I like what Holly describes! It sounds like a great way to stimulate in-class discussion, and Eric Mazur at Harvard has been pioneering this for a couple of years, I think.
It is different from the RAP process as I use it.
I have mused about how I might incorporate clickers into the RAP. But I admit the practical complications I foresee have kept me from wanting to actually use the clickers for both initial *and* team graded tests. None of these are insurmountable, but collectively they comprise a bigger bite than I have wanted to take on all at once.
I think the most daunting process-related issue is having to march teams through PowerPoint test questions in lock-step. (If your test has more than one question on it.)
But several practical issues nibble away at me, too.
For example
1) "I forgot/lost my clicker, so I can't take this [individual] test?"
(Can be dealt with by distributing/collecting clickers at the door, though who gets which clicker must be tracked, and what about the clicker the sneaks out but doesn't come back next time, causing the student to ask this question next time. Not an issue with paper and pencil.)
2) "My clicker won't work, so I can't take this [individual] test?"
(If it is not an interference/systemic problem, I suppose you could give the student a different clicker--so you need to have a few extra--but then you need to note which number they get, and manually deal with the computer mis-calculating their grade from "absent" input. Not a problem with paper and pencil.)
3) "Whose clicker do we use to enter the team's answer on the team test?"
(If only one, then you need to go back in afterward and manually enter the team score as individual's grade.)
4) "If *everyone* answers the team question with their own clickers, what if I clicked the wrong button accidentally? I dropped my clicker and it clicked the wrong button!"
(Again, going back in manually.)
5) "How do I do a make-up test?"
(Paper and pencil, probably.)
Maybe I just don't have to guts to be an "early adopter" on this.
-M
From: Holly Bender
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 9:07 AM
Subject: Re: TEAMLEARNING-L Digest - 14 Sep 2005 to 5 Oct 2005 (#2005-45)
Hi Kathy, Alice and Maureen,
I teach veterinary clinical pathology using TBL. We did not have enough clickers for each student to have one (98 students total), so I am using the clickers (one per team) for simultaneous responses to Powerpoint multiple choice questions that I project in the front of the class. I am very pleased how it is working. This technique seems to keep the teams on task and they really do discuss the concepts! We have inter-team discussions on difficult concepts where there is disagreement. My impression is that key to its success is giving students course credit for their responses. I don't see students' attention drifting any more.
Best wishes,
Holly
On Oct 6, 2005, at 8:45 AM, Ross, Kathy wrote:
I've been thinking about the use of classroom response systems (aka
clickers
http://www.einstruction.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=HigherEd.Display&header
=HigherEd&content=engage) used along with team learning. Initially I was
wondering whether the clickers could substitute for paper for the R.A.T.
Now in reading Maureen's questions below, I am wondering they have some
other uses, such as allowing the simultaneous reporting she wants in
lieu of handing out cards.
The clickers seem to be a way to accomplish interaction and simultaneous
response even in larger classes, like Alice's Physicians Assistants, or
in classes with numbers in the hundreds. (I have not used them yet so I
am not speaking from experience. Our campus is just placing our orders
to get started with the clickers.) Have any of you tried combining that
technology with team learning?
Kathy
Kathy Ross, Ph.D.
Instructional Technologist
Center for Teaching, Learning & Assessment Indiana University Kokomo
2300 South Washington PO Box 9003 Kokomo, IN 46904-9003
765-455-9392
[log in to unmask]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 13:18:17 -0500
From: Maureen Jonason <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: translating conversations to the larger group
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C5C9AF.413EED70
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I have been having a similar reaction to my RATs: critiquing my test
questions. I do find some of their concerns legitimate and appreciate
sincere efforts to suggest appropriate revisions, but I sometimes feel
what they really want are easy questions. In terms of discussion, I have
a much smaller class, but sometimes the same thing happens. I know I
need to do more simultaneous reporting of responses (Who agrees or
disagrees? Choose the best example from 1, 2, or 3) so that they can see
that there are different ways of looking at an application and are then
inspired to debate the issue as a whole class rather than hiding behind
an erroneous assumption of agreement. It would require having index
cards with choices handed out to all and a call for simultaneous
reporting, much easier in a smaller class. I have used it to discuss
ethical issues (is this scenario ethical or
unethical?) and had good results.
-----Original Message-----
From: Team Learning Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Automatic digest processor
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 12:01 AM
To: Recipients of TEAMLEARNING-L digests
Subject: TEAMLEARNING-L Digest - 14 Sep 2005 to 5 Oct 2005 (#2005-45)
There are 2 messages totalling 417 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. translating conversations to the larger group (2)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 13:35:22 -0400
From: "Fox, Alice" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: translating conversations to the larger group
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C5C9D3.29B000A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I have just begun to use team-based learning in a class of 41 Physician
Assistant students; the current course is on communication in the
medical encounter and I have found the team approach very enlivening.
However, what I have noticed is that the team discussions are very
intense and lively and then when we come back together as a group, the
conversation halts. Reviewing the questions poorly understood on the
R.A.T. has taken a kind of semantic turn, as well (pointing to some of
my limitations as a test question designer), rather than what seem to be
the more substantive issues.
I am wondering if others have some techniques of transitioning, or
making use of the energy of the teams to share some of the insights with
the entire class. Or does it matter? I had the experience of spending
time with a team, engaged in a great conversation and then when I
suggested the topic be shared later on, the interest in discussing it
seemed gone.
Thanks,
Alice
=20
Alice B. Fox, DrPH, PA-C
Mercy College
Graduate Program in Physician Assistant Studies
1200 Waters Place
Bronx, N.Y. 10461
(914)674-7658
email: [log in to unmask]
fax: (718)678-8605
Kathy
Kathy Ross, Ph.D.
Instructional Technologist
Center for Teaching, Learning & Assessment
IU Kokomo
765-455-9392
[log in to unmask]
Holly Bender
Holly Bender, DVM, PhD, Diplomate ACVP
Director, Biomedical Informatics Research Group
Room 2254 Veterinary Medicine
Department of Veterinary Pathology
College of Veterinary Medicine
Iowa State University
Ames, Iowa 50011-1250
ph. 515-294-7947
fax 515-294-5423
[log in to unmask]
http://www.vetmed.iastate.edu/faculty_staff/profiles/hbender.asp
http://www.birg.vetmed.iastate.edu/
|
