Actually, what we decided here in Singapore is that 50% grade will be individual and 50% team work – because we value team work as much as individual and believe the learning that occurs in teams is just as valuable.
Individual includes IRATs and any other summative assessments.
Teamwork = GRATS, Application, Peer Eval.
Peer eval is a constant 10%. That leaves 40% to split among the GRAT/Applications – with varies from course – depending on how challenging they feel the applications are. In general, of that 40%, we often give 25% GRAT, 15% application.
The weights for the IRATs depend a lot on how many other summative assessments there are and how many IRATS we have. So in one course, we have 8 IRATS and no other summative assessments – so each IRAT = 6.25% of grade.
In another course they have 3 exams, 15 quizzes and 12 IRATS. The exams are 10, 10, 5=25%; quizzes about 1% = 15%, IRATs= 10% - so about 1.25% each. So it all depends
In addition, many of our faculty have a threshold for passing on the individual performance. So, you still need at LEAST a 70% average individually to pass course – no matter what your total is.
Their concern was that if we had a 70% pass rate overall, one could pass by only doing well with the team work and blow off the individual. They think that if someone was getting average of 90% in teamwork (which would give them 45% of their grade). They THINK would mean they would only need a 25% average individually to pass course (to get an overall of 70% - thinking it is 45% + 25%). But I have not yet been able to convince them that, they would actually have to average at least in their individual 50% ((90+50)/2=70%) to get to 70% - but even that is low to them. So our students generally have grades between 75-85 because their individual work averages at least 70% + teamwork which averages about 85-90%
What I have noticed, though, that students who do get in the 70-75% range – usually are the lower end students, generally getting only 60-75% individually – and something we look out for.
Sandy
********************************************************
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]<mailto:[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 David Raeker-Jordan
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 4:26 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: What is your grading scheme?
iRAT = 10%
tRAT = 10%
Applications = not graded
Peer = 5%
The remainder are individual writing assignments.
-----------------
David Raeker-Jordan
Legal Methods Professor
Widener University School of Law
Harrisburg, PA
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Sibley, James Edward <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
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<tel:604.822.9241>
Fax 604.822.7006<tel:604.822.7006>
Email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Check out http://<http://cis.apsc.ubc.ca/>www.teambasedlearning.org<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.
|
