GENERAL INFORMATION
Due date: End of Week 4 (before 23:59 local time)
Feedback date: Within one week after submission (early Week 5)
Time: Approx. 2–3 hours of asynchronous teamwork per week, plus at least one 60–75 min Zoom meeting per week
Modality: Mainly asynchronous collaboration with scheduled synchronous Zoom meetings.
Delivery form: Team process proposal (2–3 pages) and a digital presentation (slides or short video)
Activity value: 25% of the COIL component grade (together with Weeks 2 and 5)
DIDACTIC INFORMATION
Objective: To enable intercultural teams to apply chemistry and biosystems concepts by designing a feasible process to remove heavy metals from sargassum and proposing at least one sustainable market application for the treated biomass.
Resources:
· https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPsCOmDCmAM
· https://youtu.be/8A3CsZjBpxI
· https://www.slu.se/en/collaboration/international/slu-global/global-challenges-university-alliance/
· https://youtu.be/LYCKzpXEW6E
· https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld
· https://youtu.be/v7WUpgPZzpI
· https://upgrader.gapminder.org/
· https://youtu.be/woP0v-2nJCU
· https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1524839919884912#
· https://youtu.be/Ww_ml21L7Ns
· https://youtu.be/Rhcrbcg8HBw
· https://youtu.be/pgNLonYOc9s
· https://agenda2030.mx/index.html?lang=en#/home
Instructions:
Review the Week 2 problem brief
Each team revisits its selected sargassum case and clarifies the context and constraints (scale, resources, regulations).
Design the treatment process (Weeks 3–4)
In their shared Google Doc, teams outline a step‑by‑step process from sargassum collection to heavy‑metal removal and final product (e.g., adsorbent material, construction material, fertilizer with precautions).
Students must justify the choice of at least one heavy‑metal removal technique (e.g., washing, chemical treatment, thermal treatment, biosorption) using scientific sources.
Teams identify potential risks, benefits and limitations of their process for both local contexts (Mexico and the U.S.).
Prepare the digital presentation
Teams create a 8–10 minute presentation (slides with narration or video) including:
Brief recap of the problem and context
Diagram or flowchart of the proposed process
Explanation of how heavy metals are addressed
At least one concrete, realistic market application and its sustainability implications.
The final presentation and proposal are uploaded to the team’s Google Drive folder; the link is posted in the LMS/Padlet by the deadline.
Teamwork organization
Each team sets roles (e.g., coordinator, literature reviewer, process designer, presenter) and schedules at least one Zoom meeting per week to check progress.
Communication channels (e.g., email, WhatsApp via institutional policy, or LMS messages) are agreed upon to ensure all members are informed
Evaluation criteria:
Scientific accuracy and depth
Correct use of chemistry and biosystems concepts; appropriate justification of chosen treatment method(s).
Process design and feasibility
Clear step‑by‑step process, consideration of resources and constraints in both countries, identification of potential risks and limitations.
Sustainability and innovation
Coherent link between heavy‑metal removal, safe use of sargassum and proposed market application; explicit reference to environmental and socio‑economic benefits.
Intercultural and team collaboration
Evidence of contributions from students in both institutions; integration of Mexican and U.S. perspectives; respectful, inclusive communication.
Communication and format
Well‑structured written proposal (2–3 pages), clear visuals/diagrams, presentation within time limits; correct citation of sources in a simple, consistent style.
Feedback:
Formative feedback during Weeks 3–4 through comments on the shared Google Doc (instructors highlight strengths, suggest improvements in process steps or justification).
Brief oral feedback in optional check in sessions or during scheduled Zoom meetings.
Summative feedback after submission (end of Week 4) via rubric in LMS/Google Forms, including scores and qualitative comments for each criterion
