# data[].attributes.body
10.2 Associated Bank in Milwaukee - students had to choose from 4 types of marketing that would appeal to teenagers (and their parents/guardians) to yield more youth bank accounts.

# data[].attributes.body
Students were researching the provided locations from the case brief and found out that some of the plots of land they were supposed to consider were sold. This hindered some of their buy-in.

# data[].attributes.body
This is the top two cases of 9th grade based on student feedback. They really like how open-ended it is for them to choose a nonprofit and explain why. Many students make connections to nonprofits they know or may have been a part of which makes it very real. It's accessible for students and a great way for them to start their 9th grade year.

when I say open-ended, I mean in comparison to 9.3 and 9.5, which have a finite number of solutions for students

# data[].attributes.body
This case provided 3 options that were all very different. There were 2 expansions (1 in the US and 1 in Mexico). There was 1 "new" plant option. We liked the broad range of options students had to choose from and I think it really helped them narrow down their decision from their research.

# data[].attributes.body
Can we talk through the infographic piece as part of the deliverable for 10.2?

# data[].attributes.body
The case is centered around forklifts as investments, and one of the options had a link that was broken. The link specifically was the fully automated warehouses choice.

# data[].attributes.body
Deloitte has been our partner for the last three years and we have a great case that allows students to dive into case studies for the first time in a safe and structured way, and we have a really great coach! Students have been having a lot of success!

# data[].attributes.body
Students really struggled with creating infographics after launch. Many students created slide presentations that they had to later re-create into an infographic. They couldn't wrap their mind around an infographic.

# data[].attributes.body
The options provided to students are clear and also provide enough autonomy to be creative. The company's wants are clearly stated in the case brief and aids the students in making their decisions.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a new partner for us, but the task is for students to research a non-profit organization to volunteer with. However, the nonprofit has to be in Dallas, Atlanta, and other cities in the country, which I think is not allowing students to see the connection to their community, or allowing them to think about how to propose changes to their community, which the Deloitte case does.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a great case for students to get started, but lately there has been some confusion around the shared initiative. The share initiative is 'Elevate the Community' and is wanting students to find an opportunity for the partner to locate some service-learning opportunities for college students. What seems to be falling short is the students being able to re-reference the idea and purpose of service-learning inside of the shared initiative.

# data[].attributes.body
Students had a hard time engaging in the research aspect of finding additional data (quantitative and qualitative). If more data were included in the case brief, I think they would better understand what they're being asked to do and to make an objective decision backed by data.

# data[].attributes.body
This case had 4 considerations for students to think about. My other two cases had less considerations (2-3) which, I think, made it more difficult for students to research.

# data[].attributes.body
As this is their first case challenge, would we ever consider doing the decision tree first as it is easier as an overall introduction rather than the collaboration map?

# data[].attributes.body
This is a tough concept for students in general it seems and I wonder if 9.2 is the best spot for it. It’s the first case challenge…add in this concept and it feels like a bit much. My case is around building a talent pipeline for financial advisors. Students seemed to grasp the idea of recruiting more employees, but the real test will be when Internal Judging rolls around very soon!

# data[].attributes.body
This was a great improvement from last years' 9.2 case. The focus on hiring entry level positions at the company was relatable for students since a lot of them already have jobs or are starting to think about getting a job. There was a focus on partnering with nonprofits which was difficult for some students to understand, but with their teacher's help they got there in the end.

There was a disconnect with the coaches who worked for the company- they told one of my schools that the company doesn't work with nonprofits for recruitment (which directly contradicts the case brief). I'm not sure if that is something that needs to be changed in the actual case or if the coaches need more training prior to talking with the students.

# data[].attributes.body
This case has been improved from last year. The three options are clearly the requirements for each possible location.

# data[].attributes.body
Some of my LTs brought up that the infographic was not specifically part of the rubric. Don't quote me on this though, I've moved onto 10.3 and haven't relooked since they told me!

# data[].attributes.body
The students have been engaging in the case and trying their best, but some of them are not bought into the case challenge prompt of suggesting an initiative for KPMG to reduce their carbon emissions. This is also an issue I noticed last year.

# data[].attributes.body
Our St. Pete HS, Gibbs HS, and Lakewood HS student infographics for City Furniture, Bank of America, and The Palladium Theatre were absolutely amazing. Students made a huge leap from last year in their deliverables looking like they were done by a Fortune 500 company. The infographics had very reliable statistics that one could tell that they spent a lot of time researching. Students were able to speak to each data point, and the judges at all the different culminating events were very impressed. I love that students get a more creative option in this case challenge than the typical deliverable.

# data[].attributes.body
There is a lot of scientific background information in this case and it is a lot to cover in launch.

This case assumes students know how to research at a basic level without any scaffolds. Our students struggle here because they typically will use the Google AI Overview. Finding more information about each option KPMG is considering is a gap students have.

When KPMG BPs came for coaching, none of them were aware of the company's goal.

I wish the infographic was for a later case. With it being the first case of the year, and the feedback on the case above, an infographic is another new addition for students to grasp. There are so many new things for students to understand in this case.

# data[].attributes.headline
Talent pipeline was tough for my 9th graders

# data[].attributes.subject
Talent pipeline was tough for my 9th graders

# data[].attributes.body
Many students were tripped up on this case because of the many steps they had to do to actually get to their proposed solution. I think maybe this case being introduced later on would be more of a confidence booster for the kiddos.

# data[].attributes.body
Students are being asked to focus on a non profit that would benefit from automation. They have no way of knowing without asking the non profits directly whether or not they are currently automated.

# data[].attributes.body
This case was revised this year, which is a PLUS! In previous years, students had a hard time really engaging in that understanding of "building a talent pipeline" however, the new initiative was to "promote a STEM entrepreneur camp." They were far more engaged, but I think what stumped them a little bit was the word "promote" given that they considered how the partner and Amgen would work together to reach the shared initiative. Personally, the LT liked that, but for ELL learners and 14 year olds in general, that word can get a little sticky

# data[].attributes.headline
9.2 - When working with the case partners, having a spot in the teacher resources or challenge section with any examples of organizations/non-profits they have worked with before to help narrow down new options for students.

# data[].attributes.subject
9.2 - When working with the case partners, having a spot in the teacher resources or challenge section with any examples of organizations/non-profits they have worked with before to help narrow down new options for students.

# data[].attributes.body
I really like this case, but I wish it came at a later point in the school year. There are so many moving parts and things to consider when students are developing a solution. I felt like all the aspects prevented some students from understand the real question. Moving from 9.2 to 9.3 almost feels like a step down in rigor (in terms of infinite and finite solutions). Maybe even switching the order of 9.2 and 9.3 would help?

# data[].attributes.body
Overall, I think the case is really strong. The initiative is described as partnering with a non-profit to build the Publix talent pipeline, specifically focusing on deli and grocery departments. While this was highlighted during launch, most of the student solutions focused on suggesting non-profit partners to supply workers in general, rather than targeting those specific departments.

In the case context, it’s noted that Publix promotes from within, which creates a need to fill vacant entry-level roles. The coaches also mentioned there are open entry-level positions across multiple departments, not just deli and grocery.

My question is: Do we need to require students to focus specifically on deli and grocery positions, or can we allow them to propose partnerships that address entry-level hiring needs more broadly across the company? It seemed that students struggled to narrow their ideas to those two departments, and broadening the focus might lead to more realistic and relevant solutions.

# data[].attributes.body
I think it would benefit from an update to be more like the Synovus case that looks at bringing in future customers. Currently the case looks for students to pick the best option for the organization to expand in a new market and I just think the reaching younger, new customers is something the students could connect more to.

# data[].attributes.body
I've noticed that my teachers struggle with using the vocabulary "talent pipeline". Specifically, because it doesn't fit well with some of my cases (for example, PFW is looking for a talent pipeline of people to attend for STEM). This makes teachers use different vocabulary when talking with students, which has lead to them being confused.

# data[].attributes.body
Was a really cool case and loved how you all brought AI into the case for students to choose between

# data[].attributes.body
This year we switched Deloitte and NSU and the case provided to the students was exciting and a great introduction to case challenges. The Shared initiative "Save the turtles" was also ready established provided them the opportunity to focus on the other half of the Collaboration Map. Student who moved quickly, were able to elaborate on the shared initiative.

# data[].attributes.body
This case is a few years old and therefore the company has already implemented some of the choices that are presented to the students. It feels like this case should be turned into a case study since the company has already chosen their solution.

At the very least, the choices need to be updated- the metaverse is a choice that no students choose after doing research since not a lot of people have access to VR devices.

# data[].attributes.body
I really love the focus on volunteer opportunities/community service with the Deloitte case and the shared initiative. Students really bought in to this piece of the case.

# data[].attributes.body
Students had a great time with this case and their infographics were very laid out well! I think it was easy for them to grasp because it relates to them! Their CEs were very well put and explanations and recommendations were extremely well thought out to support their justification.

# data[].attributes.body
Students are struggling a bit to make the connection with the talent pipeline. The case is asking them to find, collaborate, and partner with an organization who will provide consistent and qualified workers to AAA or TD SYNNEX. Students are choosing a partner and even are choosing a partner with a shared initiative. However, they are struggling to find organizations that can offer actual future employees to the company. Students feel like they only have the option of different colleges, since many organizations are not going to just willingly give away their good employees.