Learning Science Lab | Activities

When: At the very start of a new unit, class session, or project.

What it looks like: Students spend several minutes answering targeted prompts. These can be multiple‑choice or short answer questions, or a quick poll.
You can share and discuss the results in real time as an aggregated summary or follow up individually after the session, then adjust depth, pace, or examples accordingly.

Why it works: The knowledge check surfaces misconceptions early and gives you evidence to direct your instruction, avoiding content they’ve mastered—or worse, assuming knowledge they don’t have. It also gives students perspective on their own prior knowledge.

Setup:

1. Identify core prerequisites (for example, understanding time‑value‑of‑money math before a valuation lecture).
2. Write short questions that map to those prerequisites.
3. Tell students why you're asking. Let them know this is about improving their learning; not evaluating performance.
4. Decide how you will handle feedback: e.g., on‑the‑spot discussion, sharing anonymous and aggregate results with the class, follow‑up mini‑lecture, or adjusted homework.

Relevant tools: Google Forms or Brightspace quiz for auto‑grading, Poll Everywhere for live polling, old‑school index cards if tech is unreliable.

When: Following a class or activity that provides opportunities for reflection.

What it looks like: Students take regular opportunities to reflect on course content, their learning progress, or personal insights and take the time to articulate them. For example, "Five things I took away from this class." To be most effective, this activity should be done regularly, with each entry taking minimal time: 5 to 15 minutes.

Why it works: By providing students regular opportunities to reflect on their learning, it fosters metacognition, critical thinking, and self-expression while providing an opportunity for students to track their development over time.

Setup: 

1. Define the purpose (e.g., reflection, analysis, goal-setting).
2. Provide prompts or guiding questions if needed.
3. Establish expectations for frequency and length. Instruct students to organize entries by date or topic.
4. Determine if submissions will be private or shared, written on paper or submitted digitally, and how you will provide feedback.

Relevant tools: Paper submissions, Google Docs

When: Right after introducing a new concept, reading, or problem—or to reactivate prior knowledge before moving on.

What it looks like: Think (1‑2 min): students quietly jot a response to your prompt. Pair (2‑4 min): they compare answers with a partner (or trio). Share (2‑5 min): selected pairs report highlights to the whole class—verbally, on a whiteboard, or through a quick poll—while you synthesize key takeaways.

Why it works: Requires every student to commit to an idea before discussion, boosting accountability and retrieval practice. Peer explanations expose misconceptions and broaden perspectives in a low‑stakes setting.

Setup: 

1. Craft a focused prompt that allows multiple defensible answers or rationales.
2. Make the Think‑Pair‑Share intervals explicit and keep them tight. 
3. Define sharing method. Cold‑call a few pairs, collect responses in a live poll, or post to a shared doc.
4. Close the loop. Summarize common themes or lingering questions before transitioning.

Relevant tools: Google Docs (one slide per pair) to collect responses; Poll Everywhere for live results; physical index cards, whiteboards or sticky notes for smaller classes in person; Zoom breakout rooms for online classes.

Check out our demonstration video to see Think-Pair-Share in action.

When: After new content is introduced and before high‑stakes assessments, or as periodic refreshers in a longer course unit.

What it looks like: Students complete structured tasks—problem sets, mini‑cases, short quizzes—individually or in pairs. Each task targets one or two specific learning outcomes. Immediate feedback through an answer key, auto‑grading, or quick debrief helps students gauge their mastery before moving on.

Why it works: Retrieval practice and spaced repetition strengthen long‑term retention. Timely feedback pinpoints misconceptions, allowing students to close knowledge gaps early. Because the stakes are low, learners can focus on improvement rather than performance.

Setup: 

1. Align with learning outcomes. Create exercises that map directly to the concepts or skills you just taught.
2. Scaffold difficulty. Start with straightforward applications and progress to integrative or open‑ended problems.
3. Supply feedback. Provide solutions, automated hints, or short explanations so students understand why an answer is correct.
4. Make the stakes clear. State whether the exercise is graded or completion‑based.
5. Determine how you'll deliver exercises. Post in the LMS, embed an online quiz, or distribute a papaer worksheet.

Relevant tools: Brightspace quizzes, Google Forms with automated feedback, Excel/Google Sheets templates for quantitative work, downloadable PDF worksheets for offline practice.

When: Ahead of internship recruiting, client‑facing presentations, or anytime you want students to rehearse high‑stakes questioning.

What it looks like: Students work in pairs or trios. One student plays the interviewee, another the interviewer (and, if a third, an observer). After a timed round (5‑10 minutes), they switch roles until each student has practiced and received feedback.

Why it works: Simulated pressure lets students refine their responses, body language, and poise without real‑world consequences. Structured feedback highlights strengths and specific improvement areas, boosting confidence and professionalism.

Setup: 

1. Define the scenario. Specify the role (job interview, research pitch, client consultation).
2. Provide prompts. Share sample questions and note the competencies you expect to see (e.g., adhering to an interview framework like the STAR method, exhibiting technical accuracy).
3. Form groups. Pairs for speed; trios if you want a dedicated observer.
4. Set timing. Allocate interview rounds and debrief windows (e.g., 7 min interview + 3 min feedback).
5. Facilitate feedback. Use a checklist or rubric so peers give focused, actionable comments.

Relevant tools: Rubric or checklist to structure feedback; Zoom for remote breakout rooms; phone or laptop cameras for recording practice; Google Docs for shared feedback notes.

When: In classes with 40+ students where you want broad participation and a visible record of group thinking—e.g., brainstorming options, comparing frameworks, or critiquing a case.

What it looks like: Students quickly "count off" into groups of 4-5 students (e.g., 8-10 groups for a class of 40.) Each group claims a pre‑marked section of the classroom whiteboard. They spend ~8 minutes brainstorming or solving the instructor's prompt in their space. When time is up, all work remains visible and the class reconvenes for a guided walkthrough and comparison.

Why it works: Shrinks a big class into manageable teams, ensures every student contributes, and produces a public artifact that anchors the whole‑class debrief. The side‑by‑side board sections make similarities and contrasts obvious without slide‑by‑slide switching.

Setup:

1. Prep the board. Divide the whiteboard into equal sections and label them A, B, C…
2. Form groups fast. Have students count off or pre‑assign numbers to avoid clustering with friends.
3. Pose a focused prompt. One clear question or task per group.
4. Set a strict timer. Announce halfway and one‑minute warnings to keep energy high.
5. Facilitate the debrief. Walk the room/board, inviting each group to highlight one key point or unique angle. Synthesize common themes and unresolved issues.

Relevant tools: Physical whiteboard + markers, large Post‑it pads for overflow, document camera for quick photo capture; online: Miro, Google Jamboard, or Zoom whiteboard with breakout rooms mapped to board sections.

When: After students have enough background to analyze a scenario but before you formalize "the right answer." Ideal for ethics, strategy, or negotiation topics.

What it looks like: Students receive a brief case and a role (e.g., CEO, regulator, client, analyst). After a short prep window they act out a meeting, negotiation, or decision forum while you observe or moderate. The session ends with a whole‑class debrief linking choices back to course concepts.

Why it works: Roleplay forces perspective‑taking, surfaces competing incentives, and makes abstract theory concrete. The ensuing debrief lets students compare approaches and unpack the real‑world implications of their decisions.

Setup: 

1. Pick the case & roles. Select a scenario with clear conflict points and 3‑6 distinct stakeholders.
2. Distribute briefs. Provide background, objectives, and any private data each role should guard.
3. Allocate prep. 5‑10 minutes for students to craft a strategy or talking points.
4. Run the roleplay. Set a time limit, establish ground rules (e.g., stay in character, aim for resolution).
5. Debrief. Discuss outcomes, alternative moves, and how theory explains successes or failures.

Relevant tools: PDFs in Brightspace or printed briefs to establish the scenario; Zoom breakout rooms for online enactment; shared Google Doc or Miro board for capturing agreements; timer or classroom projector for time cues.

When: When covering multi‑part content that benefits from peer teaching, like frameworks with distinct components, sections of a report, or different industry cases.

What it looks like: The Jigsaw Method is a cooperative learning technique where students become "experts" on different pieces of a topic and then teach their peers. It involves several steps: 

1. Expert groups: Students first meet in "expert" groups, each assigned one chunk of the material to master (10‑20 min).
2. Jigsaw groups: They then split into mixed "jigsaw" groups so that each new group has one expert on every chunk. Experts teach their segment to peers (15‑30 min).
3. Synthesis: Groups work together to integrate all segments into a coherent whole—summary, mini‑project, or discussion output (10‑20 min).

Why it works: This activity ensures every student becomes both a learner and a teacher. The need to teach others boosts accountability and depth of understanding, while the mixed groups guarantee full content coverage without duplicating effort.

Setup: 

1. Divide content. Break the lesson into 3‑6 distinct, roughly equal segments.
2. Form expert groups. Assign each group one segment and provide guiding questions or resources.
3. Prepare teaching aids for the jigsaw groups. Encourage experts to create a brief handout or visual to support their explanation.
4. Re‑form into jigsaw groups. Ensure each new group contains one expert per segment.
5. Provide a synthesis task. Ask groups to produce a summary, solve a problem, or answer integrative questions to confirm mutual understanding.

Relevant tools: Google Docs or Slides for collaborative notes; Zoom breakout rooms for online classes; physical whiteboards or poster paper for in‑person synthesis; Brightspace Discussion boards for posting final outputs.

When: As a capstone to a unit or course, or in parallel with regular class meetings to let students apply theory in a real‑world context.

What it looks like: Students tackle a multi‑step task, such as a market analysis, data‑driven report, prototype, or strategic plan. Work may be individual or team‑based. They move through creating a proposal, conducting research, completing interim checkpoints, and submitting a final deliverable such as a paper, presentation, or product demo.

Why it works: Extended projects require students to synthesize material across topics, sustain critical thinking, and iteratively solve problems. They build independence, collaboration, and professional skills while producing artifacts students can showcase.

Setup: 

1. Define scope & deliverables. Clarify the problem, expected deliverables, and success criteria.
2. Provide guidance. Share rubrics, milestone dates, and examples of quality work.
3. Establish checkpoints. Schedule progress reports or draft reviews to catch issues early.
4. Resource support. Point to data sources, research tools, or mentoring sessions.
5. Include reflection and presentation. Have students reflect on learning and present results to peers or external stakeholders.

Relevant tools: Brightspace assignment folders for submissions, Google Drive or Microsoft 365 for collaboration, Trello or Asana for project management, Miro for brainstorming, Zoom or in‑class sessions for milestone presentations.

When: As a standalone assignment or capstone element requiring deeper investigation of course themes.

What it looks like: Students investigate a focused question or problem, locate and evaluate sources, and synthesize findings into a paper, presentation, or other artifact. Work often progresses through proposal, evidence gathering, analysis, draft, and final submission.

Why it works: Research builds information‑literacy and critical‑analysis skills, promotes independent learning, and encourages students to connect course concepts with real‑world evidence.

Setup:

1. Define scope & question. Clarify the topic boundaries and required depth of inquiry.
2. Guide source selection. Provide criteria for credibility and introduce research databases or methodologies.
3. Scaffold the process. Require interim products such as annotated bibliographies, outlines, or drafts for feedback.
4. Specify deliverables. State format, length, citation style, and any presentation component.
5. Schedule checkpoints. Set deadlines for proposals, drafts, and final submission to keep projects on track.

Relevant tools: Library databases, Google Scholar for research papers; Endnote, Zotero or RefWorks for reference management; Brightspace assignment folders for submissions; Google Docs or Microsoft 365 for collaborative drafting.