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!