The test tank sessions were outside of the classroom in which students were designing and building. This helped us make the test tank sessions private in order to ensure that the students were unaware of their placement in the control or treatment group. Data collection included test tank videos of each group, observations, and semi-structured interviews. We videoed each test tank session and took photographs of each buoy iteration. One of the researchers also took observational field notes of each test tank session. Although learning almost certainly took place in the classroom while students went through the process of building and then modifying their designs, we focused only on their products, which involved their time at the test tank. This focus on product came from the lack of an accepted definition of or way to measure creative process (Amabile 1996) as well as our desire to capture the test tank sessions in as much detail as possible. The semi-structured interviews consisted of several pre-defined questions as well as questions taken from observations of each group. Two researchers were present at the test tank. During treatment group test tank sessions, one of the researchers asked inquiry-based questions based on what happened to each buoy. These questions were designed to encourage students to think and talk with their partners and cue them to issues related to their design. The comparison group test tank sessions went very differently. Both researchers stood in proximity to the tank, smiled, and even chatted a bit about the buoys in general. However, we did not ask the comparison groups inquiry-based questions, show students the Weebles, or encourage their discussion.