My explanation is a combination of those that you offer. The data you
present is typical of: 1) a single (and probably short) test, 2) given
to newly-formed groups--not yet teams, 3) not using IFAT answer sheets.
Thus, your results are a likely to be a combination of the explanations
you offer plus the "lucky guess," option could just as easily be called,
"unreliable test"--which is characteristic of almost ANY short and new
test. (You might want to check out Watson, W. E., Michaelsen, L. K. &
Sharp, W. (1991). Member competence, group interaction and group
decision-making: A longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology,
76, 801-809 to see a fuller explanation and some supporting empirical
evidence.) Based on cumulative scores (i.e., increased reliability from
a longer test), between 1986 and 2003 (when I started using IFATs), I
had data from over 1,100 teams and all but 1 team scored higher than its
own best member and by an average of nearly 11%. Since I've started
using IFATs (which provide teams with some within-test feedback, I
haven't had any team fail to beat its best member and the average gain
has been 20+%.
Larry
Larry K. Michaelsen
Professor of Management
Central Missouri State University
Dockery 400G
Warrensburg, MO 64093
660/543-4124 voice
660/543-8465 fax
>>> "Philpot, Robert J." <[log in to unmask]> 11/23/05 3:11 PM >>>
Hello All,
I have been intrigued by the comparisons of team scores on the gRATs to
the High, Low and Mean scores on the iRATs. Lately I've had the
opportunity to keep track of scores following different team learning
experiences. It struck me as a little odd that some teams actually score
lower than the highest member on that team. I've attributed this to 1.)
inexperience working as a team, 2.) withholding by the brighter team
member (for whatever reason), and 3.) lucky guessing by unprepared
students that cannot help their team experience the same success.
Perhaps someone could posit another cause?
Low
High
Mean
Team Score
Gain above high
Gain above mean
Gain above low
Team1
56%
67%
61%
72%
6%
11%
17%
Team 2
50%
89%
78%
94%
6%
17%
44%
Team 3
67%
89%
78%
94%
6%
17%
28%
Team 4
61%
83%
78%
89%
6%
11%
28%
Team 5
50%
89%
67%
78%
-11%
11%
28%
Team 6
56%
89%
72%
83%
-6%
11%
28%
Team 7
72%
89%
78%
94%
6%
17%
22%
Team 8
67%
78%
75%
89%
11%
14%
22%
Team 9
72%
89%
78%
89%
0%
11%
17%
Team 10
56%
78%
67%
83%
6%
17%
28%
My real question, however, revolves around the analysis of this data
once it is collected. Has anyone used a reasonable statistical test to
compare individual scores on the iRAT to the team scores on the gRAT? I
have been considering ways to compare performance of several teams on
gRATs (dependent variable) following the use of an educational
intervention (independent variable). All of the students will have taken
the iRAT prior to the intervention so I could compare team scores to
high, low and mean individual scores for each group also. Exp.
(iRAT->X1->gRAT) vs. control (iRAT->gRAT->X2).
'Looking forward to hearing your ideas and experiences,
Bob
Robert Philpot Jr., PhD, PA-C
Clinical Assistant Professor
Associate Clinical Coordinator
University of Florida College of Medicine
Physician Assistant Program
Gainesville, FL 32610-0176
352-265-7955 w
352-871-5053 mobile
[log in to unmask]
http://medinfo.ufl.edu/pa/faculty/Bob/
"Someday, after mastering the winds, the waves, the tides and gravity,
we shall harness for God the energies of love, and then, for a second
time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire."
Pierre Teilhard de Chardin
!DSPAM:1576,4384e50a18453946398363!
|
