It is not at all clear if they are using TBL (TM) - it appears NOT since: 1 - they have teams of 8 students which contradicts all the evidence for effective team size 2 - there's mention of 'self-assessment' and not a team assessment for Readiness Assurance 3 - no mention of the necessary 'hand-glove' fit between the Readiness Assurance and the Application Exercise. 4 - sessions are podcasted for 'absentees' - our absentee rate is less than 2% and only for truly excusable reasons. Unless I learn otherwise, I fear that they have taken some elements of TBL and are trying to make 'it' work. Glad they are not calling it TBL, which is probably is not. I know Ruth has done a workshop there, but, as we have learned places often modify TBL so that it is NOT TBL, and when it fails then they call it TBL! A recent publication in Teaching and Learning in Medicine is another example wherein in the title of the article they use 'Team-Based...,' but when you read the details they cut out key components of TBL then tried to compare its effectiveness with traditional small group learning! They cut all accountability components such as counting for a grade the RAP, no peer eval, and team selection was not ideal. I hope someday soon that Paul Haidet et al's article on standards will impact what journals will publish under the TBL name. Dean Dean Parmelee, M.D. Associate Dean for Academic Affairs Boonshoft School of Medicine Wright State University Dayton, Ohio http://www.med.wright.edu/aa/parmelee.html On Feb 24, 2011, at 3:03 PM, Carey Nevin, Judy A wrote: > One of the feature articles in this month’s UVa alumni magazine is > about the new-and-improved Medical School—both its new facility AND > its new curriculum, which is TBL without the label. Here’s the link > to the article:http://uvamagazine.org/features/article/adjusting_the_prescription/ > . > > --Judy >