I did plan ahead somewhat. Every other Friday was movie day and everyone who attended and filled out an "active viewing worksheet" got a point. That's something new.  But then during the term when a group activity turned out to be a dud I would give very easy grades on it.
 
So, I think in the future I would be less lenient if only because the group activities would, I hope, be better. I will probably keep the movie idea for MWF courses. It gives students the option of a day off if they're doing well, and that makes everyone happy.
 
-Melissa
 
 

 
On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 12:26 PM, John Fritz <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Glad to hear it, Melissa.

And I think what you did was just fine. Sorry if it sounded otherwise. 

But I'm curious: you anticipated possible resistance, enough to plan ahead by being more lenient as you first introduced TBL. How did you know this might be an issue? Did other colleagues who used TBL tip you off? Had you experimented with other teaching changes before and encountered resistance? And since students did love TBL and learning improved, what are your thoughts about gradually being less lenient on the grading the next time you use it?

Please don't think I'm singling you out: I don't mean to. But it does make me wonder how tenure (or the lack of it) continues to influence innovation in teaching. You were prudent in thinking ahead about the impact of student evaluations on P & T. Just wondering how Erica, a grad student, proceeds without the golden ticket in hand.

Thx,

John


On Mar 10, 2009, at 2:25 PM, Melissa Michelson wrote:

Student learning did improve. They loved TBL and I don't think it was just the grading.

I just think it is so hard to switch (and I have been teaching for 15 years, so it was a big deal to re-do my syllabus), and mistakes are made (goodness knows some of my group activities were disasters) that I wanted to reduce the likelihood that students would complain.

And I don't think there's anything wrong with that. Student evaluations are notoriously subjective and related to the grades they are getting. Being a little lenient when it seems necessary is, IMHO, a logical move for untenured folks.

-Melissa




On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:49 AM, John Fritz <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
On Mar 10, 2009, at 1:05 PM, Melissa Michelson wrote:

For those concerned about promotion/tenure review, I would recommend making grading a little more lenient while switching. Nothing makes students happier than good grades. I did this last year and got perfectly lovely student evaluations despite it being my first try with TBL. I have tenure, so it doesn't matter so much, but I didn't want a revolt.
-Melissa

Melissa,

Sorry, but I just have to ask: did you think student learning improved using TBL vs. not using it?

If so, now that you have tenure, would you be prepared to be less lenient to see how student learning is impacted by changes in your teaching? If student learning doesn't improve, will you continue to use TBL?

No body likes getting bad evaluations, but if students learn better, don't we have an ethical obligation to resist (or redirect) their pressure to "not teach," as some so rudely expressed to Erica? My Faculty Development Center colleague Barry Casey just came back from the TBL conference, and he was telling me of some engineering faculty who expressed similar pressures Erica is experiencing. However, even when student grades improved, some students said they didn't like TBL and wanted to "go back" to the old way of lectures & papers.

This troubles me.

Apart from preparing students to think and cooperate in ways that will be expected of them in their careers, don't we owe it to them to confront their own inflexibility, so they can learn to adapt to the next new thing they will inevitably face--in life generally?

John