We have set ours for this first year. Since staff and students are all new to TBL, we thought consistency might be important in year 1, but we would like to give the students the chance to choose the grade weights (within limits, as per Larry's advice) in future years. We don't have Amanda's issue - our whole course is now TBL for the first years, and it will 'roll in' for the other years of the degree programme as this cohort move up through the years, so they will only ever experience TBL for their degree. This perhaps makes it easier to have the % we want from TBL! Seeing that you wanted 50% is interesting though - our whole programme is TBL, but we're still assessing mainly using exams. It may be that this is something we need to think about in future years.
Each module (which would be course in the US, I think!) is weighted 70% exam, 30% TBL. The 30% TBL is made up of 15% from iRATs, 5% from tRATs, 5% from group application exercises, and 5% from peer evaluation.
It's interesting seeing how other people are doing this.
Josie
On 11 Oct 2012, at 15:32, Emke, Amanda R wrote:
> I run a 17 hour pre-clinical pediatrics course. The course in general is very different from what students receive in their second year of medical school because I don't run it as a disease-based course as do most of the other courses they receive (this course focuses on the cornerstones of pediatrics needed for clerkship with a focus on pediatrics as a specialty based on prevention and health supervision). Within the 17 hours, 8 hours are spent in 4 TBL sessions. The TBLs constitute 30% of their final grade (remaining 70% from final exam). We tried using a higher percentage of the final grade from TBL because almost 50% of the course is devoted to TBL, but the administration and students thought that was too much (only one other course uses TBL and only has 2 sessions at that). Within TBL, the students choose the grade weights. Only once did they put more weight on the individual scores, and they asked that it be changed half way through when the discovered they did much bet
> ter as a
>
> Amanda
>
> Amanda R. Emke, MD
> Instructor, Divisions of Pediatric Critical Care & Hospital Medicine
> Associate Fellowship Program Director, Pediatric Critical Care
> Course Master, Pre-Clinical Pediatrics
> St. Louis Children's Hospital, Washington University Physicians
> Washington University School of Medicine
> One Children's Place, Northwest Tower, Campus Box 8116
> St. Louis, MO 63110
> (314)454-2527
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Team-Based Learning [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Levine, Ruth
> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 7:43 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: What is your grading scheme?
>
> Since we do TBL in the context of a clerkship, and so much of the grading in individual, our TBL component weighs heavily on the teamwork.
>
> Our grading rubric is as follows:
>
> TBL is worth 15% of overall grade
>
>
>
> IRAT: 30%
>
> GRAT: 70%
>
> peer evaluation (Fink method): percent multiplier modifies GRAT
>
> Applications: not graded (we used to grade them, but arguing tended to be more about points then concepts, so we dropped the points and discussion improved)
>
>
>
> However, we also have the policy that the team takes the final summative "shelf exam" as a team. This is worth 35% of the grade with the breakdown as follows:
>
>
>
> Individual performance: 70%
>
> Team performance: 30%
>
>
>
> Students also have to obtain a "passing" score on the individual component to pass the course...in other words, the team score can't rescue them if they don't do well individually.
>
>
>
> When I first started doing TBL I had the teams determine grade weights. After I switched to a "percent multiplier" peer evaluation system the only question was individual vs team weight and since students always chose the highest team and lowest individual I stopped the grade weight exercise since students would always choose the same ratio anyway.
>
>
>
> Larry's point of making sure that the individual is "high enough" is one I have wondered about recently. I think that 30% is about as low as I would want to go with medical students. With undergraduates, I might even want to go higher. But I think its essential that the team weight is high to ensure that the students are motivated to contribute for the sake of the team. We have conducted focus groups with students and they tell us that they prepare not as much for themselves but because they don't want to let their teammates down. That tells me alot about the power of team accountability.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Ruth
>
>
>
> Ruth E. Levine MD
>
> Clarence Ross Miller Professor of Psychiatry
> The University of Texas Medical Branch
> 301 University Blvd, Route 0193
> Galveston, Texas 77555-0193
> 409-747-9675 (Phone) 409-747-9677 (Fax)
> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> ________________________________
> From: Team-Based Learning [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Chris Burns [[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 10:46 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: What is your grading scheme?
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm curious about how (those who do) you grade application exercises considering that they should ideally not have a clear single best answer. At my former and current institution we agreed not to grade GAEs to encourage faculty to push the limits and develop challenging applications that may have more than one correct answer.
>
> Thanks for your input.
>
> Chris Burns
> University of Illinois College of Medicine
>
> ________________________________
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 16:50:04 -0500
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: What is your grading scheme?
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> Jim and Others,
>
> My grading scheme creates 2 general categories, with sub-items in each one. The specific points vary from time to time, but the last time I taught a course, here was the breakdown, with 200 points in the whole course:
>
> Individual Work: (100 Points)
> - iRATs (best 4 out of 5) - 20 pts
> - Bi-weekly journals - 30 pts
> - Teaching Portfolio - 15
> - Learning Portfolio - 15
> - Individual Learning Project - 20
>
> Group Work: (100 Points)
> - gRATs - 45 pts
> - Group Design Project - 30
> - Final Group Project - 25
>
> The total points for the Group Work were adjusted for each person in the group, by multiplying them by the Peer Evaluation score that each person received from his/her group. This Adjusted Group Component was then added to the points from the Individual Work, to create that person's Total Score for the course.
>
> Dee Fink
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Elizabeth Oldland <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
> Hi Jim
>
> TBL contributes to 20% of our overall unit (subject) score. Within this, each component is equally weighted.
>
> So overall:
>
> Exam 40%
>
> Assignment 40%
>
> TBL 20%
>
> * iRAT 5%
> * tRAT 5%
> * Applications 5 %
> * Peer evaluation 5%
>
>
>
> regards
>
> Elizabeth
>
> Elizabeth Oldland
> Lecturer
> School of Nursing and Midwifery, Faculty of Health
> Deakin University, Melbourne Burwood Campus, Australia
> Phone: 03 9244 6608 International: +61 3 9244 6608
> Fax: 03 9244 6118 International: +61 3 9244 6118
> email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Website: http://www.deakin.edu.au/nursing
> Deakin University CRICOS Provider Code 00113B (Vic)
>
> [Description: Description: Description: Nusingawards_banner_V1 11 (3)]
>
> [Description: cid:image003.jpg@01CD8503.E8C875E0]<http://www.deakin.edu.au/future-students/postgrad/events.php?utm_source=email-signature-pg&utm_medium=email&utm_content=signature-pg&utm_campaign=t3-pg-info-night>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Team-Based Learning [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of Sibley, James Edward
> Sent: Thursday, 11 October 2012 7:18 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: What is your grading scheme?
>
>
>
> Hi
>
>
>
> I was just reading
>
>
>
> Dean Paramlee, Larry Michaelsen, Sandy Cook, Patrica Hudes
>
>
>
> Team-Based Learning : A practical guide
>
>
>
> They presented a grading scheme
>
>
>
> Article's Grading Scheme
>
>
>
> iRAT 25%
>
> tRAT 35%
>
> Applications 35%
>
> Peer Evaluation 5%
>
>
>
> This is very different than the one we use
>
>
>
> UBC Grading Scheme
>
>
>
> iRAT 10%
>
> tRAT 10%
>
> Applications NOT GRADED
>
> Peer Evaluation 5%
>
>
>
> The reminder individual things like papers, problem set, midterms
>
>
>
> #############################
>
>
>
> What does your grading scheme look like?
>
> --
>
> Jim Sibley
> Director
> Centre for Instructional Support
> Faculty of Applied Science
> University of British Columbia
> 2205-6250 Applied Science Lane
> Vancouver, BC Canada
> V6T 1Z4
>
> Phone 604.822.9241
> Fax 604.822.7006
>
> Email: [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
> Check out http://<http://cis.apsc.ubc.ca/>www.teambasedlearning.org<http://www.teambasedlearning.org>
>
>
> (c) Copyright 2012, Jim Sibley, All rights reserved The information contained in this e-mail message and any attachments (collectively "message") is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient (or recipients) named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this message in error and that any review, use, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail, and delete the meesage.
>
> Important Notice: The contents of this email are intended solely for the named addressee and are confidential; any unauthorised use, reproduction or storage of the contents is expressly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please delete it and any attachments immediately and advise the sender by return email or telephone.
>
> Deakin University does not warrant that this email and any attachments are error or virus free.
>
>
>
> --
> ***********************
> L. Dee Fink
> 234 Foreman Ave.
> Norman, OK 73069
> Phone/FAX: 405-364-6464
> Email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Websites:
> www.designlearning.org<http://www.designlearning.org> [multiple resources on course design]
> www.deefinkandassociates.com<http://www.deefinkandassociates.com> [offer workshops & online courses]
> www.finkconsulting.info<http://www.finkconsulting.info> [Fink's consulting activities & publications]
>
> **Former President of the POD Network in Higher Education (2004-2005)
> **Author of: Creating Significant Learning Experiences (2003, Jossey-Bass)
> **National Project Director: Teaching & Curriculum Improvement (TCI) Project
> **Senior Associate, Dee Fink & Associates Consulting Services
>
>
>
>
>
> The materials in this email are private and may contain Protected Health Information. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that any unauthorized use, disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender via telephone or return email.
|
