Hi Dee and Listserve members,
I agree with the analysis by Dee and the approach Adrew takes.
I do it a little different. I spend the first three class sessions
explaining to them why I chose to use this teaching strategy. Since I have
been doing this for four semesters now and other faculty in the department
are using it as well the students now have heard about it and expect it. On
a side note, we are seeing the benefits trickling up to the upper level
courses (Mine is a sophomore leve course). Students do not resist team work
anymore, they are more task oriented and focused during the class sessions,
and they interact more readily and actively with each other.
Back to the issue. I did serveral things to help the students focus on team
work:
1) During the first class session of the semester I let students complete a
background questionnaire to get a better sense of their experience with the
topic of the course and their GPA. I created groups based on sex, GPA, and
background. Absolutely NO self-selection. I have an extensive syllabus in
which I explain the rationale for team-based learning and critical thinking
among other things. I read the whole syllabus to them verbatim and the first
practice RAT is over the syllabus.
2) On the website for the course I placed Tickets To Class the students
print out, complete, and bring to class in preparation for the next in-class
assignment. The first TTC was related to issues concerning teamwork. They
had to individually think about a Full Value Commitment (this is basically a
contract between team members concerning behaviors they expect of each
other). They also had to develop consequences that would be imposed on
members if they did not follow the "rules." During the subsequent class
session, each team developed their own FVC. I took all of them and compiled
their statements into a class FVC with consequences. The entire class then
got to vote on which items to keep. Following that vote every student signed
a copy of the contract that was placed in their team folder. During that
session I presented the students with several characterizations of possible
disruptive individuals and asked them the questions "how would you deal with
this person if s/he was in your group?" This may seem overkill, but it
focuses students right from the beginning on essential team-related issues.
3) I developed a theme for the class and organized the content into 7 Units.
Each unit has either 1 or 2 RATs for a total of 11 RATs for the entire
semester. I placed Study Guides on the course website that help the students
focus on the most important concepts for each unit. At the end of the Study
Guide if place Study Concentration Questions. Students are allowed to print
those questions out and make handwritten notes. They can bring that piece of
paper and use it for the RATs. It boosted their performance and I have not
heard any complaints about not lectures before the RAT. You can say that is
cheating, but I don't see it that way. It helps them read the content more
carefully and they are better prepared for the team discussion during the
team RAT.
4) When there is no RAT for a session students bring their TTC to class. The
questions they answered on it are the lead-in and preparation for that
session's in-class assignment. If they do not bring their TTC they receive
and absence and loose the 5 points that go with the TTC. The assignments
involve critical thinking exercises related to the content using David
Perkins' 5 questions: 1) what's the purpose, 2) how is it organized; 3) what
is an example; 4) how can we explain it; 5) how do we know it works? The
students are still struggling with this. I practice this approach with them
during the first two units. For four of the other 5 units the work on
synthesizing concepts and presenting their work on a poster during the last
session of the unit. They have a rubric of standards based on Perkins 5
questions that they use to develop their poster and to evaluate a randomly
selected poster. I reserve the right to give their grades however. All this
is quite difficult and sometimes emotional for them, but it certainly
engages them. I never ask that they meet outside of class, but guess what,
they are doing it on their own.
Team-based Learning works, but you need to explain clearly and repeatedly
why you are making them do this. Dee's suggestion to carefully balance RATs
and tough but do-able assignments is also very important. Writing good
assignments is very difficult, but also very rewarding.
Group dynamics do not develop automatically and I come back to their
functioning as a team several times during the semester using formative
evaluations and surveys. I will also step in as facilitator if a team is
clearly having problems to help them work it out.
Hope this is somewhat helpful.
Harry Meeuwsen
-----Original Message-----
From: Dee Fink [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 5:36 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Team-Based Learning: Student Resistance?
Members of the Team-Based Learning (TBL) Listserv:
In the last few weeks, I have had a couple of different phone calls or
emails from teachers using TBL who are experiencing various forms of
resistance from students. It appeared that this might be a widespread
enough problem to warrant checking further into the situation and sharing
the question on this listserv.
What might be causing this?
When I checked into the situations where this was occurring, I
sometimes found the following factors which seemed like they might be
contributing to the problem:
* Teacher had not spent much time at the beginning of the course,
explaining to students how the course was going to be different and why the
teacher was choosing to teach this way.
* Letting students pick their own team members.
* No (or not many) application exercises between Readiness Assessment
Tests.
* Giving application exercises to the groups/teams that required them
to meet outside of class.
* Being uncertain or equivocal about how peer assessment was going to
work.
Of these, the third item (too many RATs in relation to application
exercises) seemed especially important in causing students to be
non-cooperative. It is like we are telling students: "Work hard so you can
do well on this test/quiz, and I will reward you with...another quiz." If
the process is perceived this way, it isn't likely to generate a lot of
support and enthusiasm. Student interest and perceived value is likely to
come more from seeing themselves able to use the knowledge in challenging
application activities.
Your Experience?
I suspect there may be value in letting everyone on this listserv share
their experiences and observations.
Does the analysis above correspond with your experience, or not? What have
been your experiences and observations in terms of what seems to affect
student attitudes (positive or negative) toward TBL?
Dee Fink
|
