WeSolve+ is built on the opposite assumption, one person working through their own material over weeks. The tool below is the free, silent version of that.
WeSolve+ reads the whole document and writes the questions for you
Upload your PDF, photograph your notebook, or point the camera. WeSolve+ writes questions from that material, explains why each answer is right, reads the chapter back to you as a podcast, and remembers every item you missed until you own it.
The tool below is a small browser-only tool and it is not WeSolve+: paste a few lines and text rules turn them into cards on the spot. The real app, the one that uses AI, is behind the link above.
No room, no timer
This is a browser-only tool, and that is all it isIt splits the text you paste by rule, and nothing else. WeSolve+ is a different thing entirely: it reads your whole PDF with AI, writes the reasoning behind every question, speaks the chapter back to you, and remembers what you missed so it can return it. Try the real app now, free!
This tool uses text rules, not AI, and it has no timer and no score. That is deliberate: a clock changes what is being practised, and this page argues that the change is not always in your favour. Your text stays in the browser and is never sent anywhere.
| Situation | Live round | Solo revision |
|---|---|---|
| Thirty people, one room, ten minutes | Unbeatable | Wrong tool |
| Finding what a class does not know | Seconds | No distribution exists |
| Fixing what you personally missed | Nothing follows you home | That is the whole job |
| Time to think before answering | The clock decides | As long as you need |
| Questions from your own chapter | Somebody must build the set | Read from the file |
| Three weeks later | The round is over | It comes back |
One decision, and everything follows from it
Thirty people answering simultaneously requires a shared clock, and a shared clock requires a time limit, and a time limit invites points for speed. Kahoot's own description of how it works starts from the room, and the rest is a consequence rather than a set of independent features. This is the same family as classroom audience response systems, and it is genuinely good at what it was built for: attention in a room, at a specific minute, with everybody present.
Speed scoring changes what gets practised
Points per second rewards recognition and reading pace, and penalises the person who thinks before answering. Over a term that trains a habit which the exam does not reward, since no paper gives marks for finishing an item in four seconds. This is the visible edge of gamification, which reliably raises participation and does not automatically raise learning. The honest reading is that the timer is doing a real job, holding a room together, and the cost lands on the individual rather than on the session.
What a room gives you that nothing else does
Being watched raises effort on tasks you can already do, an old and well replicated result called social facilitation, and it is much harder to skip a question in public than alone. A live round also surfaces the distribution instantly: if half the room picks the same wrong option, the teacher knows within seconds. No solo product can manufacture either of those, and pretending otherwise would be dishonest. If your problem is a disengaged class, this is the tool.
Where the individual is left behind
The round ends and nothing follows you home. The questions were chosen for the class rather than for the six things you personally keep confusing, nothing returns in three weeks, and the material belongs to whoever built the set. For revision that is the whole difficulty: spacing and a record of your own errors are what move a result, and a live round has neither by design. Again, not a flaw; a different product.
What WeSolve+ does instead
Point it at a document, a photographed page or a camera shot and it returns explained questions, a deck and a short spoken recap from that source. There is no clock, so thinking is free. What you get wrong is set aside and comes back later, which is the part a round cannot do. If you want the social element there is a head to head against a friend, on questions from your own material rather than a general bank. Free to start on the web and on iPhone, counted by file. Figures on pricing.
Use both, in the obvious order
A live round is an excellent way to find out what a class does not know, and a poor way to fix it. The natural sequence is round first, then revision: play to surface the misconceptions, then work on your own on the ones that were yours. Teachers running a class have a fuller version of this argument on the teachers page. Nothing here requires picking a side, and the products barely compete once you notice they are solving different halves.
Sources used on this page
- Kahoot, resmi site
- Kahoot, how it works
- Kahoot pricing
- Kahoot pricing for schools
- Kahoot!
- Audience response
- Synchronous learning
- Social facilitation
- Gamification of learning
- Recognition memory
- Spaced repetition
- Active recall
- Testing effect
- Desirable difficulty
- Cloze test
- Roediger and Karpicke (2006)
- Karpicke and Roediger (2008)
- Cepeda et al. (2006)
- Cepeda et al. (2008)
- Dunlosky et al. (2013)
- What Works Clearinghouse
- The Learning Scientists
- Retrieval Practice
- Anki manual, deck options
- MDN, the details element
- MDN, the textarea element
- W3C, disclosure pattern
- WeSolve+ App Store'da
Is Kahoot good for revision?
It is good at surfacing what a room does not know and poor at fixing it, because nothing follows you home and nothing returns weeks later. Those are the two things revision needs.
Why does the timer matter?
Points per second reward reading speed and recognition, and penalise thinking before answering. The timer earns its place by holding a room together; the cost lands on the individual.
Can WeSolve+ run a classroom game?
No. There is a head to head against a friend, but nothing designed for thirty people answering at once. That is what a live product is for.
What does a live round do that solo study cannot?
Raise effort through being watched, and produce a distribution instantly. Half the room picking the same wrong option is information you cannot generate alone.
Should a teacher use both?
The natural order is round first to surface misconceptions, then individual work on the ones that were yours. They solve different halves rather than competing.
Does the tool on this page have a timer?
No, deliberately. The answer waits until you ask for it, so thinking costs nothing.
Last updated: 2026-08-15