We use "what grade would you like to get" instead of "pervious grade" jim > From: Ruth Levine <[log in to unmask]> > Reply-To: Ruth Levine <[log in to unmask]> > Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 09:38:35 -0500 > To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]> > Subject: Re: team transparency > > I actually put together teams with a pretty large class (66) in a lecture hall > using a pretty unwieldy method (where they were born). It was chaotic but the > students had a blast doing it and in the end we had good teams with good > heterogeneity. I think transparency is fairly important and getting a little > messy can be fun. You can go up and down the aisles of the lecture hall if you > need to. > > The trouble with using methods like previous grades is that if the students > find out you did that they will always wonder (or worse--find out!!) who the > "smart one" and who the "dumb one" in the team is and that can be > counterproductive to team cohesion in the long run. They might not trust a > teammate (for stupid reasons like race, gender, or ethnicity--assuming a > correlation between one of those qualities and "smartness"--"oh-that is the > "dumb one") If they don't find out how you put them together they will always > wonder what method you used. > > Even if you don't line them up--let them see and know (like the cart sorting > method) that you are using a system that is relatively random or based on > qualities that determine success (like previous experience in the subject). > But I would hesitate to put them in based on things like test scores or course > scores because people will always wonder who the group "low scorers" are. If > your groups are large enough (5-7) then every group will have enough talent to > succeed and in general no group should have a substantial advantage over > another. > > That is just my opinion, for what its worth.... > Ruth > > > Ruth E. Levine MD > > Clarence Ross Miller Professor of Psychiatry > The University of Texas Medical Branch > 301 University Blvd, Route 0193 > Galveston, Texas 77555-0193 > 409-747-9675 (Phone) 409-747-9677 (Fax) > [log in to unmask] > ________________________________________ > From: Team-Based Learning [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Sweet, > Michael S [[log in to unmask]] > Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 9:05 AM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: team transparency > > Jennifer, > > When classes get over a certain size (50-ish, or so), doing the formation in > class just becomes unworkable. Many teachers just assign students to teams > and announce the team rosters. > > As long as you share why you made the teams as you did (to be fair across > student backgrounds and give each team the best chance to succeed that you > could) students seem to quickly forget the formation experience and get on > with the business of the term. > > -M > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Team-Based Learning [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of > Jennifer Imazeki > Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2010 12:11 PM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: team transparency > > Hi all, > > How important do you think it is to do the creation of teams in class? > I'm asking because I was planning to create teams in class by having > students line up according to different characteristics and then > counting off. However, I want to make sure that both 'good' and 'bad' > students are distributed across teams and I'm not sure how to do that > without identifying the less-good students (in my mind, I am defining > 'good' and 'bad' students by how well they did in the lower-division > prereq classes, which are important preparation for this particular > course). On the first day, I am having them fill out a short survey > that I will use to gauge how to create the teams and I *could* just > create the teams myself and walk in the second day and tell the > students which team they are on. Does anyone think this would be a > terrible thing to do? > > thanks, > Jennifer