Hi

 

I am working with a teacher from Georgia…trying to imagine TBL online

 

Here is what we have come up with…

 

If you have experience or words of wisdom, I would love to hear it

 

Jim

 

#########################

 

 

Team-Based Learning Online – A proposal

 

Team-Based Learning is a flipped classroom model that has been traditionally applied to F2F courses. There has been growing interest in applying some of the unique TBL pedagogical to the online environment. This document will attempt to map the F2F components to the online environment.

 

TBL moves initial acquisition of basic knowledge outside of the classroom (typically with targeted readings), then checks and builds on that initial knowledge using a process known as the Readiness Assurance Process. Finally, having established a shared level of basic understanding, teams move to an application phase where they are asked to make decisions in applying what they abstractly learned to concrete situations. This application of the abstract to concrete situations naturally highlights important contextual factor, and analysis issues.

 

Reviewing 2 Major Processes in Face-2-Face TBL

 

Readiness Assurance Process (RAP)

 

One of the most interesting things about the Readiness Assurance Process is that students interact with the course concepts up to 5 times and interact with troublesome concepts more than easy concepts. The first interaction is in the readings, then the individual test, the team test, the Appeals process (which forces students back into readings right where they had trouble) and finally the instructor clarification/mini-lecture on the troublesome topics. What the RAP process establishes is a shared level of understanding so all team members can more equally contribute.

 

Readings: Time on task, knowledge acquisition.

 

Individual Test: Individual accountability for knowledge acquisition.

Team Test: Social construction of knowledge, accountability to peers, consensus building, negotiation, team decision-making and immediate feedback.

 

Appeals Construction Process: Pushes students back into reading right where they had the most difficulty.

 

Instructor Clarification/ Mini-Lecture: a short, focused discussion on remaining troublesome topics.

 

Application Activities (4S)

 

Activities built using TBL’s unique 4S structure. Students use course concepts to solve problems, social construction of knowledge, taking a public position, articulating one’s thinking and ideas, probing and analyzing other team’s thinking and decision. The 4 required components for this application activity are: significant problem, same problem, specific choice and simultaneous report. 

 

Mapping TBL Processes to the online environment

 

RAP Process (Day 1 to 4)

 

Day 0-1

 

Reading/Preparation Materials – online delivery is a good fit – print or video

 

Individual Readiness Assurance – existing quiz tools will work well. If video content is used can embed questions in flow of video. Just want to ensure students have given honest effort in reading and trying to understand material. It’s important (according to Palsole and Awalt) to not provide students instant grade, the individual grade is provided after the team grade is provided.

 

Day 2-3

Team Readiness Assurance – uses model described to Palsole and Awalt (NDTL no. 116). Two or Three higher-level RAP (bordering on easy 4S) questions are asked. Here is a deviation from traditional TBL, these questions are not the same as iRAT questions. You want questions that are a little more difficult and higher level to spark discussion. Team discuss in private discussion area and at end of two days the designated team leader (rotating role – see table 1) compiles discussion and posts gist on whole common course discussion board. Points are given to team leader for compilation and given to each individual for making “substantive” posts (set a minimum – see table 2). At end of this process individual understanding has improved through team processing.  

Day 4

 

Mini-lecture – teacher provides summary observations from posting and reviews major takeaways. Liberally quote student words in summary to honour their contributions.

 

4S Process (Day 5 to 10)

4S Problem or case is posted on common course discussion board. Provide the specific choices that each team must select from.

 

Day 5-8

 

For 3 days, Student teams analyze, discuss problem, and come to a consensus decision in private team discussion forum. Points are awarded to individuals for “substantive” discussion posts (set a minimum see table 2). Forums we have used are private but include instructor. Peer evaluation could work here – I would add peer evaluation questions like – contributed at least 2 substantive post at each stage, contributed at least 1 substantive post at each stage, contributed NO substantive post. 

 

At end of period - the designated team leader (rotating role – see table 3 for grading criteria) compiles discussion and sends decision and support rationales to instructor (word limits/worksheet) by 5 pm on designated day. I like how you have us send to discussion board and instructor, so we can view everyone’s ideas.

 

End of Day 8

 

Instructor then compiles and posts in common course discussion board (simultaneous report). Or You could have teams post themselves at a specific time to save instructor effort. A little less simultaneous, but workable.

 

Day 8-10

 

Once posted, individual review all team submissions and must post two “substantive” comments – one challenge comment and one supportive comment (see table 2). I like the simple 2 part components, challenge and supportive.

 

Module Summary (Day 11) 

 

Instructor then compiles discussion – extracts lesson learned and shares a summary of problem solution. Liberally quote student words in summary to honour their contribution.

 

Table 1: tRAT team leader (marks for assigned rotating role individual)

 

0	1	2	4
Does not post	Poor quality	Average Quality	Excellent
	poorly organized and difficult to understand	adequately organized and mostly understandable	well organized, understandable and insightful

 

Table 2: Individual Posting* (marks for individuals) 

 

0	1
Not Substantive  (or does not post)	Substantive
	More than 50 words. Adds substantially to conversation.  See list.

 

*used three times, first in tRAT, then in 4S team analysis discussion, and finally in the 4S simultaneous report follow-up discussion (if we set minimum to 2 posts per step – 6 total points are available to individuals).

 

A Few Important Substantive Discussion Contribution Behaviours

 

• •              Support/Verify – cite new evidence (literature reference) or quote readings (page numbers)
• •              Build – add the statement of previous speaker
• •              Link/Combine – incorporate multiple sources and ideas into one big idea
• •              Uncover Assumptions – what is believed to be true without proof
• •              Articulate limits of applicability – how context affects applicability
• •              Paraphrase/Summarize – concise restatement of aggregate ideas
• •              Unpack – explain in detail how team arrived at decision
• •              Devil’s Advocate – examine alternate choices or understandings

 

 

Table 3: 4S team compilation and submission (marks for assigned rotating role individual)

 

0	1	2	4
Does not send	Poor quality	Average Quality	Excellent
	poorly organized and difficult to understand	adequately organized and includes decision and some supporting rationales	well organized, clear decision, well-articulated rationales, acknowledges limits of applicability and effects of context

 

 

 

 

 

[log in to unmask]">

 

Jim Sibley 

 

Director 

[log in to unmask]">

http://cis.apsc.ubc.ca/

Faculty of Applied Science 

University of British Columbia 

 

CEME 1214-6250 Applied Science Lane 

Vancouver, BC Canada 

V6T 1Z4 

Phone 604.822.9241 

Email: [log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]

 

 

Check out my book Getting Started with Team–Based Learning

Check out my TBL website at www.learntbl.ca

 

 

© Copyright 2018, 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.