We initially built out the student workflow as only "choose your adventure" without two part structure. There would be many more rooms from coding game rooms, challenge rooms, topic rooms, OH rooms, or anything the section leaders find helpful.

During our testing period, we discovered a couple of key insights. First, we realized that some users were disappointed or confused when their choices did not show up or was not available. Then bigger issue was the logistics and edge cases—everything became too chaotic and confusing, not to add onto the pedagogical concerns.

For example, if we limit the students' ability to move around, students might not want to spend the whole section on a specific topic/room, but if we don't, they will inevitably join other rooms that are already in progress. Furthermore, students might not know what they need help with beforehand, and the differences in learning progress might become unintentionally widened without structure to also review new material.

To remedy these issues, we added the two part structure. The first part aims to help digest current material, and the second is a targeted "choose your own adventure" section. This way, there won't be an issue of students being stuck in a room for too long, and also pedagogically mirror original sections but with additional flexibility. We also added disclaimers that even though students might not get their top picks, it is good practice regardless and there will likely be challenge rooms if none of the topic rooms are appealing.