Being a student in the IDC 3002H course was a really interesting learning experience for me, as someone who is not used to working so collaboratively on science projects. In previous instruction I’ve received, all science-related work was done individually, with the exception of lab projects, which allowed me to hone in on subjects I was really interested in. IDC 3002H was very different. This course, and the specific section I was in, required me to go out of my comfort zone by studying topics that I was very unfamiliar with, in ways that I was unaccustomed to. I think one of the most challenging parts of this teaching mode was the prolonged teamwork. My teammates and I produced great work, but it wouldn’t be accurate to say that it was a breeze the entire semester. Having to collaborate for a whole semester on various tasks and projects was challenging, especially when we had to do other smaller things on the side (e.g. aspirin lab, and the soap lab). I’m very used to working in a team for maybe 2-3 weeks, but this collaborative effort lasted for a much longer time. I think this extended group work helped me realize my strengths and weaknesses as a group member more so than a short project would have.

I think the other smaller projects, like making graphs using the HIV/AIDS statistics, would have been a lot more beneficial to me if they were taught differently. For that project, we were told to break off into groups to make graphs, but I think that if that work was done individually that it would’ve been more fruitful. This is because it’s very hard to share information just using our laptops, while one person made the excel graphs. I think that, in this way, the learning style was not very beneficial for me.

Aside from the modes of instruction, I wish that we could have just done one of the smaller lab reports (aspirin/soap labs). This is because for each lab we had to write a 2 page lab report, and 2 pages is not very descriptive. I took a science research course in high school where I had to write 8-10 page reports, which were much more up-to-par with actual research that’s out there. I think if we focused on just one lab, and not both, that one lab report could’ve been much more descriptive and thorough.

Personally, I enjoyed taking this course, and I like that it was STEM-focused. Additionally, I thought the in-class science demonstrations were very enriching (my Instagram Story really spiced up this semester, thanks to those). I hope that as I continue my career in finance I never lose sight of the importance of scientific advancement, not just in NYC, but starting in the classroom.