June,

If you are like most of us, you want two things. One is having students truly understand the issues. The other is that you want to improve the quality of your questions (and are willing to grant appeals that would help you do it.)  On the other hand, what you  don't want to have happen is to get "ganged-up" on by the class. Assuming that's true AND assuming that the "problem" students are clearly a minority, I have a potential suggestion for your "Review" session that I think would be worth trying. It involves using your teams to help with both improving the questions and "educating" the students who are simply trying to get the points but, don't really have a good foundation for their position.
SOMETHING TO TRY
I'd still allow the students to create their index cards and their appeals but not ask for the appeals to be submitted until AFTER the review session. 
At the beginning of the review session, I'd make it clear that the PRIMARY purpose of the session was to ensure that everyone understood the concepts from the material that was tested and a SECONDARY purpose was to give class members who have appeals the opportunity to get feedback on their appeals so they could either decide that they weren't valid or discover how to make them more convincing. Then, I'd give the teams a chance to review the test and identify THE question they would most like to discuss as a class, do a simultaneous report and run the discussion much like an application activity. Finally, at the end of the class, I'd give instructions on how you want the appeals process to be handled.

I would predict that:
>the overall flavor of the session would be learning and problem solving not griping.
>everyone, faculty included, would learn a lot--especially students who had unsupportable appeals.
>a reasonably high percentage of potential appeals would end up not being submitted.
>the team interaction would significantly reduce the extent to which "appealers" would be in an "attack" mode in their subsequent interaction with faculty.
>the appeals that made it through would be much better thought out,(i.e., less emotional and more rational)
>faculty would have the support of the class discussion if they still felt the appeals were ill supported

Whatever you decide to do, I'd love to hear how it turns out.

Larry


On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 2:14 PM, June Johnson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Hi Paul, Thank you for taking time to reply. These are EXAM appeals, referring to the 3 major exams given periodically throughout the semester (perhaps we should call them "exam challenges"), we give 6 IRAT/GRAT, 3 module exams, and 1 final exam. We do follow the TBL format of group appeals after the GRAT, and those are going well. I concur with all your points. It may be time for us to try something different (we used to hold optional "Review" sessions for students to review the correct answer and rationale for the exam, but changed our approach when we switched to TBL). Perhaps we could start with the very next class reviewing any PROBLEMATIC questions with the class (where the exam stats told us the question was a poor quality question or only a small % got the question correct). I would advocate that we NOT agree to change any answer option at that time, but have students just make individual appointments, and bring a written evidence-based rationale. Any other ideas??
I just want to avoid confrontation, and having only 1 faculty stand in front of a large class to defend their answer.
June

June Felice Johnson, BS, Pharm.D., FASHP, FCCP, BC-ADM
Professor of Pharmacy Practice, Clinical Sciences Department
Drake University College of Pharmacy & Health Sciences
2507 University Avenue, Cline Atrium 009
Des Moines, Iowa  50311
Office: 515-271-1849


From: Paul Koles <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tuesday, July 22, 2014 11:43 AM
To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Cc: "Sibley, James Edward" <[log in to unmask]>, Pharmacy Health Sciences <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Appeals Process after Exams: Self Care and Therapeutics Course with over 100 students-Concerns and Need for Ideas

June:  I'm not sure I understand when the students are taking "their exams into a side room".   Is this before or after the Team RAT?   Are you using IF-AT cards that reveal the faculty's opinions before they go off to the room?   Are the appeals being generated after there has been whole group interactive discussion focused on questions that some of the teams missed?  

 I understand that students may become upset, angry, and even aggressive (unprofessionally) when they miss questions individually or as teams.    However, there is a designated time in the TBL sequence to voice these concerns to the faculty and whole class:  after the team RAT decisions have been finalized by all teams.    The facilitator must manage that discussion to insure that teams with dissenting opinions (i.e., disagreements with faculty's best answers) have opportunity to express why they disagree by supporting their opinions with facts and concepts.  These rationalizations for alternate answers may be of significant value for the whole class, because it forces the other teams to re-consider their positions.   However, once all opinions and evidence are "on the table", the facilitator must bring the discussion to an end with an invitation to write cogent appeals that are supported by authoritative resources (including the advance assignment).   Teams or individuals that want to continue discussion because they are upset or angry, but cannot verbalize additional evidence  to support their position, must not be allowed to take the rest of the teams and the faculty hostage by continuing to burn up valuable time.   When the facilitator perceives that no new information is being shared, it's time to say, "I appreciate the passionate and vigorous discussion we have had, but it's time to move on.   Feel free to submit a written appeal or talk with us after the session today."
A final point:  I never make decisions as to accepting or rejecting an alternate answer DURING a heated discussion, as my judgment is typically altered by a stubborn attitude that despises whining and digs my heels in to defend MY opinion.   The only exception is when the faculty's question is written so badly that most students cannot interpret the language in the stem and/or the answer options.   Such lame questions may be suspected when the IF-AT cards show considerable lack of support for the faculty's favorite answer. /PK

On Jul 22, 2014, at 12:05 PM, Sibley, James Edward wrote:

Hi

It sounds like these are individual appeals…we only allow appeals from teams…there is a nice moderating effect when the antagonizing student must convince their team mates to do a team appeal

jim
--
Jim Sibley 
Director 
Centre for Instructional Support 
Faculty of Applied Science 
University of British Columbia 
2205-6250 Applied Science Lane 
Vancouver, BC Canada 
V6T 1Z4 

Phone 604.822.9241 
Fax 604.822.7006 

Email: [log in to unmask]



Check out TBL at  www.teambasedlearning.org



hmmmmm…

© Copyright 2014, Jim Sibley, All rights reserved The information contained in this e-mail message and any attachments (collectively "message") is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient (or recipients) named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this message in error and that any review, use, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail, and delete the message.

From: June Johnson <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: June Johnson <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tuesday, July 22, 2014 at 8:46 AM
To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Appeals Process after Exams: Self Care and Therapeutics Course with over 100 students-Concerns and Need for Ideas

Colleagues, I teach in a clinical therapeutics course at Drake University where all 3 semesters are TBL, and also teach in a Self Care course in the TBL format. The issue of concern is our appeals process after exams.
Currently, we allow students to hand in their scantrons, and take their exams into a side room to view multiple copies of an exam key with rationale for correct/incorrect answers. Students pick up an index card with a few short notes that they can take with them to file an appeal for the question within 48 hours of the exam.
The concern: This has become a very emotionally charged situation for a number of students, who argue in writing (without solid evidence) that their answer, not the faculty's, is correct. This has negatively impacted student evaluations of our teaching in some cases.
We would appreciate suggestions on how to better conduct these appeals, as we feel they are an important extension of their learning, to avoid antagonism.
Thank you in advance for your ideas!

June Felice Johnson, BS, Pharm.D., FASHP, FCCP, BC-ADM
Professor of Pharmacy Practice, Clinical Sciences Department
Drake University College of Pharmacy & Health Sciences
2507 University Avenue, Cline Atrium 009
Des Moines, Iowa  50311
Office: 515-271-1849


Paul G. Koles, MD
Assoc. Professor of Pathology and Surgery
Chair Pathology
Boonshoft School of Medicine
Wright State University
140 White Hall
3640 Colonel Glenn Highway
Dayton, OH  45435-0001



--
*******************************
Larry K. Michaelsen, Professor of Management
Dockery 400G, University of Central Missouri
Warrensburg, MO 64093
660/543-4315 voice, 660/543-8465 fax
For info on:
Team-Based Learning (TBL) <www.teambasedlearning.org> 
Integrative Business Experience (IBE) <http://ucmo.edu/IBEl>
*******************************