I use an 8 item, (critical thinking) model for my iRATs/T-RATs.  There are three choices plus all of the above, none of the above, A&B but not C, B&C but not A, and A&C but not B.  Then you can run it either by starting at 8 points per item or do percentages.  I use percentages.  So the 100% on the first try, the 70% for the second, 60% for the third, 40% for the 4th, 20% for the 5th, 10% for the 6th and 5% for the 7th (obviously  0 for the 8th).  I use an algorithm on the spreadsheet generated by the clicker software to compute the score.

 H D B  3 0.6


Rarely do teams go past 3 or 4 guesses.  The algorithm also only counts if they entered a different answer.  It is interesting to see how in every T-RAT at least one team has entered the same choice multiple times. 

I toyed with the idea of giving partial credit if they chose "A" and the answer was "F" (A&B but not C).  However, when I ran the numbers on the number of times that has happened, it's usually only one or items.  So we're talking a difference of .10 points. Also, I usually make the question such that leaving out one of the parts is important to the concept or including the wrong part destroys the meaning. One example would be "The DSM-V defines bulimia as having the following conditions..."  I they only got the binging and not the purging or the purging and not the binging or included excessive sleeping, they would have missed the key components of the concept.

On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 2:04 PM, OP McCubbins <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

I teach a capstone course in farm management and operations- Junior/ senior level students only. Students are making decisions that affect a working farm operation. Because of this, I grade TRATS with four options (a,b,c,d) 4-2-0. My experience thus far has been great. Students are extremely engaged in the discussion process and only seem to have issues at the beginning of the semester when they’re are unfamiliar with the process. I have found that if they exhaust their options for earning points, it is generally because they haven’t adequately prepared (also evident when compared to each members IRAT score).

 

OP McCubbins

Instructor- AGEDS 450

Collegiate FFA Graduate Advisor

College of Agriculture & Life Sciences

Department of Agricultural Education & Studies

217B Curtiss Hall

Ames, IA 50011

859-444-3966

[log in to unmask]

 

 

                        GO CYCLONES!

head-is

 

From: Team-Based Learning [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Sibley, James Edward
Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 9:54 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: tRAT Grading

 

Hi

 

We use 4-2-1-0 on 4 distractor cards and 8-4-2-1-0 on five distractors cards

 

The 4-3-2-1-0…makes me uncomfortable ….a student could not know a single right answer…but get them on the second try and still get 75% on test….that just feels wrong to me

 

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 
Email: [log in to unmask]

 

 

Check out this recent article in Macleans - Canada’s news magazine

 

Check out my new book Getting Started with Team–Based Learning available at Stylus Publishing

 

Check out my TBL website at www.learntbl.ca

 


? Copyright 2015, 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: Josie Fraser <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: Josie Fraser <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Friday, January 16, 2015 at 7:08 AM
To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: tRAT Grading

 

We use 4 - 2 - 1 - 0

We have A-D (4 option) MCQs for our tRATs, so I couldnąt justify giving 1

mark to the students who have exhausted all the options.

If you have A-E then I can see 4, 3, 2, 1 (0) making more sense.

I wonder whether one gets more discussion with the 4/2/1/0 option. The

fact that getting it right first time is worth double the points may

encourage students to spend more time thinking/discussing their preferred

response and coming to a proper consensus. But that is just a gut feeling

- I wonder if anyone has tried to see whether it actually makes any

difference? Does anyone know of data on this?

Josie ?

 

Dr Josie A Fraser

Senior Lecturer in Pharmacology, Bradford School of Pharmacy

Associate Dean for Learning & Teaching, Faculty of Life Sciences

 

School of Pharmacy

Faculty of Life Sciences

University of Bradford

Bradford

West Yorkshire

BD7 1DP

 

T: (+44)(0)1274 234663

 

 

 

 

 

On 16/01/2015 14:05, "DrL" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

 

Hi,

 

What is the most popular grading system for tRATs?  One point off for

each wrong answer (4,3,2,1)  or reduce by half for each wrong answer

(4,2,1,0)?  Other methods?  What are the pro and cons?

 

 

R Roy Lindquist, M.D.

University of Connecticut

School of Medicine

 

---

This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus

protection is active.

 




--

Herb Coleman, Ph.D
Dir. Instructional Computing and Technology
Adjunct Professor of Psychology
Austin Community College
Highland Business Center
5930 Middle Fiskville Rd.
Austin, TX 78752
[log in to unmask]
512-223-7746

************************************************************************************************************
“The way I see it, every life is a pile of good things and bad things. The good things don’t always soften the bad things, but vice versa the bad things don’t always spoil the good things and make them unimportant. And we definitely added to his pile of good things."

- Eleventh Doctor from the BBC series Dr. Who
************************************************************************************************************