Bill (and other Listserv participants),

Let me apologize in advance for my extended response.

I started using TBL in 1994 after taking an Organizational Behavior course with Larry Michaelsen as a doctoral
student.  I was studying interpersonal communication at the University of Oklahoma and was fortunate to test TBL in
communication courses for my doctoral dissertation which I completed in 1996 (see excerpt below). 

Although I was skeptical, I was amazed to find that student learning outcomes (e.g., affective, cognitive, and behavioral) were significantly greater in TBL courses when compared to traditional lecture-based courses. I have been arguing for the last decade that the reason for the significant learning outcomes is the interaction that occurs (between students and the content, students and other students, and students and instructor) in the classroom. 

I have been using TBL for a variety of undergraduate and graduate communication courses for the past decade (I was recently tenured at the University of Kentucky in the College of Communications and Information Studies).  For me, the key to a successful experience is to establish my credibility and expertise in the first couple of weeks of whatever course I am teaching.  To do this, I ask a series of questions BEFORE the Individual Readiness Assessment Tests to make sure students understand that I know the material and that I am not expecting them to "learn it on their own" but that I am expecting them to read because I am not going to be regurgitating textbook material in class.  The interaction generally requires no more than 3-5 minutes but provides students with the opportunity to clarify issues they may have with the reading before they are assessed with the individual and team RATs.  The questions I ask make it clear that I know that content and that I am serious about them reading the material before class.  I tell them that I am more concerned with application, evaluation, and synthesis of course concepts than I am with basic knowledge or comprehension. Additionally, I let the students know that we cannot possibly apply the content if they haven't taken the time to read in advance and have a basic understanding of the content.

I am convinced that the two most important elements in TBL are:  1) individual accountability and 2) the interaction that occurs as students apply course concepts and demonstrate their competence as they solve problems. 

If you've read this far, perhaps you will allow me to share some resources I have found especially useful in explaining to my graduate students and other colleagues across our campus how and why TBL works.

Beyond the 1997 text by Michaelsen, Knight, and Fink, there are two additional references that may prove especially useful for people that have concerns about  application-oriented activities and encouraging interaction:

1)  Michaelsen, L.K., Knight, A. B., & Fink, L. D. (1997).  Team-Based Learning: A Transformative Use of Small Groups.  Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers (Greenwood Press). http://www.greenwood.com/books/BookDetail.asp?dept_id=1&sku=H863
 
Michaelsen and Black (1994) is one of my favorite articles to provide an introduction to TBL.  It is also a great reference for curriculum development.  I generally share this reference as an introduction for colleagues and graduate students interested in using TBL:

2) Michaelsen, L. K., & Black, R. H. (1994). Building learning teams: The key to harnessing the power of small groups in higher education, Collaborative Learning:  A Sourcebook for Higher Education (Vol. 2). State College, PA: National Center for Teaching, Learning & Assessment

Finally, it may be helpful (even to those of you who have attended Larry or Dee's workshops on TBL) to watch how Larry encourages interaction.  There is an outstanding Internet Resource sponsored by the Baylor College of Medicine focused on Team Learning in Medical Education.  The link is provided below:

3)  http://www.bcm.tmc.edu/fac-ed/team_learning/intro_to_team_learning.html

When you point your browser to the Baylor page, scroll to the bottom of the page and click on the Real Video icon that will link to a 60 minute streaming video file that contains a talk Dr. Michaelsen gave to the Baylor faculty titled "Active Learning in Lectures:  Alternatives for Making Teaching in Large Classes Interactive."  Pay especially close attention to the debriefing process and how Larry encourages workshop participants to "defend" their answers.  His use of humor is especially effective as he points out differences in group answers.

One last point.  In several conversations with Larry Michaelsen (and Dee Fink) over the past several years I have determined that there are at least three conditions (related to the instructor) under which TBL should NOT be used:

1)  If the instructor has not mastered the content that is to be taught;
2)  If the instructor is not willing to relinquish the instructional spotlight and some classroom control (e.g. not willing to move from sage on stage to guide on side); and
3)  If the instructor does not know what s/he wants the students to DO with the course concepts (e.g., curriculum).


Just my two cents.

-Derek

================================================
**In my dissertation (Lane, 1996  THE USE OF PERMANENT LEARNING TEAMS IN TEACHING INTRODUCTORY COMMUNICATION COURSES:  ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF COMMUNICATION ON HUMAN LEARNING) I wrote,

"What is learning?  Why does it occur?  What role should/does communication play in the learning process?  This study has investigated learning as an active process—different from learning as a static outcome.  Knowledge is created and pursued through communication.  Educators change not just what people know, or even what they can do, but who they are.  This study has argued for a reconceptualization of  learning from a communicative perspective.  The bottom line is that learning teams do impact student learning and illustrate the important impact student communication has on the learning process. 
        
Although the use of Learning Teams requires advanced planning, the advantages may make it well worth the effort.  However, we should continue to create and evaluate teaching methods to help ensure the most effective learning environments possible. Great clarity and understanding is possible if researchers can continue to refine answers to such fundamental questions as:
 What is learning?  Why does it occur? What role should/does communication play in the learning process?  What today is impossible for us to do in education, but if it could be done, would fundamentally change the entire educational process? 
        
The answers to these questions can be found through investigations of innovative instructional strategies.  Team-based learning makes students accountable and responsible for their learning and allows them to construct knowledge through communication.  Learning occurs as a result of communication as students apply knowledge and make connections.  If the difference between knowing and teaching is communication, and the difference between passive reception and genuine learning is active communication, this study provides evidence that active communication is facilitated by learning teams in communication classes."



At 03:13 PM 2/9/2004, you wrote:

Hi everyone,
Like Karla, I also just started team based learning this semester and I
seem to have a similar problem with teams not willing to defend their
answers.  For example, last week they completed a case study on
speciation of maggot flies
(http://www.sciencecases.org/maggot_fly/maggot_fly.asp) and each of
the 6 teams wrote their short answers (without explanations) on the
board at the same time.  It seemed to me that if 4 of the teams came to
the same answer then the other 2 teams felt they must be wrong. I even
tried to indicate that I thought the minority answers were better but
the teams seemed content and felt they had finished.  I am wondering if
this part of the team builiding process and it might just take some
time.  However, I still feel I could have done something differently.

Some of my students are also making comments that may be common, but
they do make me feel a little bit uneasy about the team-based learning.
A few have said things like:
I don't like that we are forced to learn this all on our own.
When are you going to lecture, I don't learn anything from the others
in my team.
I don't have any notes and I don't know what to study for the test (
even after I explained that their notes during team discussions were
their notes for the class and they will have open book tests)

Are these common or are they warning signs that I am not doing
something right???

Bill Bromer


 "Derek R. Lane" <[log in to unmask]> 02/09/2004 12:59:45 PM >>>
Karla,

The problem may be that you are not having the students simultaneously
reporting.  If you have specific choices and each team is required to
make
a choice and report at the same time, you will actually have more
interaction and enthusiasm as the teams "defend" their answers.

Just a thought.

-Derek

At 12:28 PM 2/9/2004, Kubitz, Karla wrote:

>Hello all,
>I'm new to team based learning, having implemented it in my classes
just
>this semester.  I've a question that those with more experience might
be
>able to help with.  I've come up with team assignments that fit
>Michaelsen's criteria... same problem, make a specific choice,
sharing
>responses at the same time, etc. and they seem to 'work' when the
teams
>are working towards making their choices.  For example, I gave the
teams a
>set of handouts about different ways to measure physical activity and
told
>them I was doing a research study and needed them to decide which was
the
>best way.  The students seemed interested and involved.  However,
things
>seem to fall a bit flat after they report their answers.  That is,
there
>seems to be minimal interest in what the other teams have decided or
in
>talking about the differences in the answers and the rationales
behind
>those answers.  They seem to be thinking... we're done... time to go.
I
>guess I'm not sure how to facilitate that last bit of the process.
Any
>suggestions?  Karla
>
>Karla A. Kubitz, Ph.D., FACSM
>Associate Professor
>Department of Kinesiology
>8000 York Avenue
>Towson University
>Towson, MD 21252
>410-704-3168 (ph)
>410-704-3912 (fax)

*********************************************
Derek R. Lane, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Department of Communication
231 Grehan Building
Lexington, KY 40506-0042

(859) 257-4102 (office)
(859) 257-4103 (fax)

[log in to unmask] (email)

http://www.uky.edu/~drlane (web page)
*********************************************

Bill Bromer    a.k.a.  bb           "Take nothing on its looks;
University of St. Francis            take everything on evidence.
500 N. Wilcox                              There's no better rule."
Joliet, IL 60435                                   Charles Dickens
                                                                Great
Expectations
Phone:  (815) 740-3467
Fax:    (815) 740-4285
E-mail: [log in to unmask]