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
On Feb 24, 2011, at 3:03 PM, Carey Nevin, Judy A wrote: