Hi Sandy,
In my view, I think a way to make sure *individuals* are learning is to incorporate
individual assignments (e.g. papers, test, even mid-terms) into the unit following
the readiness assurance process and instructor feedback. Any given unit could
begin with a RAP, then instructor feedback and application exercises, and
conclude with an individual exam.
I have been researching the discourse
processes that take place in various TBL classrooms for three years now. I
have recordings of the dialogues that unfold following both kinds of process: a
gRAT following an iRAT and a gRAT *not*
following an iRAT.
When students take the iRAT first, the gRAT
conversations which follow begin with a general reporting of “What did you put?”
and--as differences are quickly discovered—questions about “Why did you put
that?” immediately ensue, and the students are off-and-running, digging into
the content and teaching each other. Most of them have thought out their
answers and have reasons for having put what they did—and they are ready to
talk about those reasons.
However, when students did *not* take the iRAT first, the conversations
were much flabbier, flatter and filled with satisficing. There are long
periods of silence during which the students read the question, often followed
with a very hesitant “I don’t know. . . A, maybe?” These timid first-tries
are often siezed by the group and rarely challenged as often as you’d like—team
members just seemed relieved that somebody offered up something as an answer,
and they are eager to move on and get it over with.
I think the having students take iRAT
first is important for a few reasons:
1) Time to read and think about the question at one’s own pace (not
the pace of the group first)
2) Private weighing of alternatives and committing to one answer
(achieving what is called “epistemic closure”)
3) This commitment triggers an emotional investment in one’s answer and
makes one later need a good reason to abandon it (motivating them to argue
toward the best thinking).
These are just some thoughts off the top
of my head. You can give it a try if you like, but I think you’ll find that the
group discussions that do not follow an iRAT are pretty watery and
unsatisfying. At least that’s what I found.
For what it’s worth!
-M
From: Team Learning
Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Sandy Cook
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 4:52
AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Reversing IRA/GRA -
GRA/IRA
Dear All,
I wanted to ask everyone a question about
an idea we are playing with here. With the volume of material the
students need to prepare for this intensive Duke-NUS medical school basic
science curriculum, it is sometimes so very difficult for them to be certain
they have focused on the right content and at the right level until after the
GRA section. They feel a bit demoralized at their “relatively” low IRA
scores. Some of our faculty (not all) do believe that the students
learn so much from the GRA part, but there is no real way to be 100%
certain. If the IRA is partially designed to ensure individual accountability,
but you have a group who is highly motivated to be accountable and your goal is
that they actually learn it the material what would be your thoughts on
reversing them sometimes? I also thought it would help the students to
work as a team better in their learning – as sometimes they just study on their
own and don’t really take full advantage of the power of group study (and
sometimes they just don’t have time or want someone there to ask questions when
the group cannot answer it).
What if we gave a comprehensive closed
book GRA – have the groups teach, learn, question together to get the answers
and then do a more focused, closed book IRA on similar (but obviously changed)
questions to see if they, as individuals, get it?
Many of our faculty here are not completely
convinced that ALL the individuals are learning in the groups, thus are
skeptical of the use of the group scores to be added to student’s overall
scores. We want to explore ways, beyond or in addition to the regular end
of module exams and standardized exams, to demonstrate that they actually have
learned in the group process.
Thoughts, comments?
***************************************
Sandy COOK, PhD | Associate Dean, Curriculum Development |
Administrative Executive: