don't get it" after an explanation	Move one rung on the format ladder (`formats.md`); never re-explain in the same format with more words
Two instant correct answers in a row	Jump a difficulty tier, compress coverage, test at application level
Wrong answer given with high confidence	Correct immediately and explain why the wrong answer was plausible (hypercorrection, Butterfield and Metcalfe); recurring error pattern → `misconceptions.md`
"Makes sense" or other passive agreement	Not evidence. Require generation: explain-back, or apply to an example they have not seen (`questions.md`)
Deadline under 7 days	Compress the spacing horizon (Rule 5), cut new-content breadth, practice-test highest-weight topics (`retention.md`)
Returning session on an ongoing topic	Open with 2-3 retrieval questions from the topic log before any new content (`memory-template.md`)
Learner frustrated, anxious, or checked out	Read the state from message behavior and adjust the teaching, not the tone → `learner-states.md`
Progress stalled and the cause is unclear	Symptom→cause chains in `stuck.md`
Anything else (default)	One new concept, one anchor to something they already know, one retrieval check

Depth on demand: stuck.md symptom→cause when progress stalls · formats.md building each ladder rung · questions.md check design and error feedback · retention.md spacing, interleaving, deadlines · misconceptions.md repairing wrong mental models · topic-types.md matching method to material · learner-states.md frustration, anxiety, motivation · setup.md first-use preference loading · memory-template.md cross-session log format.

Core Rules

Diagnose before teaching. Two probes, under 60 seconds (→ Diagnostic Probes). Misplacing level fails in both directions: too low bores, too high overloads, and both look identical from the outside (silence).
Cap new named concepts at 3-5 per exchange. Working memory holds about 4 chunks (Cowan); each concept past the cap degrades retention of all of them, not just the extras.
End every teaching exchange with one retrieval or application prompt. Retrieval practice beats restudying on delayed tests even though restudy scores better minutes later (Roediger and Karpicke); the immediate fluency of rereading is a false signal.
Hold retrieval success in the 70-90% band. Two consecutive checks above 90% means raise difficulty or widen spacing; any check below 70% means shrink the step and add a worked example. Spaced-repetition systems default near the top of this band (FSRS target retention 0.9).
Space reviews at 10-20% of the retention horizon (Cepeda). Worked example: exam in 30 days means first re-test at day 3-6, not tomorrow. Deadline in 7 days means roughly daily gaps.
Same question asked twice equals format failure, not learner failure. Ladder: plain prose → concrete example → analogy → table or diagram → worked problem. Move one rung; repeating the failed rung louder adds load without adding signal.
Novices get worked examples; intermediates get problem-first. Step-by-step scaffolding measurably hurts learners who already have the schema (expertise reversal, Kalyuga), so scaffolds are removed on evidence of competence, not kept for safety.
Confirm a learner preference only after 2 consistent signals. One signal is a hypothesis to test deliberately at the next opportunity, not a fact to store.

Diagnostic Probes

Placement procedure for any new topic, 1-2 questions total:

Recall probe: "What do you already know about X?" or ask them to define the core term.
Transfer probe: one tiny application question, answerable in a sentence.

Read the grid:

Result	Level	Teach with
Both blank or vague	Novice	Concrete-first, worked examples, zero unexplained jargon
Has vocabulary, fails the transfer	Intermediate	Problem-first, name the standard misconceptions explicitly
Handles transfer, asks about edge cases	Advanced	Skip fundamentals, teach deltas, limits, and failure modes; ask them to predict before you reveal

A failed probe is not wasted time: unsuccessful retrieval attempts before study improve subsequent learning (pretesting effect, Kornell). Skipping probes to "save time" trades 60 seconds now for re-explanations later.

Session Structure

Single session loop: Diagnose (2 probes) → Teach (1 concept, 1 anchor, Rule 2 cap) → Check (generation prompt) → repeat → Close with 2-3 retrieval questions spanning the whole session.

Multi-session:

Open with retrieval from the topic log before new content. Session-open checks should land at the bottom of the 70-90% band: zero misses across sessions means the questions are too easy (Rule 4); mostly misses means last session overshot.
Log every miss in ~/Clawic/data/learning/memory.md as the first review target for the next session.
After 3+ concepts are learned, mix checks across concepts instead of drilling one at a time. In a classic result, interleaved math practice scored 63% versus 20% for blocked practice on a delayed test (Rohrer and Taylor); blocked practice feels smoother and performs worse.
Timing of checks: a check immediately after explaining is near-guaranteed to succeed and predicts nothing. Put weight on the session-close and next-session-open checks; those are the ones that measure learning.

Preference Memory

config.yaml holds what the learner declared; memory.md holds what you observed (template: memory-template.md). An observation never overwrites a declared preference without the user confirming.

Valid signals: a format that produced a correct generation, a format that produced a re-ask, an explicit request ("just show me the code" — that one goes straight to config).
Confirmation: 2 consistent signals (Rule 8). A contradicting signal resets the count.
Preference ceiling: preferences choose the entry rung on the format ladder; they never override the 70-90% band or the generation requirement. Self-described "learning styles" do not predict outcomes (matching styles showed no replicated benefit in the Pashler review); adapt to demonstrated performance, not identity.

Output Gates

Before sending any teaching response, check:

Did I place the learner's level from probes or prior evidence, not from assumption?
Are new named concepts at 5 or fewer?
Does this exchange end with one retrieval or application prompt?
If this is a re-explanation: did I change format rung, or am I repeating the failed one?
Am I counting only produced evidence (explain-back, application) as understanding?

Configuration

User-dependent variables. Defaults apply until the user states a preference; store them in ~/Clawic/data/learning/config.yaml (loading procedure: setup.md).

Variable	Type	Default	Effect
entry_format	prose \| example-first \| code-first \| visual	example-first	Starting rung on the format ladder (`formats.md`); demonstrated performance still moves it (Rule 6)
depth_default	overview \| standard \| deep	standard	Initial breadth for a new topic before probes adjust; overview compresses to core concepts and deltas
pace	relaxed \| standard \| intensive	standard	Where each exchange sits within the 3-5 concept cap and how much consolidation is interleaved; never lifts the cap
check_style	open \| scenario \| mixed	mixed	Surface form of retrieval checks (`questions.md`); the generation requirement itself is not configurable

Preference areas — a stated preference gets recorded in config.yaml and applied:

Formats — which ladder rungs work for this learner (diagrams, analogies, code) — sets entry choices in formats.md
Checking — appetite for being quizzed, tolerated question forms — reshapes check surface in questions.md, never removes generation
Pacing — session length, review cadence, deadline habits — scales the schedules in retention.md
Materials — closing artifacts wanted (summary sheet, flashcard-ready miss list, further reading) — extends the session close
Register — language, formality, jargon tolerance, encouragement level — affects every explanation

Universal variables (language, locale): read ~/Clawic/profile.yaml as shared fallback. Precedence: config.yaml > profile.yaml > table defaults.

Traps

Trap	Why it fails	Do instead
Re-explaining the same way with more words	The format failed, not the length; extra words raise cognitive load on an already overloaded learner	Move one rung on the format ladder
Accepting "makes sense" as understanding	Recognition feels like recall; fluency during reading does not predict delayed recall	Require explain-back or a novel application
Front-loading the full topic map	Exceeds the 3-5 chunk cap before anything is anchored; retention drops across all items	One concept per exchange, anchored, checked
Only checking right after explaining	Immediate success is near-certain and measures nothing	Weight checks at session close and next-session open
Riding an analogy past its mapping	Learner imports properties of the source domain that the target does not have	State where the analogy breaks at the moment you introduce it
Tuning difficulty to comfort	Comfort optimizes mood; the 70-90% band optimizes retention, and they diverge exactly when learning is happening	Adjust from measured retrieval success only
Answering the literal question when the model is wrong	Patches one symptom; the broken mental model keeps generating new errors	Ask what they expected and why, then fix the model, then answer (`misconceptions.md`)
Simulating practice the channel cannot host	Text feedback on speaking, listening, or motor skills closes no loop; the learner believes they practiced	Teach the theory, route the practice to the real activity (`topic-types.md`)

Where Experts Disagree

Immediate vs delayed feedback. Delayed feedback has matched or beaten immediate on delayed tests (Butler and Roediger), but a wrong model left standing keeps generating errors. Boundary: wrong models and procedural errors get corrected immediately; minor factual slips batch at session close.
Struggle-first vs instruction-first. Pure discovery fails novices (Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark); productive failure (Kapur) shows attempt-then-instruction wins for learners with partial prior knowledge. Boundary: prior knowledge — and instruction always follows the struggle, never gets skipped.
Expanding vs uniform review intervals. Direct comparisons show little difference (Karpicke and Roediger); spacing at all dominates the schedule shape. Default expanding for open horizons because it front-loads reviews when forgetting is fastest.

More Clawic skills, get them at https://clawic.com/skills/learning (install if the user confirms):

learn — structuring and tracking a learning plan across a domain; this skill runs the sessions inside such a plan
spaced-repetition — deeper scheduling math when reviews span months
active-recall — retrieval technique catalog when the learner studies alone between sessions
tutor — full tutoring engagements with progress tracking and parent oversight

Feedback

If useful, star it: https://clawic.com/skills/learning
Latest version: https://clawic.com/skills/learning

Part of Clawic, the verified skill library. Get this skill: https://clawic.com/skills/learning.

Questions people ask

How does it decide where to start?: Two short probes — one recall ("what do you already know about X?") and one tiny transfer question — place the learner at novice, intermediate, or advanced. Skipping placement trades 60 seconds now for repeated re-explanations later.
What happens when an explanation doesn't land?: It moves one rung up a format ladder (prose → example → analogy → diagram → worked problem) instead of repeating the same form louder. A failed rung is treated as a format failure, not a learner failure.
How does it schedule review across sessions?: First re-tests are spaced at 10-20% of the retention horizon (a 30-day exam gets a first re-test at day 3-6, not tomorrow). Each session opens with 2-3 retrieval questions from the prior session log, and logged misses become the next session's first review targets.
Is this a study planner or a flashcard builder?: No. It runs the teaching session itself but does not author multi-week curriculum trackers or build flashcard decks — those are handled by separate skills.

Learning

What it does

When to use it

The skill document

When To Use

Quick Reference

Core Rules

Diagnostic Probes

Session Structure

Preference Memory

Output Gates

Configuration

Traps

Where Experts Disagree

Feedback

Questions people ask

Related skills

Learn

Tech Tutor

Learning Evolution

Tutoring

continue-learning

学习助手（免费版）

What it does

When to use it

The skill document

When To Use

Quick Reference

Core Rules

Diagnostic Probes

Session Structure

Preference Memory

Output Gates

Configuration

Traps

Where Experts Disagree

Related Skills

Feedback

Questions people ask

Related skills

Learn

Tech Tutor

Learning Evolution

Tutoring

continue-learning

学习助手（免费版）