MAILING LISTS

It is not at all clear if they are using TBL (TM) - it appears NOT  
since:
1 - they have teams of 8 students which contradicts all the evidence  
for effective team size
2 - there's mention of 'self-assessment' and not a team assessment for  
Readiness Assurance
3 - no mention of the necessary 'hand-glove' fit between the Readiness  
Assurance  and the Application
      Exercise.
4 - sessions are podcasted for 'absentees' - our absentee rate is less  
than 2% and only for truly
excusable reasons.

Unless I learn otherwise, I fear that they have taken some elements of  
TBL and are trying to
make 'it' work.  Glad they are not calling it TBL, which is probably  
is not.  I know Ruth has
done a workshop there, but, as we have learned places often modify TBL  
so that it is NOT TBL, and
when it fails then they call it TBL!

A recent publication in Teaching and Learning in Medicine is another  
example wherein in the
title of the article they use 'Team-Based...,' but when you read the  
details they cut out key components
of TBL then tried to compare its effectiveness with traditional small  
group learning! They cut all
accountability components such as counting for a grade the RAP, no  
peer eval, and team selection
was not ideal.  I hope someday soon that Paul Haidet et al's article  
on standards will impact what
journals will publish under the TBL name.

Dean

Dean Parmelee, M.D.
Associate Dean for Academic Affairs
Boonshoft School of Medicine
Wright State University
Dayton, Ohio
http://www.med.wright.edu/aa/parmelee.html



On Feb 24, 2011, at 3:03 PM, Carey Nevin, Judy A wrote:

> One of the feature articles in this month’s UVa alumni magazine is  
> about the new-and-improved Medical School—both its new facility AND  
> its new curriculum, which is TBL without the label. Here’s the link  
> to the article:http://uvamagazine.org/features/article/adjusting_the_prescription/ 
> .
>
> --Judy
>