Category: Depth of Knowledge

Posted on

Cross-presentation

Cross-presentation

Victoria Ereskina

Architecture

BTech3

Activity Description: Provide a brief description of the activity

Upon completion of research and design, students are to comment on, grade, and occasionally present one another's' work.

Learning Goals: What do you aim to achieve with this activity?

In the field of architecture, engineering, building physics, and construction, the work done by someone in the office is always part of a set of other drawings, specifications, or other deliverables. These are presented to stakeholders and colleagues by just one or a small handful of project representatives that usually haven't completed all of the work on the page.
This is radically different from the studio and college environment when work presented is always done by the presenter or someone who is co-presenting shared work together.

The activity aims to point out that work bust speak for itself. Drawings are a form of communication. There are symbols, colors, line weights, dimensional convention, layout, sequence, orientation of views, progressive scale, tabulation, annotation, and information strategically omitted for the sake of clarity.
When these conventions aren't followed, and the person who prepared the work isn't there to clarify questions, it becomes obviously a struggle to communicate the design and tectonics of the scope of constructed work.
Presenters , in turn, learn to take responsibility for the terminology they wield to identify parts of a stair, steel assembly, curtain wall, rainscreen, or full building.

Timing: At what point in the lesson or semester do you use this activity? How much classroom time do you devote to it? How much out-of-class time is expected?

Between 15 and 40 minutes is enough for this. Presentations of work on Miro happened in the beginning of class. Longer presentations, up to 1 hour, would happen when the final iteration of the work would be due.

Logistics: What preparation is needed for this activity? What instructions do you give students? Is the activity low-stakes, high-stakes, or something else?

The activity is low-stakes because the work on the page speaks for itself and is the actual object graded in the end. But presenting it means that students must communicate their work to one another in advance, as they would have to do in their future careers in this industry, no matter the specialization.

Assessment: How do you assess this activity? What assessment measures do you use? Do you use a VALUE rubric? If not, how did you develop your rubric? Is your course part of the college-wide general education assessment initiative?

The activity is assessed based on both the work presented and the student presenting the work. Articulation and knowledge of the building components on the part of the presenter was analogous to the lineweights, drawing organization, clarity of geometry, and technical correctness of the work being presented.

Reflection: How well did this activity work in your classroom? Would you repeat it? Why or why not? What challenges did you encounter, and how did you address them? What, if anything, would you change? What did students seem to enjoy about the activity?

I would say that the challenge was shyness and punctuality. Students started seeing what they would want their classmates' work to look like for it to be clear and internalized the importance of those visual elements for their future work. I would repeat this assignment.

Additional Information: Please share any additional comments and further documentation of the activity – e.g. assignment instructions, rubrics, examples of student work, etc. These can be links to pages or posts on the OpenLab.

https://miro.com/app/board/uXjVGKBSa6I=/

Please share a helpful link to a pages or post on the OpenLab

Posted on

Mystery Pastry Reading Project

Mystery Pastry Reading Project

Brigitte Malivert

Hospitality Management

HMGT 1204

Activity Description: Provide a brief description of the activity

The Mystery Pastry Reading Project is a two-part reading comprehension and critical thinking activity that replaces one of three unit quizzes in the HMGT 1204. Part I is an in-class, closed-note quiz in which students receive five anonymized pastry passages, each describing a product from a curated list (eg. Napoleon, Eclair, Cream Puff, Palmier, Croissant), and must identify each product through close reading and textual evidence. Part II is an out-of-class assignment in which each student creates a single PPT slide for their individually assigned final presentation product, embedding clues through a narrative passage, ingredient list, tools list, and production timeline without naming the product. Part II connects directly to the final presentation: students are already researching their assigned product, and the slide requires them to translate that research into precise descriptive writing. The activity culminates in a class reveal event during the last session before presentations, in which slides are displayed in randomized order, the class guesses together, and the sequence of correct identifications sets the presentation order.

Learning Goals: What do you aim to achieve with this activity?

This activity is designed to develop and assess the following competencies:
• Students will demonstrate close reading skills by identifying key details, drawing evidence-based conclusions, and distinguishing relevant information from supporting context in professional culinary texts.
• Students will apply discipline-specific vocabulary and product knowledge to decode and produce written descriptions of pastry items.
• Students will compare and contrast technical characteristics of multiple pastry products, including ingredient composition, equipment requirements, and production logic.
• Students will practice professional writing by composing a structured, technically accurate mystery passage that integrates culinary terminology, process description, and sensory language.
• Students will connect reading comprehension skills to their ongoing product research, reinforcing the relationship between reading, writing, and practical knowledge in a professional culinary context.
• Students will engage in peer learning through a structured class activity that rewards precise writing and attentive reading.

Timing: At what point in the lesson or semester do you use this activity? How much classroom time do you devote to it? How much out-of-class time is expected?

This activity is best placed near the end of the semester, after students have had sufficient exposure to foundational pastry products and techniques and have received their final presentation product assignments. Ideal placement is Week 12 or 13, when students have some familiarity with the products on the mystery list but may not yet have made all of them.

Part I in-class time: One class session of 45 minutes. Students receive the five passages and the sample passage for orientation, complete their written responses individually, and submit before leaving. No outside research is permitted. A brief debrief discussion of the sample passage can open the session before timed work begins.

Part II out-of-class time: Students should plan for two to three hours outside of class. This includes reviewing their existing product research, drafting the narrative passage, assembling the ingredient list and tools list, building the production timeline, and laying out the slide. Because Part II draws on research already underway for the final presentation, the additional research burden is minimal.

Presentation: Class session post final exam, dedicated to displaying and guessing slides as a group. The instructor randomizes the slide order before class. Each slide is displayed for approximately five to eight minutes of reading and discussion before the class commits to an identification. The sequence of correct identifications determines presentation order for the following session, which creates genuine engagement with each slide.

Logistics: What preparation is needed for this activity? What instructions do you give students? Is the activity low-stakes, high-stakes, or something else?

Preparation for Part I requires the instructor to compose five mystery passages in advance, one for each product on the list. Passages should be written so that no single passage is significantly easier or harder to decode than the others. Each passage should contain at least three strong, product-specific clues distributed across the narrative, ingredient list, and tools list. The sample croissant passage included in this document is provided to orient students to the format and should not be used as one of the five graded passages.

Part I is administered as a closed-note, in-class quiz. Students will have to review the semester's production thus allowing them to also prepare for the final exam. Students receive the passage packet and a separate response sheet. Annotating the passages is encouraged. Response sheets are collected at the end of the session. Since students must write their own evidence-based responses citing specific language from the passages, the analysis requirement substantially limits the value of guessing or sharing answers.

For Part II, each student's assigned product is the same product they are researching for their final presentation, so no new product assignment is needed. Students submit their slide to Brightspace before the reveal session. The instructor collects all submissions, removes any accidentally included product names from file names, randomizes the order, and prepares a single display deck for the reveal session. Keeping the product names out of file names is important for maintaining the game format.

For the reveal event, the instructor tracks guesses on the board. A simple point tally (one point per correct class identification) can be kept as a group score, or individual students whose slides are correctly guessed can receive a small bonus point as recognition for clear writing. The presentation order for the final session is announced at the end of the reveal event.

This is a medium-to-high-stakes assignment. It replaces a unit quiz and therefore carries real grade weight. Part II is also preparation for the final presentation, making it doubly consequential.

Assessment: How do you assess this activity? What assessment measures do you use? Do you use a VALUE rubric? If not, how did you develop your rubric? Is your course part of the college-wide general education assessment initiative?

This activity is assessed using the modified AAC&U VALUE Rubric for Reading included in this document, which evaluates four dimensions: Comprehension, Context, Analysis, and Interpretation. The rubric applies to both the Part I written responses and the Part II slide narrative. A point-based grading breakdown is provided in the document. Part I accounts for 50 points total: 20 for correct identification across all five passages and 30 for the quality of textual evidence and explanation. Part II accounts for 50 points distributed across narrative quality and clue integration (20), ingredient and tools accuracy (15), timeline realism (10), and slide readability with all four components present (5).

The rubric was adapted from the Association of American Colleges and Universities VALUE rubric framework to reflect the discipline-specific reading demands of a culinary and hospitality program. The original rubric was modified to address the inferential and comparative reading required when working with professional culinary texts, including ingredient lists, process descriptions, and production timelines.

This course participates in the college-wide general education assessment initiative. The reading rubric used here is aligned with the college's information literacy and communication general education outcomes and may be submitted as part of departmental assessment reporting.

Reflection: How well did this activity work in your classroom? Would you repeat it? Why or why not? What challenges did you encounter, and how did you address them? What, if anything, would you change? What did students seem to enjoy about the activity?

This activity was designed in response to two related observations: students in the pastry sequence often had difficulty extracting and applying information from professional culinary texts, and the standard unit quiz format did not give students a meaningful way to connect reading skills to the hands-on and research work they were already doing. Replacing the quiz with this two-part activity addressed both issues by making the reading task concrete, discipline-specific, and consequential in more than one direction. This will be officially implemented in the course in Fall of 2026.

Additional Information: Please share any additional comments and further documentation of the activity – e.g. assignment instructions, rubrics, examples of student work, etc. These can be links to pages or posts on the OpenLab.

Please share a helpful link to a pages or post on the OpenLab

Posted on

Term-Long Case Report

Term-Long Case Report

Daniel DeBonis

New York City College of Technology

PSY 1101

Activity Description: Provide a brief description of the activity

A case study is an in-depth, detailed investigation into a single person, small group, or specific event. Choose ONE of the following options:

1. Create a FICTIONAL person and tell me a bit about them — their age, where they are from, what some of their family and friends are like, and what their general vibe is.

2. Find a small group (3–10 people) from history that you find interesting. Tell me a bit about the group members and what this group does. This group can be anything: a music group, a small sports team, a cult, etc.

3. Choose a specific event from history and tell me about the event. What happened? Who was involved? Who was impacted? Is this event seen as positive, negative, or are there shades of gray? Examples include: the COVID-19 pandemic, a music festival, the Great Depression, Woodstock, etc.

Each week of the term, students will apply the concept discussed in that week's chapter to their topic of choice. At the end of the term, the students will combine the writings from each week to create one, comprehensive case study.

Learning Goals: What do you aim to achieve with this activity?

Creative Thinking. By tying the case study to a topic that the student finds interesting, my hope is that creativity can take center stage. Half of the assignments are informal, allowing students to use their voice in connecting their topic with course content.

Timing: At what point in the lesson or semester do you use this activity? How much classroom time do you devote to it? How much out-of-class time is expected?

This project spans the entire semester and 1-3 hours each week will likely be dedicated to this project outside of class.

Logistics: What preparation is needed for this activity? What instructions do you give students? Is the activity low-stakes, high-stakes, or something else?

Each weekly writing assignment is worth 6% of their total grade, and the final case study is worth 16%. This makes each assignment low-stakes, while allowing room for experimentation and creativity. The final case study is ultimately the high-stakes assignment. Each week, detailed instructions are given regarding what is to be written and the style in which to do so.

Assessment: How do you assess this activity? What assessment measures do you use? Do you use a VALUE rubric? If not, how did you develop your rubric? Is your course part of the college-wide general education assessment initiative?

Each activity is graded on a rubric, with 2 points being dedicated to quality of course information, 2 points being dedicated to the intersection of course information and the student's topic, and 2 points dedicated to meeting the requirements of the assignment (word count, formatting, etc.). The specifics of this vary from assignment to assignment, and each has it's own specific rubric.

Reflection: How well did this activity work in your classroom? Would you repeat it? Why or why not? What challenges did you encounter, and how did you address them? What, if anything, would you change? What did students seem to enjoy about the activity?

I didn't implement this activity in Spring 2026, but spent the term preparing it. I look forward to implementing it in the Fall 2026. The main challenge I predict is student's relating the prompts to their specific topic. My plan to remedy this challenge is through open and frequent communication. My hope is that students enjoy the creative and iterative nature of the activity.

Additional Information: Please share any additional comments and further documentation of the activity – e.g. assignment instructions, rubrics, examples of student work, etc. These can be links to pages or posts on the OpenLab.

Final Case Study Assignment Prompt:

Write a 6–10 page case study on the subject you have been investigating all term. Your paper should be organized as follows:

Introduction: Briefly introduce your subject and explain why it is worth studying. (Revised and expanded from Week 1)

Background & Context: Developmental, historical, and situational context. (Drawing from Weeks 8, 9)

Biological Factors: Neurological, genetic, and physiological dimensions. (From Week 3)

Psychological Factors: Learning, cognition, memory, emotion, motivation, and personality. (From Weeks 5, 6, 7, 9, 10)

Social & Environmental Influences: Social psychology, organizational context, and health. (From Weeks 11, 12, 13)

Clinical Picture: Psychological disorders, DSM-5 criteria, and diagnostic considerations. (From Week 14)

Treatment & Interventions: What evidence-based treatments or interventions are relevant? What would you recommend, and why?

Conclusion: What did you learn? What questions remain? What was most surprising or meaningful?

References: Minimum 6 peer-reviewed sources, APA format.

Please share a helpful link to a pages or post on the OpenLab

Posted on

Creating and Journalizing Accounting Transactions

Creating and Journalizing Accounting Transactions

Professor Ionie Pierce

Business

Principles of Accounting 1

Activity Description: Provide a brief description of the activity

Create a service company and integrate what you have learned in class:
Create transactions for your company, include different types of transactions
Journalize your transactions
Post the accounts to the ledger
Prepare unadjusted trial balance
Create and journalize adjustments
Prepare adjusted trial balance
Prepare financial statements
Prepare closing entries
Prepare post-closing trial balance.
You will be asked to present your work to the class

Learning Goals: What do you aim to achieve with this activity?

– Develop a clear understanding of the accounting cycle, from initial journal entry to the preparation of financial statements.
– Build skills to prepare accurate and complete financial records, ensuring compliance with accounting principles.
– Understand how accounting entries affect the overall financial health of an organization and the preparation of financial reports.

– Gain the ability to communicate financial data effectively, using proper accounting terminology and methods.

Timing: At what point in the lesson or semester do you use this activity? How much classroom time do you devote to it? How much out-of-class time is expected?

The activity is done towards the end of the semester. Seeing that the goal of the activity is to test students' knowledge of their understanding of what they learn, not much in-class activity is done unless students have questions. Students are expected to devote as much out-of-class time as required to complete the project. After completion, students will do a presentation.

Logistics: What preparation is needed for this activity? What instructions do you give students? Is the activity low-stakes, high-stakes, or something else?

To effectively perform the activities of journalizing, posting, adjusting entries, and closing entries in accounting, adequate preparation is crucial. The preparation needed for each task are:
1. In preparation for writing journal entries, students must understand the transaction. They must analyze each business transaction thoroughly to determine which accounts are affected and whether they should be debited or credited. And whether the transaction involves an asset, liability, equity, revenue, or expense account, as each has different rules for debiting and crediting.
2. In preparation for journalizing entries, the general ledger must be set up and it must be organized with individual accounts for each asset, liability, equity, revenue, and expense category. The debit and credit amounts for each journal entry, as well as the accounts involved must be double-check, to make sure that everything balances correctly.
3. In preparation for posting entries you have to make sure you know how to transfer amounts from the journal to the ledger while maintaining the correct debit/credit balance. And all journal entries must be posted to the ledger in a timely manner to ensure that the trial balance is accurate and up to date.
4. In preparation for adjusting entries you must look at the current trial balance to identify accounts that may require adjustments for example, accounts like prepaid expenses, unearned revenue, accrued expenses. And make sure you can differentiate between accruals, which are revenues and expenses that have been earned/incurred but not yet recorded and deferrals which are transactions where money was received or paid in advance of actual recognition.
5. In preparation for closing entries, temporary accounts need to be identified, because temporary accounts need to be closed at the end of the accounting period. These typically include revenues, expenses, and drawings/dividends accounts. Revenue accounts such as sales, service revenue, etc., and expense accounts such as salaries, utilities, etc. need to be transferred to an income summary account. And understand how the net income or loss from the income summary will affect the retained earnings account. Then transfer dividends/drawings, if applicable to retained earnings/Owner's Equity. After performing closing entries, you must confirm that the temporary accounts which are revenues, expenses, dividends/drawings have been reduced to zero, and the balances have been transferred to retained earnings/owner's equity.
The activity is high-stakes because it is used as a major component of the final grade, in which students' performance is critically evaluated.

Assessment: How do you assess this activity? What assessment measures do you use? Do you use a VALUE rubric? If not, how did you develop your rubric? Is your course part of the college-wide general education assessment initiative?

The VALUE Rubric helps to assess general education outcomes. It is structured to assess student work on a range of criteria using levels of performance. The VALUE Rubric can be adapted to evaluate accounting tasks, especially in areas like critical thinking, problem-solving, and quantitative literacy. The VALUE rubrics in accounting activities include
Criteria for Assessment and Levels of Performance. The criteria for assessment includes Knowledge of Accounting Concepts, Problem Solving, Application of Skills, and Accuracy of Work. The Levels of Performance includes Capstone/Excellent, Milestones /Proficient, Benchmark/Basic and Beginning/Needs Improvement.
I am not aware that the course is part of the college-wide general education assessment initiative.

Reflection: How well did this activity work in your classroom? Would you repeat it? Why or why not? What challenges did you encounter, and how did you address them? What, if anything, would you change? What did students seem to enjoy about the activity?

This activity works well in my class. Students were able to do the work and present it with knowledge that they have grasp the concepts taught in class. Yes, I will repeat this in my class next semester because it helps to reinforce the concepts taught. I did not encounter any challenge. What students need clarification on, I explained it to them. Students did well, therefore, I would not make any changes. Students were able to prepare their work and present it so they were glad they understand the concepts not only to put it on paper, but also to present it.

Additional Information: Please share any additional comments and further documentation of the activity – e.g. assignment instructions, rubrics, examples of student work, etc. These can be links to pages or posts on the OpenLab.

Have example of a rubric but do not know how to attach it or create a link.

Please share a helpful link to a pages or post on the OpenLab

Posted on

Finding and Feeding Curiosity: When Students Drive Their Own Learning

Finding and Feeding Curiosity: When Students Drive Their Own Learning

Sergio Belich

Computer Systems Technology / NYC College of Technology

Web Programming I

Activity Description: Provide a brief description of the activity

In this collaborative research activity, students work in small groups (3-5 students per row) during the laboratory portion of class to research and define key concepts introduced in the preceding lecture. Each group is assigned a major topic from the chapter and tasked with finding comprehensive yet accessible definitions using internet sources. Groups contribute their findings to a shared Google document, creating a collaborative chapter resource that serves as a student-generated textbook supplement. Additionally, separate groups are formed to create and present websites based on the material learned throughout the semester, with these projects due at the end of the semester as a culminating demonstration of web programming concepts. This activity transforms passive note-taking into active knowledge construction, particularly engaging for working adult students who prefer hands-on learning over independent reading assignments. The collaborative approach also supports multilingual learners by allowing peer assistance with language and technical terminology comprehension.

Learning Goals: What do you aim to achieve with this activity?

Primary goals include: 1) Transforming students from passive recipients to active knowledge creators, 2) Developing research and digital literacy skills essential for web programming careers, 3) Fostering collaborative learning that mirrors real-world development team dynamics, 4) Creating student ownership of learning materials that enhances retention and engagement, 5) Addressing the learning preferences of working adult students who benefit from focused, in-class activities over outside reading, 6) Supporting multilingual learners through peer collaboration and shared vocabulary building, and 7) Building technical English proficiency alongside programming concepts, 8) Applying semester-long learning through final website creation and presentation projects, and 9) Building a comprehensive, student-generated resource that serves both present and absent students for exam preparation.

Timing: At what point in the lesson or semester do you use this activity? How much classroom time do you devote to it? How much out-of-class time is expected?

This activity was implemented most extensively during the first third of the semester, building toward the first exam when foundational concepts were being established. During this initial phase, the 2-hour laboratory session dedicated approximately 90 minutes to collaborative research and document creation. As the semester progressed and more advanced topics were introduced following the first exam, the activity required modification—less time was devoted to pure research and more time to streamlining and building upon established foundations. The pacing also accommodated the time needed for multilingual learners to process technical vocabulary and collaborate on language comprehension.

After the first exam, "cheat sheets" containing high-level main topic concepts were introduced at the beginning of each 2-hour lecture and used through the end of the semester. These provided quick, easily absorbed foundations before advancing to complex topics. These cheat sheets particularly benefit students for whom English is not their first language, providing key terminology and concepts in a condensed, reference-friendly format. The laboratory portion evolved to include both definition creation and hands-on coding exercises for web page development, with approximately 60 minutes for collaborative research and 30 minutes for practical application as advanced topics were introduced. Website creation and presentation projects are assigned as end-of-semester culminating activities that demonstrate the integration of all concepts learned throughout the course.

Students are expected to read assigned chapters (maximum 50 pages per chapter) prior to each class discussion, with homework assignments from the required reading due prior to following class, though many working adult students prefer to learn during class time rather than complete pre-class reading. The collaborative laboratory activity serves as both reinforcement of chapter material and active learning for students who may not have completed the pre-reading due to work and family obligations. No additional out-of-class time beyond the chapter reading and homework assignments is expected, which accommodates both the scheduling constraints of working adult students who attend Saturday classes due to weekday work obligations and recognizes that additional language processing time for multilingual learners is better supported through in-class collaboration rather than independent home study.

Logistics: What preparation is needed for this activity? What instructions do you give students? Is the activity low-stakes, high-stakes, or something else?

Initial preparation involves creating shared Google document templates for each chapter and identifying major topics from the lecture to assign to each group. After the first exam, preparation expanded to include developing "cheat sheets" containing foundational concepts that are distributed at the beginning of each lecture session. As the semester progresses, preparation shifts toward streamlining research processes and integrating hands-on coding exercises that apply researched concepts to web page development. Additional preparation includes organizing website project groups and establishing end-of-semester presentation schedules.

Instructions are given both verbally and in writing to support students with varying English proficiency levels. Early-semester instructions focus on: 1) Research assigned topics using credible internet sources, 2) Provide definitions that are comprehensive yet easily absorbed (avoiding both overly technical and overly brief explanations), 3) Include source links for reference, and 4) contribute to the shared document. Groups are encouraged to help each other with language clarification and technical terminology. Later instructions expand to include coding exercises that demonstrate practical application of researched concepts. Website project groups receive specific guidelines for incorporating semester concepts into functional web pages and end-of-semester presentation requirements.

Key logistical considerations include managing simultaneous Google Docs editing issues where students' visual locations shift as others type, and addressing inconsistent formatting across contributions. Future implementations will require individual drafting before collaborative merging and standardized formatting guidelines.

The activity is medium-stakes—it contributes to participation grades and creates essential study materials, but individual mistakes don't severely impact overall course performance. However, the collaborative nature means that group dynamics significantly affect individual success. Website projects carry higher stakes as end-of-semester demonstrations of cumulative learning and practical application skills. Future iterations will include designated group leaders for coordination, bonus point incentives for quality contributions, and structured peer support systems to ensure all students, regardless of English proficiency level, can participate meaningfully.

Assessment: How do you assess this activity? What assessment measures do you use? Do you use a VALUE rubric? If not, how did you develop your rubric? Is your course part of the college-wide general education assessment initiative?

Assessment focuses on participation, collaboration quality, and contribution accuracy rather than formal VALUE rubrics. I evaluate: 1) Active participation in group research and discussion, 2) Quality and appropriateness of definitions (comprehensive but accessible), 3) Proper source citation and link inclusion, 4) Collaborative behavior during the activity, and 5) peer support provided to group members, particularly important given the multilingual classroom environment. End-of-semester website projects are assessed on functionality, design, incorporation of semester concepts, and presentation quality.

The informal rubric developed through observation emphasizes engagement and effort over perfection, recognizing that students are learning while contributing. Assessment criteria accommodate varying English proficiency levels, focusing on content understanding and collaborative contribution rather than language perfection. Post-activity follow-up quizzes in subsequent classes assess knowledge retention and understanding of both researched concepts and practical coding applications as the semester progresses.

While this collaborative activity allows for flexible, innovative assessment approaches tailored to this specific student population's needs, all assessments ultimately filter back into a traditional grading system based on exams. To accommodate students who cannot take exams due to work or other obligations, makeup exams with different questions are offered to be taken either prior to or after the scheduled exam date. Assessment evolved after the first exam when it became apparent that despite increased engagement and improved materials, some students still didn't utilize resources effectively for exam preparation due to work obligations or last-minute study habits. This led to implementing more frequent, lower-stakes check-ins and bonus point opportunities to encourage consistent engagement with the collaborative materials.

Future assessments will include: peer evaluation of group leaders, bonus points for exceptional contributions, structured peer mentoring recognition for students who effectively support multilingual classmates, and more frequent formative assessments to bridge the gap between collaborative learning and individual accountability. The ultimate challenge remains translating collaborative learning gains into improved individual exam performance, recognizing that working adult students may prioritize work and family obligations over education.

Reflection: How well did this activity work in your classroom? Would you repeat it? Why or why not? What challenges did you encounter, and how did you address them? What, if anything, would you change? What did students seem to enjoy about the activity?

The activity succeeded dramatically in engaging students who typically show low motivation for independent assignments, particularly during the first third of the semester when foundational concepts were being established. Students demonstrated high enthusiasm for collaborative work, preferring this active approach over traditional note-taking. The collaborative environment particularly benefited multilingual learners who could support each other with language barriers and technical vocabulary. Average class grades increased compared to previous semesters, and student motivation was notably higher.

I would definitely repeat this activity with modifications. The increased engagement and improved learning outcomes, particularly for working adult students and multilingual learners, demonstrate its effectiveness despite the challenges encountered.

Several challenges emerged during implementation. Initially, inconsistent definition quality ranged from overly verbose to excessively brief explanations, which may partly reflect varying English proficiency levels and cultural approaches to explanation. Google Docs simultaneous editing caused visual displacement issues as students' work locations shifted while others typed. Formatting inconsistencies required significant instructor cleanup time. Most significantly, despite increased engagement and improved collaborative materials, some students still didn't utilize resources effectively for exam preparation due to work obligations (missing weekend classes) or last-minute study habits, reflecting the reality that Work-Family-Education priority hierarchy persists even with enhanced learning activities. After the first exam, I addressed these challenges by introducing foundational "cheat sheets" at the beginning of each lecture, which continued through the semester's end. The activity evolved from pure research to integrated research-and-coding exercises as topics became more advanced.

Future iterations will implement: designated group leaders for coordination, intentional pairing of students with complementary language strengths, individual drafting before collaborative merging, bonus point incentives, standardized formatting requirements, and more frequent formative assessments to better bridge the gap between collaborative learning gains and individual exam performance. The core challenge remains helping working adult students translate enhanced engagement into consistent academic preparation despite competing life priorities.

Students particularly enjoyed the interactions during the laboratory section, which helped reinforce what they learned from the lecture portion. They especially appreciated the coding exercises, which gave them confidence not only that they were learning but that they could be prepared for real-world applications. The end-of-semester website creation projects were particularly popular, as students could see tangible results of their semester-long learning and felt prepared for professional web development work.This hands-on practice with immediate application of lecture concepts seemed to bridge the gap between theoretical knowledge and practical skills they would need professionally. The collaborative aspect and peer support for language comprehension also contributed significantly to their positive experience.

Additional Information: Please share any additional comments and further documentation of the activity – e.g. assignment instructions, rubrics, examples of student work, etc. These can be links to pages or posts on the OpenLab.

This approach was specifically designed for a unique classroom context: working adult students attending intensive Saturday sessions (split into 2-hour lecture + 2-hour laboratory) who typically prioritize work and family obligations over education. The student population is predominantly multilingual, with English often not being their first language, which significantly influenced both the collaborative structure and assessment approach.

Key contextual factors that make this activity particularly effective: 1) Students prefer PDF materials over purchasing textbooks and rarely complete pre-class reading. 2)The no-electronics policy during lecture creates anticipation for the hands-on laboratory portion. 3) Small group sizes (3-5 students per row) facilitate peer language support, and 4) Saturday scheduling accommodates work obligations but limits study time availability

Technical considerations for implementation: 1) Google Docs simultaneous editing creates visual displacement issues requiring workflow modification, 2) Formatting consistency becomes crucial when serving multilingual learners who need clear, accessible reference materials, 3) Evolution from pure research to integrated research-and-coding reflects advancing curriculum complexity, and 4) Cheat sheets introduced after first exam proved essential for supporting both advanced topic progression and language comprehension

Materials available for adaptation: 1) Google Docs templates structured by chapter topics, 2) Sample "cheat sheet" formats containing high-level concepts in accessible language, 3) Group assignment rotation systems for equitable topic distribution, 4) Peer support frameworks for multilingual collaboration, 5) End-of-semester website project guidelines and presentation rubrics, and 6) Integration models for transitioning from research activities to hands-on coding exercises.

Future documentation will include: 1) Detailed group leader role descriptions and rotation schedules, 2) Multilingual learner support strategies and peer mentoring structures, 3) Bonus point rubrics tied to collaborative contribution quality, 4) Standardized formatting guidelines to reduce instructor cleanup time, 5) Follow-up quiz examples that assess both individual understanding and collaborative learning transfer , 6) Makeup exam scheduling and question differentiation protocols, and 7) Strategies for bridging engagement gains with exam performance in working adult populations.

This activity demonstrates how pedagogical innovation can address specific population needs while maintaining academic rigor, particularly valuable for instructors serving diverse, working adult, and multilingual student communities. The flexibility to accommodate scheduling conflicts through makeup exams and the integration of end-of-semester website projects further support student success in real-world applicable skills.

Please share a helpful link to a pages or post on the OpenLab

Posted on

Escape the Math

Escape the Math

Julia Rivera

Math Department/New York City College of Technology

Mat1275CO (College Algebra and Trigonometry)

Activity Description: Provide a brief description of the activity

Group Activity: Escape Room game about Factoring. There are 5 puzzles to complete within the hour

Independent Activity: Escape Room game about Quadratics l. They had 5 puzzles to complete within the hour.

Learning Goals: What do you aim to achieve with this activity?

For this acitivity my goal was to get students motivated in learning math while being in groups vs doing the work independenthly. I wanted to observe if students do better when they work independently or when they work in groups

Timing: At what point in the lesson or semester do you use this activity? How much classroom time do you devote to it? How much out-of-class time is expected?

I used this activity during the beginning, middle and end of semester. I did this acitivity after I lectured giving students at least an hr to complete and discuss.

Logistics: What preparation is needed for this activity? What instructions do you give students? Is the activity low-stakes, high-stakes, or something else?

I needed to create to different handouts with different exercises. The handout would be given during the group activity and the other handout would be given during independent work. After I instructed the factoring lesson. I told students they had one hr to complete the challenges.

Assessment: How do you assess this activity? What assessment measures do you use? Do you use a VALUE rubric? If not, how did you develop your rubric? Is your course part of the college-wide general education assessment initiative?

To assess the students I would walk around and observe how students were as a group vs how they were independently. I noticed students that work in groups were less dependent of me then students working independently. Then after I gave the students 2 surveys to fill out. The surveys asked questions on whether they enjoyed the activity as a group or if they enjoyed the activity when working alone. I asked them how they felt when asked to be put in groups and what they felt when they were asked to do the activity by themeselves.

Reflection: How well did this activity work in your classroom? Would you repeat it? Why or why not? What challenges did you encounter, and how did you address them? What, if anything, would you change? What did students seem to enjoy about the activity?

I believed the acitivity went well. During the group activity, students were able to communicate with each other and also look at other teams to get some advice or motivation from them. During the independent activity students were more quiet but they were in competition with one another since it was an escape game activity. I did provide extra credit for those that did escape on time. However for the students that did not escape on time had homework assignment. Also I noticed from the surveys is that students actually prefer to work alone than in groups. Cons in working groups was that they felt rushed and they weren’t sure if they were able to keep up with their peers. Pros was that they were able to compare answers and it did help them communicate better and they had fun exploring and seeing other peers answers. Also listening to music while working helps motivate them.
I would repeat this activity but instead of an escape game I’ll probably just give them a handout and ask them to work in groups and then another day ask them to work independently. Overall they enjoyed the activity and I would recommend other Professors to try it. It’s just creating the game will take some time that’s all.

Additional Information: Please share any additional comments and further documentation of the activity – e.g. assignment instructions, rubrics, examples of student work, etc. These can be links to pages or posts on the OpenLab.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GpFfiHfyneEFM3iG7mKFB6-hVcTWNGa0/view?usp=drivesdk

https://drive.google.com/file/d/14y4mZ1lzMTdmAfIv1GHei5vSMPudWAsL/view?usp=drivesdk

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ITaQyk2ubHv7yrtk5DzqOIFlf0cSs2mQ/view?usp=drivesdk

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZXWfN01ZJxv8rZCWorsvJ-UzRUb_-HyJ/view?usp=drivesdk

Please share a helpful link to a pages or post on the OpenLab