UBC Mailing Lists 17.0 - TEAMLEARNING-L Archives

Hi Marina,

I’m a strong proponent of grading 4S activities for a couple of reasons:

1. I want to be able to use what happens in class as assessment that is both formative (this happens naturally, I think) and summative. This allows me to evaluate the learning of teams of students on a wider range of objectives. If I only had exam and RAT questions to use for this purpose, I don’t think I could adequately assess all of the learning objectives for any given topic.

2. Since I think that the process of solving a 4S activity is at least as important as the solution that is chosen, I want to be able to reward teams who can demonstrate that they used an effective and logical process to arrive at a decision. By grading activities on both the answer given and the explanation, I think I am providing some incentive for student teams to go beyond simply making the correct specific choice.

Functionally, this works out to be a simple answer key for each question in an activity that allows me to fairly distribute points to teams based on response. This is then coupled with a “live” scoring mechanism (tally marks on a sheet of paper) for keeping track of good thought-processes and explanations that I observe in the classroom. I have also found that doing the grading after the fact is time-consuming, which is why I have chosen to do it live in class. Here’s an example of an answer key Powerpoint slide that students will see after the discussion has ended:

Partial credit is given to teams who answer A, B, C, or E to varying degrees based on the “correctness” of the answer. (D is still the best answer, but A is reasonable.)

Note that a team that answers D might not get 100% credit if their explanation shows a lack of understanding for why this choice is better than the others. (I should credit Michael Nelson for being one of the early authors of this question, which has evolved quite a bit over ten years of use.)

Hope there’s something useful you can take from this!

Regards,

Pete

Peter Clapp, PhD

Chair, Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences

School of Pharmacy | Rueckert-Hartman College for Health Professions

3333 Regis Blvd., Denver, CO 80221 H-28

P 303.625.1312 | E [log in to unmask] | REGIS.EDU

LIAlumniBadge

From: Team-Based Learning [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jim Sibley
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2019 7:57 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: grading class activities

Hi Marina

In 15 years of doing TBL and probably 100 courses we have yet to grade an application exercise....we always have a summary sheet that teams complete and sign and hand in

By not grading them you can make them more difficult with no one answer having to be rock solid

Also we have never had any issues with lack of participation on application activities

If you do grade applications I would suggest having a grand application at module end that is graded and using ungraded (with summary sheets) till them...that would reduce your marking

Take care

Jim

Sent from my iPad

On Apr 29, 2019, at 6:34 AM, Neil Haave <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Hi Marina,

I typically grade these in-class using a personal response system (Plickers in my case). It sounds like you are doing something more elaborate.

Neil

On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 4:13 AM Marina Di Carro <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Hello everybody,

I'd like to ask you some tips on correcting and grading application exercises.
Do you use a sort of rubric for each assignment? That is to say, you decide to give full marks for the right explanation and the right letter, about 80% of the maximum if they understand the reason behind but choose the wrong letter... and so on?
I am about to correct more or less 11 application activities for each teams (there are 10 teams...) for a total of more than 100 exercises... I need something fair, so that teams who have reasoned well can be rewarded, but also simple, because I'd rather not spend hours and hours on them. In our grading system top mark is 30/30 and pass mark 18/30, so there are many possibilities to discriminate between two different grades.

Any suggestion you can give me will be helpful.

Thank you very much--

Marina

**********************************************************
Marina Di Carro, PhD
Department of Chemistry and Industrial Chemistry
University of Genoa

Via Dodecaneso, 31
16146 Genova - Italy

tel +39 010 3536198

+39 010 3536173
fax +39 010 3536190

email address: [log in to unmask]
**********************************************************

To unsubscribe from the TEAMLEARNING-L list, please click here.

Further information about the UBC Mailing Lists service can be found on the UBC IT website.

--

Neil Haave, PhD
Professor, Augustana Faculty
Associate Director, CTL

University of Alberta, Canada

DISCLAIMER: Any and all spelling mistakes contained in this email were inserted at the whim of my iPhone.

To unsubscribe from the TEAMLEARNING-L list, please click here.

Further information about the UBC Mailing Lists service can be found on the UBC IT website.

To unsubscribe from the TEAMLEARNING-L list, please click here.

Further information about the UBC Mailing Lists service can be found on the UBC IT website.