Classroom playbook 02 · Accounting
A low-stakes tutorial using Think First.
Every student makes a private judgement before discussion. The team then reasons through the evidence, commits to one answer and uses immediate feedback to think again.
The teaching challenge
A correct rule is not enough. Students must decide which evidence matters.
Subsequent-events questions often look simple after the answer is known. Before committing, students must distinguish the date on which an event occurred from the conditions that existed at the reporting date.
Think First gives every student a position to examine. The team discussion then exposes whether students are relying on chronology, legal form or the underlying evidence.
Before class
Prepare one decision worth discussing.
Participation
Use a class roster and existing assigned teams so attendance and the shared mark are attached to the correct students.
Roster only · Existing class teamsStudent experience
Allow member devices and require individual thinking before discussion.
Member devices on · Think First onFeedback and scoring
Keep the explanation until completion and reduce the available mark after each incorrect attempt.
4 · 2 · 1 · 0 marksDuring class
Six visible learning moments.
Students experience one continuous sequence while the lecturer monitors progress and exceptions.
- 01Join
A representative confirms the assigned team.
One present team member opens the team code, checks the roster and confirms attendance. The other present students join with the same team code on their own devices.
- 02Think
Each student commits to a private first response.
Students read the reporting-date scenario and choose the treatment they believe is best before discussion begins.
- 03Discuss
The team explains where its reasoning differs.
Students compare the evidence they used: the reporting date, the customer’s earlier financial difficulty and the later liquidation.
- 04Commit
One verified device records the team decision.
The controlling student selects the answer the team can defend and scratches to commit. The other devices follow the same team progress.
- 05Reconsider
Immediate feedback changes the next conversation.
An incorrect attempt does not reveal the solution. The team discusses again and can retry for fewer available marks.
- 06Learn
The explanation arrives after the question is complete.
Once the correct answer is revealed, students review why it is best supported and why the strongest alternative was tempting.
Example question · Financial reporting
Which date tells the accounting story?
IAS 10 + IFRS 9 · Subsequent events and expected credit losses
At 31 December, Bluegum Traders has a R480,000 trade receivable that is 90 days overdue. Before year-end, the customer told Bluegum that it was experiencing serious cash-flow difficulties. On 20 January—before Bluegum’s financial statements are authorised—the customer enters liquidation and recovery is expected to be minimal. What is the most appropriate treatment at 31 December?
- A
Leave the receivable unchanged because the original sale remained valid at 31 December.
- B
Disclose the liquidation only as a non-adjusting event because it occurred after year-end.
- C
Remeasure the IFRS 9 loss allowance at 31 December because the liquidation provides evidence of credit-impairment conditions that existed at the reporting date.
Best supported - D
Wait until the liquidation process is complete before recognising any impairment.
Reveal teaching answerHide teaching answerCheck the supported option and feedback sequence
After an incorrect attempt
Not yet. 2 marks remain.
TAIF confirms that the attempt is incorrect without revealing the answer. Students discuss again and reconsider the evidence before another scratch.
Explanation after completion
Why C is best supported
IAS 10 treats the January liquidation as an adjusting event because it provides further evidence about financial difficulty already present at 31 December. IFRS 9 then governs the remeasurement of the expected-credit-loss allowance. IFRS 15 does not measure the impairment: an unconditional receivable is accounted for under IFRS 9.
- Why B was tempting
- The legal event happened after year-end, but timing alone does not make an event non-adjusting.
- What mattered
- The receivable was overdue and the customer’s financial difficulty existed before the reporting date.
After class
Review the learning, not just the final answer.
First-attempt success
See how many teams applied the principle before receiving feedback.
Eventual correctness
See whether reconsideration helped teams reach the supported treatment.
Attempt path and marks
Review the scratches used and export the shared team mark for students confirmed present.
Private means private: individual Think First choices are not shown as named student answers. The lecturer sees participation counts and the team’s recorded assessment path.
Adapt the format
Change the setup without changing the learning goal.
Only one device per team?
Turn off member devices and Think First. The team discusses from the start and uses the shared device to select and reveal its answer.
No pre-assigned teams?
Let students form their own teams. One chosen leader enters the assessment code, adds the present students and shares the new team code.
Want an ungraded check?
Use the same question as a short diagnostic conversation and treat the score as feedback rather than a contribution to the course mark.
Use with judgement
A good fit when the reasoning matters.
Use this format for
- Applying a principle to ambiguous evidence
- Surfacing misconceptions before an exam
- Practising professional judgement
- Making peer explanation part of feedback
Choose another format when
- You must verify individual authorship
- Students cannot discuss the task
- The activity requires an individually invigilated result
- Institutional policy does not permit a shared team mark
Experience the learning loop