Hi I think peer evaluation is key….and it has to be peer evaluation with enough bite that the higher team grades are sufficiently tempered if you are a low performing student….so you don’t unfairly get benefit from higher team grades We use the FINK course multiplier…that is well described in back of the original TBL book…..I think all the peer evalution methods are compromises…so you need to find the one that right for you and your students Take a look at http://www.teambasedlearning.org/page-1032389 for a very high level look at peer evaluation And the article “Peer Assessment and Evaluation in Team-Based Learning” by Christina Cestone, Ruth Levine and Derek Lane (Google it….it should be easy to find)….is very helpful Whatever method you use…..I sit faculty down and we go through two scenarios…..take a high performing student with a great peer evaluation and check that at the end once peer evaluation is used to temper grades…that they are fairly rewarded….do this again with a low performing student to ensure that they don’t get an artificially high grade from the high team grades….when we do this we can typically see our peer evaluation may not have enough teeth We have had teams with 80% team component grade…..where a lower performing student ends up with 50% and a higher performing student has ended up with a grade near 100%….we are OK with this since in our TBL is only a portion of the students grade…the TBL component in our courses is typically only 25% of total course grade…the rest is individual (mid-terms, finals, assignments, reports) If you want a simple introduction to accountability in TBL…check out my website….http://learntbl.ca/what-is-tbl/making-student-accountable/ BTW We did a study in second year mechanical engineering comparing student satisfaction with "divide the money" evaluations and the rubric based evaluations. The students were more comfortable giving low scores, if they could justify them. So overall they preferred the rubric-based evals Jim -- Jim Sibley Director Centre for Instructional Support http://cis.apsc.ubc.ca/ Faculty of Applied Science University of British Columbia 2205-6250 Applied Science Lane Vancouver, BC Canada V6T 1Z4 Phone 604.822.9241 Email: [log in to unmask]<applewebdata:[log in to unmask]> Check out my new book Getting Started with Team-Based Learning available at Stylus Publishing<https://styluspub.presswarehouse.com/Books/SearchResults.aspx?str=getting+started+with+team-based+learning> Check out TBL at www.learntbl.ca © 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: Maxwell Rachel <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> Reply-To: Maxwell Rachel <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> Date: Thursday, August 28, 2014 at 2:30 AM To: "[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> Subject: Dividing up the assessment 'cake'and ideas for individual assessment activities Hi We are introducing TBL for the first time on three modules across our institution – one in marketing, one in occupational therapy and one in international law. The OT module is run over 6 hours a day for 24 weeks, whereas the other two are being adapted for use within our standard 1 hour lecture and 1 hour seminar per week framework. We are dividing up the assessment ‘cake’ and looking for some suggestions as to how to take effective account of our institutional requirement for a significant element of the assessment to comprise individual work. So far we have approx. 30% for the iRAT and tRAT elements combined, with the remaining 70% split between the group application element and the accompanying individual report/essay. My first question to the group is … what type of individual assessments do you set that allow for sufficient discrimination between students who are (obviously) working very closely in their teams? My second question is how do you divide up your ‘assessment cake’? Answers and guidance much appreciated. Thank you. Rachel Rachel Maxwell LL.B (Hons) PhD TQ(FE) Learning Designer Library and Learning Services The University of Northampton The Library, Park Campus, Boughton Green Road, Northampton NN2 7AL, United Kingdom T +44 (0)1604 892558 (personal) +44 (0)1604 892696 (office) Skype rachel.maxwell73 Twitter @DrRachLTB (personal) @learntechuon (team) LinkedIn http://linkedin.com/rachelmaxwell Learning Technology – www.northampton.ac.uk/learntech<http://www.northampton.ac.uk/learntech> WE ARE - NORTHAMPTON.AC.UK The University of Northampton joins the global Social Enterprise elite and is the first Ashoka U 'Changemaker Campus' in the UK; recognised for the excellence of our extensive social enterprise, innovation and entrepreneurship provision. See more about this on our website www.changemakercampus.org.uk<http://changemakercampus.org.uk> 96% of our graduates are in employment or further study six months after completing their courses. See more about this on our website www.northampton.ac.uk/about-us<http://www.northampton.ac.uk/about-us> This e-mail is private and may be confidential and is for the intended recipient only. If you are not the intended recipient you are strictly prohibited from using, printing, copying, distributing or disseminating this e-mail or any information contained in it. We virus scan all E-mails leaving The University of Northampton but no warranty is given that this E-mail and any attachments are virus free. You should undertake your own virus checking. The right to monitor E-mail communications through our networks is reserved by us.