Hi
I thing of appeals only for trat....but realize our instructions are ambiguious...maybe they need to be tightened up
The rules we harp on are "only from team" and "outside class time they will be considered"
The appeals scenario we describe to students in orientation is the more typical....team appeal trat question
We have yet to see this team appealling an individual answer in our tbl impementation
25-35 teams per course on average...and somewhere around 40+ course iterations.... 10 years
I agrre with larry....NO APPEALS from individuals but this might not been individual...this is described as a team appealing on behalf of an individual
I am still comforatble with yesterdays advice....in case an important useful conversation actually happened with the whole team...which I think would be pretty neat.....but with caution....since...it would be easy to get a individual appeal in this case that the team didn't discuss but just allowed the individual to put forward
A reasonable line in the sand would be saying no.....the important learning happened...the team took hetregenity in the individual test and turned it into a consesus correct answer on trat
Jim Sibley
Sorry for brief message -sent from my iPad
On 2012-10-09, at 4:41 PM, Sandy Cook <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Jim – aren’t the appeals only for GRAT – not IRAT? The question is that the team got GRAT correct – but the team (perhaps), on behalf of the individual, is appealing the IRAT results – not the team/GRAT results. They are appealing the “wrong” answer made on an IRAT, on behalf of just one – suggesting that the “wrong” answer might in fact be “right” – given whatever reasoned argument.
>
> Would you still change an ‘individual’s” score?
>
> ********************************************************
> Sandy COOK, PhD | Senior Associate Dean, Curriculum Development |
> Medical Education, Research, and Evaluation (MERE) |
> W: (65) 6516 8722| F: (65) 6227 2698 |
>
> Administrative Executive: Belinda Yeo | [log in to unmask] | 6516-8511
>
> Important: This email is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete it and notify us immediately; you should not copy or use it for any purpose, nor disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you.
>
>
> From: Team-Based Learning [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Sibley, James Edward
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 3:35 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Appeals for i/tRATS
>
> Hi
>
> I think this should probably be allowed
>
> The team revisited the question, thought deeply enough about it to write a well written and well reasoned appeal….this is wonderful stuff
>
> The team is rallying around a team member (cohesion)….also wonderful stuff
>
> My only slight concern would be….if the bright student wrote the appeal by themselves…with no team input….then we don't get the above two wonderful's :-(
>
> jim
> --
> 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://www.teambasedlearning.org
>
>
> © 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.
>
> From: "Anderson, Douglas C" <[log in to unmask]>
> Reply-To: "Anderson, Douglas C" <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 15:26:49 -0400
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Appeals for i/tRATS
>
> I didn't specify that this couldn't be done in the syllabus because, honestly, I didn't think about it. But one of my teams appealed a question on the RAT even though the team got it right on the tRAT, because one of the members of the team got the question wrong on the iRAT. The student who got the question wrong is one of the brighter students in the class, and their appeal was well written and well reasoned. I'm going to allow it this time because I didn't address it in the syllabus. But for future reference, should this be allowed?
>
> --
> Douglas C. Anderson, Jr., Pharm.D., D.Ph., C.A.C.P.
> Professor and Chair
> Department of Pharmacy Practice
> Cedarville University School of Pharmacy
>
> Phil 4:13
>
|
