Maybe the issue should be framed as "lecture v textbook" not "lecture v TBL". Do lower division students not learn as well from reading textbook as upper division and graduate? I've thought a little of mixing short video stream lectures to combine with readings for out-of-class assignment, but do rest of TBL by the book. Has anybody tried this? On the free-rider problem on RATS that Fritz mentioned: I deal with this by assigning a decent portion of grade to IRATs so that bad individual performance will get you at the bottom of the grade distribution. I guarantee a C to any student who has a mediocre peer evaluation and whose individual total is 70% of the class high individual total. This eliminates most of the problem, but I'm teaching seniors. In a 200 level econ class, I'd expect more of a problem, but would also expect a good number of Ds and Fs no matter how you teach. Vance Fried Oklahoma State University From: Team-Based Learning [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Fritz Laux Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 10:29 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: TBL for all levels? Responding to Jim and Gary: I read Gary's query differently than Jim did. Perhaps I'm wrong on this, but perhaps a different perspective will be helpful. Jim is answering Gary by comparing the effectiveness of TBL to lecture in delivering content. While Gary says he's concerned about "how much material needs to be delivered in the traditional "sage on stage" (lecturing) format," I'm wondering if that's really where the problem is. Clearly, if Gary or I are really only concerned about content, then TBL solves that problem for us when we assign extensive pre-class readings and quiz before "lecture." For me, the problem has not been in delivering broad content, per se, but in providing motivation for students. So here's my attempt at defining this "content" problem (I'm just taking a stab at it...). Gary questions whether or not there are good ideas for customizing TBL for 200-level classes. The issue with content is that, for 400-level classes (and perhaps 200-level classes in engineering programs, like Jim's) students tend to be more interested in the material and motivated. For 200-level general-education classes in schools that have large populations of otherwise-occupied students, a substantial portion of attending students may be content to flunk their individual RAT quizzes and hope that team scores will be high enough to let them pull a 'C' for the semester. When this happens student participation in team activities can degenerate a bit. Thus, I figure that I need to apply TBL a bit differently in a 200-level class than I do in a 400-level class. How might I customize? (1) Restrict the semester grade weight that is applied to team activities, so that it's not too high. (2) Include a bit more lecturing to integrate the material covered in exercises and perhaps even to "level" in areas where too many students seem to be completely "out of the loop." As for item (2) in an econ class like Gary is probably teaching, this includes for me some class-wide lecture and discussion that I use to establishing a baseline understanding of supply and demand. I hope this helps. Fritz Laux Associate Professor of Economics Northeastern State University -- On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 9:28 AM, Sibley, Jim <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: Hi Gary We use TBL in many lower division courses It can be difficult when there are external content covering expectations for your course We use TBL in a 2nd year mechanical design course and last year when we resorted to lecturing at a difficult topic (we thought) the students stopped us and asked what we thought we were doing! They wanted TBL There is a good paper by Haidet et al (available at TBL site) around active vs passive learning and they found that they could cover as much detailed technical mathematical content as a passive delivery. There is also a great paper by Weeks (1987) talking about the fact that most engineering undergraduates (or at least the ones studied) see the instructor do 1000 problems at the board....and do another 3000 in their homework....BUT have no discernable improvement in their problem solving skills over their program......hmmm Read Bligh about the ineffectiveness of lectures I think the reality is that we as academics are in love with content and have a lot of trouble giving it up The literature really points to our failure to effectively "cover the content" (Ramsden has some damming quotes about this) THE REAL QUESTION is what do you want your students to be able to do.......reproduce lots of detail on demand.....or be able to think and solve problems This is very controversial....I am in the middle of a curriculum review for one of my engineering departments and the "reducing" content issue is always at the surface I have instructors who just can't give up the content....they are now using pre-class podcasts to "cover the content" so they can use class time differently. I am a bit biased.....I think TBL is the answer to many of the curriculum issues we struggle with....I seen too many good outcomes in TBL courses of all levels.... Jim ________________________________ From: Team-Based Learning [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of Gary D Lynne Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 6:05 AM To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> Subject: TBL for all levels? The "Webinar" yesterday stirred a thought/question, which I did not get around to posting: Does TBL have to be modified a bit for different levels of teaching, e.g. 200 level for mainly sophomores ( a course I have been working at converting into a TBL format) v. a graduate course? My concern is with how much material needs to be delivered in the traditional "sage on stage" (lecturing) format. I can see where an upper division (especially a capstone) course and/or graduate course could rely almost exclusively on self-teaching, with lecture supplements, and problem sets/case studies that really bring application to the table. I am more sceptical about the latter for 100-200 level courses, at least based on my limited experience ... trying to bring TBL into my 200 level course only for the second time this semester. I find myself needing to do a bit more traditional lecturing than TBL seems to call for.... especially with respect to core ideas these students have never seen before (in contrast to upper division, graduate students who have seen the core ideas/theories/constructs many times before). Any insights on this matter will be appreciated! Gary D. Lynne, Professor Department of Agricultural Economics and School of Natural Resources 103B Filley University of Nebraska-Lincoln Lincoln, NE 68583-0922 Website: http://www.agecon.unl.edu/facultystaff/directory/lynne.html Phone: 1-402-472-8281 Cell: 1-402-430-3100 "We are always only one failed generational transfer of knowledge away from darkest ignorance" (Herman Daly) "We do not just have our own interests. We share interests with others. Empathy is neither altruistic nor self-interested. It rather exemplifies the implicit solidarity of human nature" (Robert Solomon)