Dear Derek,
I strongly recommend against using open-book RATs for a number of reasons.
The primary purposes of the RATs are:
1. Holding students accountable for *thorough* pre-class preparation so
that you have class time to focus on concept applications.
2. Ensuring that students understand and internalize the foundational
concepts related to the upcoming applications. Otherwise, their ability to
tackle difficult applications is limited. (Note: The RATs don’t need to ask
about details because the applications *are* open-book which allows
students to develop an understanding of the details *within a context.*)
3. Ensuring that students learn *through experience* that, when faced
with difficult decisions, even the best-informed member is far less likely
to make correct decisions than relying on decisions made by teams
discussing the alternatives and reaching a team consensus. This promotes
the development of the both the skills *and attitudes *that are needed
for effective teamwork during the applications and subsequent professional
practice.
Based on both experience and empirical evidence, allowing open-book RATs
work *against *all three of the above objectives:
- Knowing that they will have to *remember *the key ideas for a
closed-book iRAT motivates students to develop a deeper understanding that
they would need to be able to “quickly look up” ideas about which they were
unsure. In fact, it is a good idea to remind them to be prepared to
“explain the reasons for their answers” because that is what they will need
to do during the closed-book tRATs.
- If you allow students to access their readings during the tRAT, doing
so will limit their opportunities to learn from each other. This happens
because, *instead of actually discussing the concepts you want them to
understand,* much of the time will be spent with members
*individually* reviewing
the pre-class preparation materials. In fact, it is entirely rational for
them to divide up the questions so that each member is responsible for
looking up the answers to their assigned questions. When teams use this
strategy, their scores are high but pretty much the only thing members talk
about is who looks up what instead of actually discussing the concepts
themselves. (Note: For several years, the Duke/NUS Graduate Medical School
allowed students to use their pre-class study materials to answer a subset
of the tRAT questions to see how doing so would affect their retention of
the material. The result was that, even though they always correctly
answered the questions they looked up, they were fare more likely to
*incorrectly*answer final exam questions over the same concepts as
compared to students who were *not *allowed to use their study materials
and had to struggle with the identical questions on the tRAT.)
- Another really harmful outcome of allowing open-book tRATs is that the
reduction in time spent in actually discussing the concepts almost totally
eliminates the opportunity for learning two critical lessons. One is that
students will seldom experience the terrific power of group-consensus
decisions for both learning and solving difficult problems. The other is
that because students spend so little time discussing concept-related
discussions, very few will develop the team decision-making skills that are
critical to their success in both the concept applications and later as
they enter professional practice.
*******************************
Larry K. Michaelsen, Creator of Team-Based Learning (TBL);
Emeritus Professor of Management
44 NW 400th Road
Warrensburg, MO 64093
USA
cell phone: +1 (660) 624-4487
For info on:
Team-Based Learning (TBL) <www.teambasedlearning.org>
*******************************
On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 1:38 PM Derek Murray <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hi folks!
>
>
>
> For some reason, I had it in my head that the tRAT should always be open
> book, for the simple fact that it encourages students to bring their books
> and to take good notes. For the quieter student who is well-prepared but
> may be shy to speak up during the tRAT, they have something to back up
> their position. It also helps with appeals. Now I can’t seem to find any
> reference to this in the major sources.
>
>
>
> Anyone have a citation for this?
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> Derek
>
>
>
>
>
> *Derek Murray, PhD (he/him)* l *Education Developer*
> Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning l Learning Services
> [log in to unmask] l 250-370-3949
> *CAMOSUN COLLEGE l Victoria, BC l **camosun.ca/cetl*
> <http://camosun.ca/cetl>
>
>
> *______________________________________ *
>
> *I am grateful to be living and working on the traditional territories of **lək̓ʷəŋən
> and **W̱SÁNEĆ peoples. I am humbled by their welcome and graciousness to
> all who seek knowledge here.*
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> To unsubscribe from the TEAMLEARNING-L list, please click here.
> <http://lists.ubc.ca/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=TEAMLEARNING-L&A=1>
>
> Further information about the UBC Mailing Lists service can be found on
> the UBC IT website.
>
########################################################################
To unsubscribe from the TEAMLEARNING-L list, please click the following link:
http://lists.ubc.ca/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=TEAMLEARNING-L&A=1
Further information about the UBC Mailing Lists service can be found on the UBC IT website.
|