Faculty Fundamentals

FLBCA & FAESS

September 2011

Making Groupwork
Work!

Contacts
A/Prof Stephen Naylor 3162
A/Prof Kay Martinez 4980

Contents
Purpose ....................................................................................................................................................................... 3
Why do we persist with getting students to work in groups? ....................................................................................... 3
Learning, Teaching and Assessment Policy................................................................................................................ 3
JCU Graduate attributes........................................................................................................................................... 3
ALTC Academic Learning and Teaching Standards ..................................................................................................... 3
What does the literature highlight? ............................................................................................................................. 4
Excerpts from Student Experience of Group Work and Group Assessment in Higher Education by Ahmed Hassanien . 4
Australian Learning and Teaching Council ................................................................................................................. 6
Key areas for discussion associated with Group work................................................................................................ 7
Assessing group work .................................................................................................................................................. 8
Diagnostic assessment ........................................................................................................................................ 8
Summative assessment ....................................................................................................................................... 8
Formative assessment ......................................................................................................................................... 8
Informal assessment involves: ............................................................................................................................. 8
Formal assessment involves: ............................................................................................................................... 8
Excerpts from Groupwork as a form of assessment: common problems and recommended solutions. W. Martin
Davies.......................................................................................................................................................................... 9
A Selection of Group Work Rubrics ..........................................................................................................................12
Backwards Design - Planning from the assessment to the task....................................................................................19
Team selection .......................................................................................................................................................19
Belbin Team Role Theory (a contested theory) ........................................................................................................19
Evaluating Belbins theory .......................................................................................................................................21
Spark ..........................................................................................................................................................................21
Group projects aren't fair ...................................................................................................................................23
Software Functionality .......................................................................................................................................24
Overview ...........................................................................................................................................................24
Step-by-Step for academics ................................................................................................................................25
Step-by-Step for students ...................................................................................................................................25
How to Interpret Spark Factors ...........................................................................................................................26
How to Interpret Individuals Spark Radar Diagrams.............................................................................................27
Group Work General comments from Flinders University ...........................................................................................29
Benefits in Using Group Work:............................................................................................................................29
When to Use Groupwork ....................................................................................................................................29
Setting Up Teams ...............................................................................................................................................30
Strategies That Enhance Effective Group Assignments ........................................................................................30
Benefits of Groupwork .......................................................................................................................................30
Phil Race Chapter 4 Making small-group teaching work ..............................................................................................32
Why is small group learning so important? ..............................................................................................................32
Twelve tips for doing effective Team-Based Learning (TBL) .........................................................................................33

Purpose
To look at how we deal with group work, especially focusing on assessment.
We would like to raise some of the key issues that have been addressed in the new Learning
Teaching and Assessment Policy and recognise the benefits, limitations and problems associated
with group work.
SPARKPLUS (you may wish to visit the site http://spark.uts.edu.au.)
Why do we persist with getting students to work in groups?
Learning, Teaching and Assessment Policy
Group work = refers to learning activities, (usually project based) undertaken by a number of
students, resulting in an outcome presenting a single piece of assessment or a number of associated
pieces of assessment.
3.1.1 In all subjects a variety of resources, teaching methods and approaches to learning will be
considered and adopted, in recognition of the diversity of the student body.
5.4.5 There will be no more than 50% assessment for group work, unless there is scope for individual
differentiation of the components of the shared group grade.
5.5 For group work, subject coordinators must provide plans for alternative individual assessment
where the subject coordinator has agreed that a group will be disbanded.
JCU Graduate attributes
Self Reliance and Interpersonal Understanding

the ability to communicate effectively with a range of audiences;

the ability to lead, manage and contribute effectively to teams;
the ability to work with people of different gender, age, ethnicity, culture, religion and
political persuasion;
the ability to work individually and independently.

ALTC Academic Learning and Teaching Standards

Accounting = Communication and teamwork
Creative and Performing Arts = Work independently and collaboratively in the Creative and
Performing Arts Discipline in response to project demands.
Geography= Contribute effectively as a member or leader of diverse teams working in collaborating
geographical or multidisciplinary contexts.
Law = Graduates of the Bachelor of Laws will be able to: (b) collaborate effectively.

What does the literature highlight?

Both academics and employers recognise the importance of group work in preparation for real
world experiences; however, many students dislike group work as it is seen as an inequitable system
of learning, artificial in the formation of the groups and unfair in the areas of monitoring and
assessment.
There is also a perception by students that they are inadequately prepared to undertake group
projects and the methods for assessment do not assist in understanding processes and practices of
group work efficiencies nor do they discriminate between the process and the product.
Excerpts from Student Experience of Group Work and Group Assessment in Higher Education by
Ahmed Hassanien
Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wttt20
ABSTRACT.
Collaborative learning continues to be an area that is increasingly receiving attention in academic
fields. This is because group-based or cooperative learning has many benefits to individual student
learning (Slavin, 1996). In addition, group work and group assessment, have, over the past few years,
become integral components of many undergraduate and postgraduate programmes in the UK and
all over the world (Houldsworth & Mathews, 2000). The primary focus of this study is to explore the
feelings and experience of students regarding group work and group assessment in Higher Education
(HE). (p17)
On the other hand, most of previous research on group learning in HE is limited though there is a
growing realization of this challenge (Fisher, Shaw, & Ryder, 1994; Lerner, 1995; Lundberg &
Lundberg, 1992; McGraw & Tidwell, 2001). There is little empirical evidence regarding its
effectiveness and success as a learning and assessment method within the context of HE (Hughes,
2002). Moreover, the same author argues that many HE institutes are not adequately prepared to
provide the essential requirements and support for effective group learning. As a result, student
experience usually falls below their expectations. Therefore, the main aim of this research is to
explore student experience of group work and group assessment at the School of Sport, Performing
Arts and Leisure (SSPAL). Accordingly, the objectives of the study are to
explore student attitudes towards group work and group assessment;
investigate the main challenges in group work; and
measure the effectiveness of some strategic tools to enhance group work. (pp19-20)
Group Work Assessment
There is little doubt that assessing students, performance is the most important thing for them
(Brown & Knight, 1994). Therefore, teachers have to carry out this assessment professionally and
effectively to (1) monitor, support and motivate students; (2) maintain standards; (3) provide
feedback to students and themselves; and (4) prepare students for life (Brown & Knight; Race &
Brown, 1998). There are two different types of assessment: (1) Informal and formative, within the
teaching process and (2) summative, making formal decisions about progress and level of
achievement (Biggs, 2003). Assessment could be carried out by (1) the module tutors, (2) the
students via self-assessment and peer assessment and/or (3) external body (Brown & Knight, 1994;
Freeman&Lewis, 1998). To be effective, assessment needs to be valid, reliable, practicable, fair and
useful (Ellington, Percival,&Race, 1993).
At SSPAL, both the summative and formative types of assessment are used to grade group work.
Tutors use the formative assessment to prepare students for the summative ones. As suggested by
Falchikov (1986, 1995), students are involved in the assessment process through self-assessment
and peer- assessment. Students are given some indication of how well they have done and how to
4

improve through both a general feedback to the whole group and a specific feedback with grades to
individuals. (pp23-24)
Challenges
Respondents were asked to identify the main challenges they face when working within a group.
Information relating to these challenges, in Table 2, indicates that Poor attendance at group
meetings (62.5%) was the most important group work challenge, followed by Getting credit
without doing equal work (52.8%). At the other end of the scale, culturally different approaches to
work, and varying work ethics were the least important group work challenges. Discussion in
focus groups provides further clarification regarding the main challenges of group work. Further
explanation is provided by the following
statements:
One of the problems I faced in terms of group communication was that there were occasions
we could not arrange a suitable time to meet and discuss progression. This was mainly due
to other academic and social commitments of individual members. Also the response time
for emails was prolonged on a few occasions, and members did not answer mobile calls for
whatever reason. (FGS7)
I felt that certain members of the group were relying on other group members to complete
tasks, and basically were not pulling their weight to provide equal amount of contribution.
The bottom line is, they were in for a free ride. (FGS10)
In one of my group projects, there were certain individuals who would not attend meetings
that were arranged and give endless excuses for their absence. (FGS9)
I felt that the members who were not attending the group meetings regularly and also not
responding to emails and phone calls, were given less tasks to complete because they were
unreliable and the concerned members did not want their grades to be affected. (FGS3)
When we are allocated in groups by the tutor and not personal preference, usually we face
the problem of having members whose grade expectations and work standards are lower
than mine. Therefore this has either has an impact on the final grade or we have to spend
time trying to teach and explain to the under achieving members of what is required. But on
some occasions, if this member is basically not bothered about a high grade, then we end up
doing his work. (FGS4)
There have been occasions when I have worked with members who dont adequately
understand team work. For example they felt intimidated by our comments and
observations. (FGS5)
In my last presentation, our group found it difficult to rehearse due to reasons beyond our
control, such as unavailability of space and equipment. (FGS11)
I feel that some tutors do not get involved even a little bit when groups are facing problems.
They use an easy escape route. (FGS1)
Although its a group work, I believe that everyone should be assessed individually. (FGS6)
Some group members just dont like to be told by others. In such occasions, I felt we needed
a formal leader who could motivate individuals and facilitate the process. (FGS8)
These findings support earlier studies by Fisher et al. (1994) McGraw and Tidwell (2001), and Group
Work (n.d.) who state that group work is always associated with many problems or challenges. These
quotes also highlight the importance of training and motivation. Students should receive training in
group learning (Cockrell, Caplow, & Donaldson, 2000; Oliver & Omari, 2001) such as how to set
goals, share roles and communicate in a way that promotes deeper understanding of the material to
be learned. However, training should not be restricted to a one-time workshop. In addition to
providing training and ongoing monitoring, faculty should include group reward valued by the
students and ensure that individual contributions to the groups can be assessed as indicated by
social loafing theory (Shepperd, 1993).
Strategic Tools
Students were also asked to identify the level of importance in relation to some strategic tools,
which can be used to improve the effectiveness of group work. Information relating to these tools, in
Table 3 indicates that dedicated assignment seminars (77.8%) is the most important tool, followed
by Formal Lecture on group and team work (66.7%). These results support what has been
previously discussed in the literature by Brown and Knight (1994), Davis (1993), Fiechtner and Davis
5

(1992), McGraw and Tidwell (2001), Race and Brown (1998) and Smith (1986). Surprisingly, peer
assessment was found to be the least important strategic tool to enhance group work. The issue
was further explained by the following statements:
Usually you work with your friends and of course you do not want to offend any of them.
(FGS4)
I do not want them to lose any grades because of me. (FGS12)
It is only effective when there have been serious problems among group members. For
example, if a group member never turned up. (FGS7)
Even when the group members are not all friends, you still feel guilty if you mark any of
them down. (FGS2)
This finding reflects the arguments of Levine and Russo (1987), and Houldsworth and Mathews
(2000) who asserted that students do not like to criticize their friends nor make derisory comments
about peers with whom they are not too familiar. It is, therefore, incumbent upon tutors to educate
students to the value of acquiring skills in appraising others input to projects. Peer assessment is an
excellent means of acquiring such skills.
In addition, discussions in focus groups further confirm, elaborate and explore about the ideas that
could make group work more effective.
I prefer to pick my group members without any tutor involvement. I like to be allocated into
a group only when I am new to the class. (FGS3)
Although we have experienced the two types (group and individual) of grading we prefer the
individual grading method as we feel it is more useful and fair. (FGS6)
Make more resources available to facilitate our rehearsing activities and preparation. For
example, one of the weekly sessions should be specialized for this purpose. (FGS5)
Tutors should be more involved in their group problems to sort them out. We require more
tutor assistance in general and regarding our group problems particularly. (FGS4)
Australian Learning and Teaching Council
http://www.altc.edu.au/resources?text=group+work+

http://creative.canberra.edu.au/groupwork/Intro/Frameset.html

Key areas for discussion associated with Group work

Appropriateness of the subject for group work (year level, subject outcomes, size of class,
facilities available, access to equipment/materials/community )
Weighting of the assessment within the subject
Allocation of time and scheduling
Dysfunctional groups or group members
Formation of groups (random, self-selecting, strategic selection)
Process outcomes (learning)
Product outcomes
Assessment type (formative or summative)
Peer assessment
Grade allocation within the group (equal, peer assessed, process versus product,
differentiated grades)
Efficiencies in delivering teaching and learning associated with group work.

Assessing group work

Types of assessment practices
Source (http://sydney.edu.au/education_social_work/groupwork/docs/TypesOfAssessment.pdf)
Diagnostic assessment
is often undertaken at the beginning of a unit of study to assess the skills, abilities, interests,
experiences, levels of achievement or difficulties of an individual student or a whole class
can involve formal measurements (e.g. IQ/aptitude tests, fitness tests) that are used to establish a
starting point or baseline OR informal measurements (e.g. observation, discussions, questioning)
informs programming and planning, and learning and teaching methods used, as well as
assessment choices.
Summative assessment
assists you to make judgements about student achievement at certain relevant points in the
learning process or unit of study (e.g. end of course, project, semester, unit, year)
can be used formally to measure the level of achievement of learning outcomes (e.g. tests, labs,
assignments, projects, presentations etc.)
can also be used to judge programme, teaching and/or unit of study effectiveness (that is as a form
of evaluation).
Formative assessment
is the practice of building a cumulative record of student achievement
usually takes place during day to day learning experiences and involves ongoing, informal
observations throughout the term, course, semester or unit of study
is used to monitor students ongoing progress and to provide immediate and meaningful feedback
assists teachers in modifying or extending their programmes or adapting their learning and
teaching methods
is very applicable and helpful during early group work processes.
Informal assessment involves:
systematically observing and monitoring students during in class learning and teaching experiences
interacting with students to gain a deeper knowledge of what they know, understand and can do
circulating the classroom and posing questions, guiding investigations, motivating and quizzing
students
providing opportunities for students to present or report upon their learning and teaching
experiences
collecting, analysing, and providing feedback on in and out of class work samples (e.g. how their
group work projects are progressing).
Formal assessment involves:
the use of specific assessment strategies to determine the degree to which students have achieved
the learning outcomes
8

 assessment strategies including: essays, exams, reports, projects, presentations, performances,

laboratories or workshops, resource development, artwork, creative design tasks, quizzes and tests,
journal writing, portfolio
individual and/or collaborative tasks that usually attract a mark (group work may include both an
individual and group component).

Excerpts from Groupwork as a form of assessment:

common problems and recommended solutions. W.
Martin Davies
High Education (2009) 58:563584.
Abstract
This paper reviews some of the literature on the use of groupwork as a form of assessment in
tertiary institutions. It outlines the considerable advantages of groupwork but also its systemic
associated problems. In discussing the problems, the paper considers issues such as free riding
and the sucker effect, issues associated with ethnic mix in groups, and the social dilemma
problemin which students face conflicting demands between altruism and self-interest. (p543)
The problems with groupwork motivation of participants has been noted to be one of the most
serious problems in groupwork (Kerr and Bruun 1983; Morgan 2002). Some group members may be
reluctant participants in assessment tasks and be uncommitted to the aims of the group (and the
subject for that matter). Motivational issues can arise as a result. Examples of motivational issues
associated with groupwork are social loafing and free riding. These issues have received
considerable attention in the literature (Jones 1984; Lantane et al. 1979; Ruel et al. 2003; Strong and
Anderson 1990; Watkins 2004). Free-riding has also prompted what is called an inequity based
motivation loss (sometimes known as the sucker effect) where capable students reduce their
input into a project when they experience free-riding (Kerr 1983; Mulvey and Klein 1998). The
relationship between the ethnic mix of students in a group and grades has also been the subject of
discussion as a problem with groupwork tasks. An additional problem in the literature is the social
dilemma of maximising advantages to a group while being principally concerned with maximising the
advantages to oneself as an individual (Watkins 2004). These issues will be discussed in the sections
that follow. In Recommendations for implementing groupwork a number of recommendations to
deal with these problems are provided.
The free-rider problem
Free-riding has been defined as follows: The problem of the non-performing group member who
reaps the benefits of the accomplishments of the remaining group members with little or no cost to
him/herself (Morris and Hayes 1997). Free-riding has been distinguished in the literature from
social loafing (Watkins 2004). The difference is this: social loafing is a reduction in effort due to
not being noticed or lack of identification in a group task. Free-riding is actively obtaining reward for
no effort. Thus, social loafing can lead to free-riding. In other papers, the terms are used
interchangeably (Brooks and Ammons 2003; Strong and Anderson 1990).
One way of solving the problem of social loafing and free-riding is to carefully consider the nature of
the task given to students and to reward the effort of groups as well as reward the work of
individuals. However, this is harder than it sounds. Tasks need to be designed to maximise students
contributions and to recognise and notice their efforts. Ways of doing this will be discussed in a later
section (see Recognition of effort).
The sucker effect problem
The Sucker effect refers to individuals responding to others free-riding upon their efforts by freeriding themselves (Kerr 1983). It appears that competent students try to avoid being suckers. They
9

make a calculation of whether or not they are the subject of free-riding from others in the group. If
they are, and they feel it unjustifiable, they try to avoid being a sucker by reducing their own input
to the task. Kerr has shown that students will even choose to fail as a group rather than be a
sucker (Kerr 1983). It is suggested that the sucker effect problem is the cause of procrastination in
many groupwork activities. Conscientious students find it hard to get the attention and compliance
of free-riders and decide not to proceed alone until a deadline is imminent (Strong and Anderson
1990).
But the situation is more complex than it appears. Watkins claims that competent students are less
likely to think of themselves as suckers if they genuinely feel that they are covering for a member of
the group who is unlikely to succeed by themselves. Thus, one way of minimising the sucker effect is
to allow members of groups to get to know each other better. If this happens, competent
students may be less inclined to feel like suckers and are less likely to free-ride (Watkins 2004). In
ad hoc, short term groups where group members do not socialise as readilythis way of
overcoming the problem might be less effective. However, this is only part of a solution, of course. A
better solution will reduce free-ridingand maximise the contributionsof all students in
groupwork activities. However, this is also easier said than done. We shall revisit is problem later in
the paper.
Groupwork and ethnic mix
A related issue discussed in the literature is the effect of culturally mixed groups on grades. It is
often observed in English-speaking universities that culturally dissimilar groups do not
spontaneously mix. Students from non-English speaking backgrounds (NESB) do not contribute as
much in class or in groupwork discussions as local students (Volet and Ang 1998). Other literature
indicates that this problem occurs less in online environments. Here, contributions from NESB
students in group discussions are more forthcoming (Freiermuth 2001).
In classes that are not diverse, lack of communication among different ethnic groups is a problem for
effective groupwork. In one paper, medium levels (i.e., 3338%) of classroom diversity, i.e., students
coming from culturally dissimilar backgrounds, are positively (though not always significantly)
related to the reported educational gains of students. By contrast, low and high levels of
diversity may be negatively related to learning gains (Terenzini et al. 2001). An important issue is
whether multicultural groups with NESB students tend to achieve lower average scores in groupwork
projects. If true, this might be a plausible explanation of the sucker effect. Local native-English
speaking students avoid ethnically diverse groups because they obtain lower grades when they join
them. When forced to join them this invites the sucker effect, and free-riding by conscientious
students.
However, perhaps surprisingly, studies have not confirmed the link between ethnicity and lower
grades. Multiculturalism in groups has no significant negative impact on grades (in fact a positive
impact has been detected) and grades are not necessarily determined by the least able member of
the group (De Vita 2002). But culture has some influence on behaviour in groups. Melles has found,
in a smallscale qualitative study, that ethnically diverse students perceive the advantages and
challenges of groupwork in a similar way to native English speakers. However, he did find differences
in the way that ethnically-diverse groups tackled issues in groupwork. Specifically, the cultural and
linguistic background influenced the way students responded to groupwork debates. They tended to
take up discourses that reinforced their own culture and language and identity, and that there
was an observed correlation between language choice and the general positions taken up by
students (Melles 2004). This can be a good thing insofar as a plurality of views can be heard. It can
be a bad thing if it leads to freeriding (for example, if culturally-reinforced habits of being quiet in
a groupand allowing native-English speakers to dominate discussionstifles the contribution from
the non-native English speaker(s)).
Another way in which the composition of groups might be negative is when most of the written
work is taken over by the students with the best language fluency (an understandable practice, but
an unfair one). This is particularly a problem in some universities where very large numbers of NESB
students are being educated. Careful selection of groupwork tasks with multiple duties (not all
requiring a high level of competence in English) might be a partial solution to this. Instituting a policy
10

of multiculturally diverse groups is therefore, not in itself negative, as long as practices to minimise
free-riding are adopted in parallel. I shall be returning to the topic of task selection later. There is a
sizable literature on the influence of gender and groupwork (Cohen and Mullender 2002; Pryor
1995; Scanlon 2000). However, this is not discussed in this paper.
The social dilemma problem
While there is a degree of natural self-interest in human nature, social behaviour is also influenced
by how social situations are organised. Some settings can foster self-interest and the maximisation
of individual welfare; others situations may foster a degree of altruism. Watkins notes that there are
two main sources of motivation for students: intrinsic and extrinsic (Watkins 2004). The former
refers to altruistic behaviour which results from a selfless commitment to others, or a genuine
interest in, and willingness to engage in a given task. This kind of motivation is quite different from
motivation resulting from the aim to maximise ones self-interest. Extrinsic motivation results from
external incentives such as assessment marks and falls under the second category. Clearly, in
groupwork there is a clash of internal and external motivations. The more powerful motivation is for
students to maximise their self-interest and to obtain high grades at the expense of others in the
group. The dilemma in setting groupwork tasks for students is how to foster intrinsic motivation
while allowing for the understandable and natural influence of extrinsic motivations
(Watkins 2004). (pp566-569)
Recommendations for recognition of effort
1. Work out ways to recognise, monitor and reward the individual effort of group members. Simply
tracking the contributions of students work and requesting that students names be given on a
group assignment might be sufficient. This can either be a matter of negotiation among students
themselves or mandated by the instructor.
2. As already noted, evaluate the individuals contribution to the groupwork assignment as well as
the work of group.
3. Allow group members to notice and evaluate each others contributions by means such as webbased tools or a peer evaluation procedure.
4. An effective assessment procedure that has been trialled in a cross-disciplinary business course is
summarised below (Brooks and Ammons 2003). The authors claim that such a procedure reduces
free riding as measured by a decline of variance between peer evaluation assessments. (It was not
clear from this paper whether groups were self-selected or instructor selected. The second variation,
given below, involved selfselected groups.)
Assessment procedure for groupwork I
a. An evaluation pack is distributed containing instructions for the groupwork task, and an
assessment sheet template which is completed anonymously by all students about their group
members (a self-evaluation is also completed). Responses were typed to ensure anonymity.
b. Numerical scores are given. Each student has 100 points to allocate on each team member (i.e., in
a group with 4 individuals there are 400 points to spend in total on their group members). Group
members can receive more than 100 points if they did more than their fair share of work (or less,
if they did not do their fair share).
c. Peer evaluation was held every 4 weeks. Thus 4 evaluations were done in total from each group
member.
d. Evaluations were placed in a sealed envelope and handed to the instructor at the end of semester.
e. Points were totalled and averaged for each individual.
f. Instructors grade was averaged according to the group average.
g. Students are given their ratings from their group members as well as their instructors final grade
(Brooks and Ammons 2003).
A similar procedure is used with the following variation at my own institution.
Assessment procedure for groupwork II
There is a oneoff peer evaluation (not every 4 weeks).
Students allocate a percentage mark for each of their group members on an evaluation template.
If the ranking of any one team member is significantly less than 90% a meeting is held between the
group and the lecturer. A consensus is arrived at among the group as to the allocation of the marks.
11

This ensures that the marks for any individual is properly considered and not unfair, and also ensure
no grudge is held by the lower-ranked group member (i.e., the members of the group have to
make a convincing case for their ranking to the lower-ranked group member).
A differentiated mark is arrived at by the lecturer in consideration of the marks awarded by group
members.
(pp 577-578)
The full paper can be found at
http://tlu.fbe.unimelb.edu.au/pdfs/martinpubs/groupwork.pdf

A Selection of Group Work Rubrics

Group Presentation Rubric
Category

Organization/

Not organized;
nervous
tension
obvious;
inappropriate
dress for type
of audience

Somewhat
organized;
somewhat
nervous;
acceptable
dress for type
of audience

Few glitches in
presentation,
little evidence
of nervous
tension,
acceptable
dress for type
of audience

Presentation
flows
smoothly; no
real evidence
of nervous
tension;
acceptable
dress for type
of audience

Presentation
flows
smoothly,
handles
audience
professionally,
dress for type
of audience is
exemplary

Vocals

Monotone;
not very
audible

Somewhat
monotone;
Fluctuation in
volume, weak
enunciation

Audible for
whole
presentation,
lacks some
tone and
inflection;
acceptable
enunciation

Volume, tone,
inflection is
appropriate
for size of the
audience;
enunciation is
acceptable

Volume, tone
and inflection
is appropriate
and adds to
the energy of
the
performance,
enunciation is
excellent

Creativity

Lacks
originality;
format is dull;
single sensory
experience

Somewhat
original; single
sensory
experience

Somewhat
original; multi
sensory
experience

Very original;
multi sensory
experience

Exemplary
evidence of
originality,
creates multisensory
experience

Energy/

Interest of
audience is
poor due to
lack of
presenters
enthusiasm

Audience
somewhat
interested;
due to
minimal
energy of
presenters

Audience is
generally
attentive due
to enthusiasm
of presenters

Audience is
attentive;
enthusiasm of
presenters is
generally high

Enthusiastic;
captivates
audience

Poise/
Appearance

Atmosphere

12

Fails to
increase
audience
understanding
of topic; fails
to convince
audience,
sarcasm and
humour is
inappropriate
for topic and
audience

Raises
audience
understanding
of some
points;
generally fails
to convince
audience;
sarcasm and
humour is
inappropriate

Raises
audience
understanding
of topic; lacks
development
or support of
some points to
convince
audience;
some sarcasm
and humour
inappropriate

Generally
substantiates
points made
and raises
audience
understanding
of topic;
humour,
sarcasm is
appropriate

Effectively
convinces
audience of its
point of view;
humor and
sarcasm is
effectively
used;
increases
audience
understanding
of topic

Visuals

Only 1
medium used;
lacks colour;
visibility to
audience is
limited

2 mediums
used that use
little colour;
somewhat
visible for
parts of
audience

Use of 3
mediums that
use little
colour; visible
for much of
the audience

Somewhat
colourful; at
least 3
mediums
evident, good
audience
visibility

Colourful; at
least 3
mediums
evident;
complete
audience
visibility

Collaborative

Focus of the
presentation
is on one
group
member only

Less than half

the group is
active in the
presentation
and use only 1
speaker

Majority of
the group is
active in the
presentation
and uses 2
speakers

Most group
members have
an active role
in participation
and use at
least 3
speakers

All group
members are
active in
presentation
and use at
least 3
speakers

Subject not
clearly
defined; less
than adequate
content
coverage in
most
categories

Content is
somewhat
sketchy;
covers about
half of the
content
categories
adequately

Some details
are
contradictory;
covers most of
the categories
adequately

Information
generally
consistent;
covers all
required
content areas
adequately

Subject clearly
defined;
covered all
required
content areas
in depth

Evidence of 23 sources;

Use of 4-5
sources;

Use of 6-7
sources;

Use of 8-9
sources;

Minimum of
10 sources;

1 medium

2 mediums

3 mediums

4 mediums

4 mediums

Persuasiveness

Involvement

Content

Bibliography

FCSC 4113: Consumer Issues: Assessment of Individual Group Members' Contributions

Consumer Issue Analysis Project Rubric II
CRITERIA
Attendance
at group
mtgs. &

13

(5)
Attended all
meetings,
arrived on time
& participated

(4)
Attended
most group
mtgs. &/or
was

(3)
Attended half
the group
mtgs. &/or
was present

(2)
Attended
about half
the group
mtgs. &/or

(1)
Attended very
few or no
group mtgs.
w/ little or no

was present
for only part
of the
meetings;
participated
to a
minimum
degree when
in
attendance

participation

fully

Willingness to
make
contribution
to group
task/goal

Willingly took on
a proportional
share of the
project work &
facilitation of
clarity & equity
of task
responsibilities,
successful
completion of
group's task

Reluctantly
willing to
accept a share
of the project
work &
facilitate group
work to
successful
completion

Unwilling to
take on
responsibility
for either
group work or
facilitation of
the group

Being
reflective of
self, group
and group
process

Willing & able to

reflectively
critique
strengths &
weak- nesses of
self & group
work during &
after completion
to improve the
quality of own &
group's work;
took
responsibility for
own mistakes &
feelings, asked
for help when
needed;

Reluctantly
willing &/or
adequate in
identifying
strengths &
weaknesses of
self & group
during project
development
or after its
completion

Unwilling
&/or unable
to identify
own strength
& weaknesses
or those of
the group at
any point in
time

14

sometimes
late or left
early;
contacted a
group
member if
going to be
late or unable
to attend;
participated
most of the
time or made
up for
absence w/
alternate
contributions
to the group
project

for only part of

the meetings;
participated
partially when
in attendance

participation

depersonalized
issues/ problems
in relation to self
& others;
openly, honestly,
& respectful- ly
interacted w/
group members
& others;
worked to
resolve problems
Following
through on
commitments

Completed all
the work agreed
to do

Only partially
completed
work agreed to
do

Did not
complete
work agreed
to do

Thoroughness
in carrying
out
commitments

Completed
agreed-upon
tasks thoroughly
& uphold a
standard of
excellence.

Adequately
completed
tasks agreed to
do

Insufficient
standard of
quality for the
work
completed

Takes
responsibility
for part of
the writing of
paper

Took
proportional
responsibility for
synthesizing
individual
contributions
into a coherent
written report

Took some
responsibility
for
synthesizing
individual
contributions
into a written
group report

Did not
contribute to
synthesis of
individual
contributions
into written
group report

Takes
proportional
responsibility
for the group
presentation
& its
preparation

Took
proportional
responsibility for
synthesizing
individual
contributions
into a coherent
oral
presentation

Took some
responsibility
for
synthesizing
individual
contributions
into a oral
group
presentation

Did not
contribute to
synthesis of
individual
contributions
into oral
group
presentation

FCSC 4113: Consumer Issues: Assessment of Individual Group Members' Contributions

Consumer Issue Analysis Project Rubric II

15

Scorer's Name:________________________________________________________________
(20% of grade)
Issue:_____________________________________________________________________________
Group
Members:_________________________________________________________________________

CRITERIA

Names of all group members

Attendance at group meetings & participation
Willingness to make proportional contribution
group task/goal
Reflective of self, group, & group process;
took responsibility for own mistakes &
feelings; asked for help when needed;
depersonalized issues/problems; openly,
honestly, & respectfully interacted w/ others
Following through on commitments
Thoroughness in carrying out commitments
Takes responsibility for part of the writing
Takes proportional responsibility for the
group presentation & its preparation
COMMENTS ON EACH PERSON'S SCORE:

TOTAL SCORE FOR EACH GROUP MEMBER

16

INDIVIDUAL GROUP MEMBERS' NAMES &

RATINGS
SELF

Professor evaluates the assessment on the criterion below.

Honesty &
Openness in
Assessment

Recognizes &
assesses
strengths &
weaknesses
accurately

Doesn't seem
to be
differentiate
between
strengths &
weaknesses

Really seems
out of touch
with
performance
in
presentation

Assessment #1: individual contribution to team process and plan development

LB5218 - Business Plan: assessment #1, individual contribution to team process and outcomes

Note: these will be evidenced by the

team process records included in this
subject guide - failure to maintain and
submit these records will result in a mark
of ZERO

Evidence will be ascertained from team blog, emails and other communications

What is
assessed
Exercise
appropriate
leadership
including
recognising
and valuing
diversity and
working
effectively in a
team

Demonstrate
high level
personal
autonomy and
accountability
in planning,
execution,
communication
and evaluation
of research and
other inputs

Demonstrate
ability to work
as part of a
team and
manage team
inputs and
processes to
achieve a
coordinated
outcome

17

HD

You encourage
and lead your
colleagues,
finding ways to
deploy the
skills of each
individual
where they are
best used

You encourage
your
colleagues,
recognising
that each
individual has
different skills

Your individual
contributions
were high
quality and
complete,
submitted on
time or early
and in excellent
usable format

Your individual
contributions
were good
quality and
mostly
complete,
submitted on
time or early
and required
minimal editing
to be usable

Your colleagues
rank your
performance as
outstanding.
You were an
active team
player and
strongly
supported
them and the
whole team in

Your colleagues
rank your
performance as
very good. You
were a team
player and
supported
them and the
whole team in
achieving its

Marks
available

You work with

all your
colleagues
reasonably well

You
demonstrate
difficulty in
working with
colleagues, and
have little
patience for
the different
skills of
individual team
members

No evidence
of leadership
in this project
was evident,
and you did
not work well
with your
colleagues

Your individual
contributions
were
incomplete and
of fairly poor
quality,
submitted
mostly late,
and requiring
significant
editing to be
usable

Your
individual
contributions
were
incomplete
and of poor
quality,
submitted
late, and
requiring
significant
editing, rewriting, and
further
research and
work to be
usable

25

Your colleagues
rank your
performance as
patchy and in
some cases
poor. You are
not yet a strong
team player
and on
occasion let
them down

Your
colleagues
rank your
performance
as poor. They
do not
consider you
to be a team
player and
point to the
fact that you

Your individual
contributions
were sound but
could be
improved and
mostly
complete,
submitted on
time or only a
little late, but
required some
editing to be
usable

Your colleagues
rank your
performance as
sound. You
were mostly a
good team
player but on
occasion let
them down a
somewhat

10

Grade
earned

Based on observations by lecturer in class

achieving its
goals

goals

Contribute to
the writing of a
sound business
plan

Significant
evidence of
individual
contribution to
writing the
plan, combined
with activities
in integrating
various
contributions,
making
suggestions for
improvements
and generally
adding value to
the writing
process

Good evidence
of individual
contribution to
writing the
plan, combined
with activities
in integrating
various
contributions,
making
suggestions for
improvements
and adding
some value to
the writing
process

Contribute
meaningfully
to discussions
at class
sessions and
presentations,
share
knowledge and
resources with
colleagues

Participated
well in class
sessions,
offering
relevant
comment and
sharing
resources, as
well as listening
to colleagues
respectfully

Participated
somewhat in
class sessions,
offering some
relevant
comment
and/or sharing
some
resources,
listening
adequately

significantly

let them down

significantly
and often

Some evidence
of individual
contribution to
writing the
plan, limited
involvement in
integrating
various
contributions,
and a few
suggestions for
improvements

Limited
evidence of
individual
contribution to
writing the
plan, limited or
no involvement
in integrating
various
contributions,
and few
suggestions for
improvements

No evidence
of individual
contribution
to writing the
plan

10

Limited
relevant
contribution.
Not permitting
colleagues to
participate,
and/or not
listening to
colleagues

Little
contribution, or
contributions
that were
irrelevant.
'Hogging' the
discussion and
not permitting
colleagues to
participate,
and/or not
listening to
colleagues

No meaningful
contribution
and/or did not
attend
some/all
sessions.

10

Areas to consider in developing assessment and rubrics

18

level of enthusiasm and participation

organisation of the team and ensured things were completed in a timely manner
suggested ideas and contributed to finding solutions to problems
demonstrated leadership
ability to be a good team member (reliable, met required deadlines, attended group
meetings, punctual)
Different Roles in the group: ideas person, big picture person, details person, technical
person, Communications person (ability to prepare and give presentations)
ability to follow instructions
exercise judgement to decide what to include in the report
perform tasks efficiently
help to manage team conflict and resolve disagreements
provide constructive feedback to team members
contributed to the quality control of the presentation; information correct, editing,
grammar, spellchecking, format

percentage of contribution to the whole project

the end product is

Backwards Design - Planning from the assessment to the task

If we know what we want at the end of the learning activity then we should design the assessment
instruments to guide students to achieve the learning outcomes
Team selection
Belbin Team Role Theory (a contested theory)
http://www.belbin.com/rte.asp?id=8
Ever wondered why some teams just seem to work and others hit the rocks? When things dont
work, it is obvious to all and it often has a profound effect on the people involved, as well as the
project or objective to be achieved.
In the 1970s, Dr Meredith Belbin and his research team at Henley Management College set about
observing teams, with a view to finding out where and how these differences come about. They
wanted to control the dynamics of teams to discover if and how problems could be pre-empted
and avoided. As the research progressed, the research revealed that the difference between success
and failure for a team was not dependent on factors such as intellect, but more on behaviour. The
research team began to identify separate clusters of behaviour, each of which formed distinct team
contributions or Team Roles.
A Team Role came to be defined as:
A tendency to behave, contribute and interrelate with others in a particular way.
It was found that different individuals displayed different Team Roles to varying degrees.
Shaper

Plant

Co-ordinator

Monitor
Evaluator

Resource
investigator
19

Highly motivated with a lot of nervous energy and a great need for
achievement.
Like to challenge lead and push others to action, can be headstrong and
emotional in response to disappointment or frustration.
Generally make good managers because they generate action and thrive on
pressure.
Innovators and inventors can be highly creative.
Often enjoy working on their own away from other members of the team.
Tend to be introvert and react strongly to criticism and praise.
Great for generating new proposals and to solve complex problems.
Ability to pull a group together to work towards a shared goal.
Mature, trusting, and confident they delegate readily. They stay calm under
pressure.
Quick to spot an individuals talents and use them to pursue group objectives.
Co-ordinators are useful to have in charge of a team with their diverse skills and
personal characteristics.
Serious-minded, prudent individuals.
Slow deciders who prefer to think things over usually highly critical thinking
ability.
Usually make shrewd judgements by taking into account all the factors.
Important when analysing problems and evaluating ideas and suggestions.
Good communicators both with other members of the group and with external
organisations.

Implementer

Team worker

CompleterFinisher

Specialist

Natural negotiators, adept at exploring new opportunities.

Adept at finding out what resources are available and what can be done.
Relaxed personalities with strong inquisitive sense and a readiness to see the
possibilities of anything new.
Very good for finding resources and heading negotiations
Well organised, enjoy routine and have a practical common-sense and self
discipline.
Systematic approach to tackling problems
Reliable and hardworking.
Will do what needs to be done whether or not they will enjoy the task.
Supportive members of the team.
Flexible and adaptable to different situations and people.
Perceptive and diplomatic.
Good listeners
Avoid conflict
Good at allowing everyone in the group to contribute.
Have a great capacity for follow-through and attention to detail, and seldom
start what they cannot finish.
Dislike carelessness
Reluctant to delegate, they prefer to tackle tasks themselves.
Good at tasks that involve close concentration and a close degree of
accuracy.
Pride themselves on acquiring technical skills and specialist knowledge.
Priorities are to maintain professional standards and advance their own
subject.
Very committed.
Important in providing the technical expertise and are usually called upon to
make decisions involving in depth experience and expertise.

R Meredith Belbin, Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (Butterworth Heinemann, 2nd
ed., 2004) ISBN: 0 7506 5910 6
Balance is key
Whilst some Team Roles were more high profile and some team members shouted more loudly
than others, each of the behaviours was essential in getting the team successfully from start to
finish. The key was balance. For example, Meredith Belbin found that a team with no Plant struggled
to come up with the initial spark of an idea with which to push forward. However, once too many
Plants were in the team, bad ideas concealed good ones and non-starters were given too much
airtime. Similarly, with no Shaper, the team ambled along without drive and direction, missing
deadlines. With too many Shapers, in-fighting began and morale was lowered.
Strengths and allowable weaknesses
As well as the strength or contribution they provided, each Team Role was also found to have an
allowable weakness: a flipside of the behavioural characteristics, which is allowable in the team
because of the strength which goes with it. For example, the unorthodox Plant could be forgetful or
scatty; or the Resource Investigator might forget to follow up on a lead. Co-ordinators might get
over-enthusiastic on the delegation front and Implementers might be slow to relinquish their plans
in favour of positive changes. Completer Finishers, often driven by anxiety to get things right, were
found to take their perfectionism to extremes. Teamworkers, concerned with the welfare and
morale of the team, found it difficult to make decisions where this morale might be compromised or
team politics, involved. Shapers risked becoming aggressive and bad-humoured in their attempts to
get things done.

20

Evaluating Belbins theory

Whilst Belbins theory has been contested by many academics there is something we can take from
this research. Clearly every team or group will function effectively if the members recognise the
range of duties and responsibilities they each need to manage. Differentiation of tasks requires that
groups recognise what sorts of roles they may need to undertake in order to achieve the outcome.
In many of our group projects we work with smaller sized groups, between 3 to 6 participants, this
means that the students will need to recognise dual roles within the group and some of the
synergies between Belbins nine categories can be factored into the project.
This also means that when we set up rubrics with generic group role expectations we may be missing
some of the nuanced components of group work. This leads us to utilising self-assessment and peer
assessment as additional measures in determining a grade for a student participate in group work.
Spark

Introduction
Welcome
Thank you for visiting the SparkPLUS web site. This web site is currently under construction and will be
updated regularly. Please visit again to learn more about SparkPLUS, including additional detailed
information about it's features and pedagogical rationale for it use.
About SparkPLUS
Group projects aren't fair is a frequent student response in higher education. Group work is used
to facilitate peer learning and encourage students to develop collaboration, crucial graduate
attributes. Since assessment strongly influences learning, any course objective to improve peer
learning and/or collaboration must have assessment that promotes it.
Self and peer assessment is a valid solution for promoting these objectives and overcoming potential
inequities of equal marks for unequal contributions. Group members are responsible for negotiating
and managing the balance of contributions and then assessing whether the balance has been
achieved.
Over the last decade our focus in using self and peer assessment has changed from making group
work fairer (something it does automatically with careful implementation) to using it to produce
formative learning-oriented feedback to complete the learning cycle and encourage the ongoing
development of skills. More recently we have found self and peer assessment to be a valuable tool
to produce learning oriented student centred assessments, facilitate collaborative peer learning and
to develop monitor and track students attribute development.
SPARKPLUS is a web-based self and peer assessment kit. It enables students to confidentially rate their
own and their peers' contributions to a team task or individual submissions.
SPARKPLUS not only enables students to confidentially rate their own and their peers' contributions to
a team project, but also allows students to self and peer assess individual work and improve their
judgment through benchmarking exercises. Being a criteria-based tool SPARKPLUS allows academics
the flexibility to choose or create specifically targeted criteria to allow any task or attribute
development to be assessed. In addition, SPARKPLUS facilitates the use of common categories, to
21

which academics link their chosen criteria, providing a means for both academics and students to
track students development as they progress through their degree. SPARKPLUS automates data
collection, collation, calculation and distribution of feedback and results.
SPARKPLUS can produce three assessment factors:
1. The Self and Peer Assessment (SPA) factor is a weighting factor determined by both the self
and peer rating of a students contribution. It is typically used to change a team mark for an
assessment task into an individual mark as shown below:
Individual mark = team mark * Individuals SPA
2. The Self Assessment to Peer Assessment (SAPA) factor. This is the ratio of a students own
rating of themselves compared to the average rating of their contribution by their peers. The
SAPA factor has strong feedback value for development of critical reflection and evaluation
skills eg, a SAPA factor greater than 1 means that a student has rated their own performance
higher than the average rating they received from their peers and vice versa.
3. The third factor is a percentage mark, the calculation of which depends on the type of task
that has been selected (e.g. benchmarking exercise or marking individual work).
In addition, SPARKPLUS allows students to provide anonymous written feedback to their peers and
provides a number of options for graphically reporting results.
The factors produced by SPARKPLUS are used to change group marks to individual marks. Without this
automation, academics with large classes simply could not consider self and peer assessment.
As with all educational technology the essential caveat applies: Careful and thoughtful integration of
student-centred tasks is vital for success!
Extract from Freeman and McKenzie (2002) Improving Teamwork and Engagement: The case for
self and peer assessment. www.aaee.com.au/journal/2006/willey0106.pdf
Group and team work are commonly used in higher education to facilitate peer learning and
encourage students to develop their capacity to work as part of a team. There seems little argument
about the value of teamwork, but its assessment has proved considerably more problematic
(Conway, Kember, Sivan & Wu, 1993; Lejk, Wyvill & Farrow, 1996). One author has likened group
assessment to a game, maintaining that the rules of the game advantage some students and
disadvantage others, and that factors such as teamwork and contribution to a team are essentially
impossible to assess fairly (Pitt, 2000, p. 240). However, assessment strongly influences students
learning (Ramsden, 1992; Biggs, 1999). If courses include objectives about students capacity to work
as part of a team, and we value peer learning then we need some means of assessing teamwork in a
fair and meaningful way which promotes peer collaboration (Sampson, Cohen, Boud and Anderson,
1999).
Peer assessment of individuals contributions to assessed teamwork isn't a new idea, although the
addition of self assessment is relatively innovative. While there is some debate about the inclusion
of self assessment (Lejk et al 1996), we believe it encourages students to reflect on their own
contributions and capabilities. In fact, Boud, Cohen and Sampson (1999) favour self-assessment
informed by peer feedback on specific criteria, in preference to peer assessment per se.
SPARK was intended to have benefits for both students and staff. It was intended to encourage
students to negotiate the way they will work in the team to achieve the best task result with equal
contributions by all students. Using self and peer assessment encourages students to develop the
capacity to reflect on and evaluate their own and others contributions, develop awareness of their
own strengths and needs as a team member and develop their teamwork skills. For staff, the
intention was that they would gain satisfaction from seeing improvements in learning and have
fewer problems with complaints about the fairness of team based assessment tasks.
22

SPARK is based on a well-designed and evaluated paper-based peer assessment system in which
students rated each other's contributions and the lecturer used the ratings to calculate adjustments
to individual marks (Goldfinch 1994). While Goldfinch's system was reasonably effective in adjusting
team marks to reflect individual contributions, it involved a series of time consuming calculations to
generate adjustment factors. This created a disincentive for lecturers and delayed the provision of
feedback to students, particularly in large classes.
The SPARK software deals with this problem by automating the processes of collecting the student
assessments and completing the calculations. This was a major efficiency benefit, in addition to the
learning benefits. Compared with paper-based systems SPARK was also intended to improve student
confidentiality and reduce data entry and calculation errors.
A further intention was to enable dissemination. SPARK was created to be a relatively generic
template which can be easily adapted to any learning context where group or team work and/or self
and peer assessment are used.
SPARK automatically produces two weighting factors. The SPA or Self and Peer Assessment factor is
a weighting factor that can be used to change a team mark for a project (stage) into an individual
mark.

For example, if a teams project mark was 80 out of 100 and a team member receives a SPA factor of
0.9 , they would receive an individual mark of 72 to reflect a lower than average team contribution
as perceived by a combination of themselves and their peers. Alternatively, if not used to moderate
summative assessment the SPA factor can be used formatively to assist student development.
The second factor calculated is the SAPA or Self Assessment to Peer Assessment factor. It is the ratio
of a students own rating of themselves compared to the average rating of their contribution by their
peers. This has strong feedback value for future development both for self-critical reflection and
peer evaluation.

It provides students with feedback about how the rest of the team perceives their contribution
unsullied by their own opinion. For example, a SAPA factor greater than 1 means that a student has
rated their own team performance higher than they were rated by their team peers. Conversely, a
SAPA factor less than 1 means that a student has rated their own performance lower than they were
rated by their peers. (p5)
Group projects aren't fair

23

Students common complaint

o Equal marks for unequal contributions
o 'Free-riders' known also as 'social loafers' and 'passengers' not penalised

Better students inadequately rewarded and demotivated

Staff common concerns

o Group work complaints evidenced in subject experience and satisfaction surveys at
local and national level
o Staff dilemma of developing collaboration and peer learning without undesirable
side effects
o Paper-based attempts in self and peer assessment unable to overcome
confidentiality concerns
o Paper-based self and peer assessment impossible workload if large classes (i.e. huge
data collection, collation and calculations)
o Innovations too risky in current resource-constrained environment unless generic,
easy and reliable

Software Functionality

Platform independent, web based software

No client software needed apart from a standard web browser
Data stored on MS SQL database
Password protected with stratified privileges for students, instructors and administrators
Easy-to-use simple interface
Instructor Administrative tools allows moderation of marks, feedback saboteur detection
Provides students with ability to enter, review and re-enter ratings and formulate teams
Provides staff/instructors with ability to batch enrol students and/or teams, enter deadlines,
track progress on ratings and duplicate subjects
Provides administrator with ability to create new instructor accounts and manage system

Stages of implementation
Overview
1. Academics determine if group learning and assessment tasks necessary to achieve learning
outcomes
2. Academic identifies weighting for group assessment task and key assessment criteria for
marking the group submission
3. Academic explains how group marks are adjusted into individual marks using SPARK and
method for formulating groups
4. Academic develops assessment criteria and rating scale to be used calculating the
adjustment factor, in collaboration with students and after considering past student
feedback
5. Academic arranges for subject and student details to be entered into SPARK to enable online
student access
6. Students, conscious of assessment criteria used in project/task and groupwork, work on
group task culminating in submission of group project/task
7. Academic monitors groups during completion of group project/task
8. Students reflect on group process in completing task and rate all members of own team
including self against agreed criteria within a rating period
9. Academic collects and assesses group projects/tasks
10. Academic communicates group project mark to each group
11. Academics consults SPARK for adjustment factors and apply to group mark
12. Academic provides each individual student with summative feedback (i.e. the adjusted
individual mark)
13. Academic may provide each individual student with formative feedback
14. Student reflects on SPA and SAPA factor to decide how future behaviour may change to
improve collaboration, interpersonal and reflection capabilities
15. Academic evaluates effectiveness (eg. online surveys, focus groups, ones own reflection)
24

Step-by-Step for academics

1. Academic determines if group learning and assessment tasks necessary to achieve learning
outcomes
2. Academic identifies weighting for group assessment project/task and key assessment criteria
for marking the group submission
3. Academic explains how group marks are adjusted into individual marks using SPARK and
method for formulating groups
4. Academic develops assessment criteria and rating scale to be used calculating the
adjustment factor, in collaboration with students and after considering past student
feedback
5. Academics arranges for subject and student details to be entered into SPARK to enable
online student access
6. Academic monitors groups during completion of group task
7. Academic collects and assesses group projects/tasks
8. Academic communicates group project mark to each group
9. Academic consults SPARK for adjustment factors and applies to group mark
10. Academic provides each individual student with summative feedback (i.e. the adjusted
individual mark)
11. Academic may provide each individual student with formative feedback
12. Academic evaluates effectiveness
Step-by-Step for students
1. Students familiarise themselves with group assessed project/task and criteria academic has
set for marking it
2. Students form groups in agreement with academic
3. Students agree assessment criteria used for rating self and peers
4. Each student familiarises themselves with SPARK
5. Students, conscious of assessment criteria used in project/task and groupwork, work on
group task culminating in submission of group project/task
6. Each student reflects on group process in completing project/task and rates all members of
own team including self against agreed criteria within a rating period. Review and
resubmission possible until specified cutoff date and time.
7. Each student receives mark for group project
8. Each individual student receives adjusted individual mark as summative feedback based on
SPA factor
9. Each individual student receives adjusted formative feedback based on SAPA factor
10. Each reflects on SPA and SAPA factor to decide how future behaviour may change to
improve collaboration, interpersonal and reflection capabilities
11. Students participate in evaluation conducted by academic

25

How to Interpret Spark Factors

A sample SPARKPLUS results screen is shown in the figure above. The SPA factor of 0.91 indicates that
overall this student performed below the average performance of their team (1 representing
average performance) while the SAPA factor of 1.05 (close to 1) suggests that the student was aware
of their underperformance. The triangle indicators for each criterion provide further feedback as to
this students individual strengths and weaknesses. They show the criterion for which the student
underrated their performance the most compared to the evaluation of their performance by their
peers was helped to manage team conflict and resolve disagreements. Conversely the criterion for
which the student overrated their performance the most compared to the evaluation of their
performance by their peers was reliable, met required deadlines, attended group meetings,
punctual. In this case since only one category of criteria was used the category and overall feedback
factors (SPA and SAPA) are the same. The feedback comments from the students team peers are
provided anonymously in the scroll down window.

26

How to Interpret Individuals Spark Radar Diagrams

The blue envelope in the radar diagrams represents the SAPA factors. When this envelope exceeds 1
it indicates that the student believes their contribution was higher than the average assessment they
received from their team peers. The red envelope represents the SPA factors. When this envelope
exceeds 1 students have contributed more than the average of their team peers.
The above radar diagram provides information about a students performance in terms of the three
attribute categories. A quick look at the diagram shows that in the Engineering Ability category the
student contributed the same as the average contribution of their team and the student's rating of
their own performance agrees with the average rating they received from their team peers.
Conversely in the Knowledge Base and Professional Skills categories the student performed slightly
below the average contribution of their team and the SAPA envelope shows they rated their own
performance much higher than they were rated by their team peers.
The differences between a students assessment of their contribution compared to their peers
assessment can be due to a number of factors including:
Their contribution has not been fairly assessed by their peers.
Their peers have not provided feedback to the student in regard to their performance and hence
they are unaware of the differences between their self and their team peers perceptions.
The student may be aware of their true performance level but deliberately chose to inflate their
ratings in an attempt to increase their overall mark.

27

The interpretation of the group radar diagram is similar to that of the individual radar diagram.
Except in the case as above where students have marked individual submissions. In this case the SPA
(red) envelope reports whether the quality of a student's individual submission was considered to be
above or below the average of those marked by the group.
N.B. Consider the portfolio options with these radar diagrams, a student could show their ability to
work as a team and understand how to improve performance via documented evidence.

28

Group Work General comments from Flinders University

Source: Flinders University http://www.flinders.edu.aulteach/teach/groupwork.htm
Research has demonstrated that an important factor in student success in university studies is the
opportunity for students to work in groups. While many academics would like to include group work,
there is often hesitation because of bad experiences when groups have fallen apart and have failed
to complete the tasks or left the work to one or a few students who have felt badly put upon.
There are many advantages to including some group work in the assessment design, but if included,
it must be thoughtfully managed.
Benefits in Using Group Work:
When students have to explain and negotiate their contributions to a group project, it assists them
in developing and increasing their meta-cognitive awareness. That is, in 'low risk' contexts they begin
to know what they know and know what they have yet to learn or find out.
Group projects provide opportunities for developing generic skills such as:
organisation,
negotiation,
delegation,
team work,
co-operation,
leadership,
following
These skills are not automatically picked up but are skills that must be explicitly taught and critically
evaluated just like essay writing, and critical reading
Group work is useful for encouraging social interaction for isolated, rural and overseas
students
Group work can be a means for acknowledging and utilising individual students' additional
strengths and expertise
With a small group of students exploring a topic in a limited time frame, there are
opportunities for their collaborative product of their studies to go to greater depth and
breadth
Group work can be used for real world work on authentic real world projects
Group work can be used to provide opportunities to work in multidisciplinary teams as
learning communities exploring specific themes or issues.
Large group projects provide a legitimate vehicle for making assessment a central aspect of a
topic
Group assessment is more public and accountable for its intentions and judgments.
If the student learning output is a group effort it will reduce the assessment workload by a
factor of the number in the groups and thus can be a more efficient means of assessing.
However, although the interpreting a grading aspect may be reduced the management and
guidance demands may well be higher than it is for individual projects or papers.
"Group Think": Some groups malfunction when the preservation of the group becomes more
important than the task at hand or the ideas.
Creation of "team players": not being a team player means dissenting from the group
identity. Independent thinkers are not popular in a group environment
When to Use Groupwork
As suggested by Gary Poole, visiting AUTC scholar 2001 :
When quality is more important than efficiency Groupwork can be inefficient. It should be used to
improve the quality of student product.
When the total amount of information processed or generated is more important than ideas. Using
techniques such as group brainstorming can reduce the number of ideas generated as students
discuss the ideas rather than come up with new ideas.
When the task lends itself to a division of labour
29

Setting Up Teams
Assign groups
Allocate students to groups rather than allowing them to pick groups themselves.
Base your assignments on your identification of high and low contributors as evident
in previous meetings
Artificially place groups into smaller sub-groups mixing gender, age, culture in order
to force interaction if none is occurring
Keep to smaller numbers. An eight member team is too large for effective project
management
and allows some members to "disappear"
Roles
Either assign specific roles or allow students to choose. Ensure that all group members are sure what
their roles in the group are. Possible roles include:
Note taker
Chair
Change teams from time to time
Strategies That Enhance Effective Group Assignments
Initial training
Set ground rules for being in a group. Allow students to establish the obligations of
accountability.
Make the group the first line of resolving group problems, and the lecturer/tutor the final
resort. Any
problems with the group must be raised in consultation by the group as a whole. Shift the
onus on group
Discourage anonymity by limiting size of groups.
Ask for progress reports early on including the functioning of the group. Use a group
evaluation form.
Make the feedback public in the group.
Allow in class time for group meetings and planning and make yourself accessible to groups.
Design formative assessment on both the work itself AND the group work.
Allow for the time required to make groups work
As a rule, assign students to groups rather than allowing them to self select.
Share the final products of the group work with the entire class and invite critique.
Encourage disagreement within group discussions as a tool to foster creativity.
Vary the products of group work
o Presentations with clearly defined rules and criteria including the insistence that a
presentation must engage the audience.
o Poster Presentations
o Individual follow up assessments
o Process analysis in that the process of the groupwork is assigned a grade. Make effective
group
o interaction and co-operation a criteria in grading
Benefits of Groupwork
An important factor in student success in university studies is opportunities for students to work in
groups. While many academics would like to include group work, they often hesitate because of bad
experiences when groups fall apart and fail to complete the tasks or leave the work to one or a few
students who then feel badly put upon.
There are many advantages to including some group work in the assessment design, but it must be
thoughtfully managed.
30

 Increase in metacognitive awareness

When students have to explain and negotiate their contributions to a group project it can
assist them to develop and increase their metacognitive awareness. That is, in low risk
contexts they begin to know what they know and know what they have yet to learn or find
out.
Development of generic skills
Group projects can provide opportunities for developing generic skills such as: organisation,
negotiation delegation, team work, co-operation, leadership, following etc. However,
students don't automatically pick these up through being involved in a group project, these
skills that must be explicitly taught and critically evaluated. Students need to be explicitly
aware of such skills to intentionally develop them and to include them in their personal
attributes in job applications.
Development of social networks and relationships
A distinguishing feature of the history of successful university students is that they have
strong social/learning networks with other students. Group work is useful for encouraging
social interaction for new students who might be isolated; especially for shy, rural and
overseas students.
Development and contribution of individual capabilities
Group work can be a means for acknowledging and utilising the strengths and expertise of
individual students. They can contribute their unique capabilities in completing a group
project or performance.
Greater depth and breadth in final products
When a small group of students explores a topic in a limited time frame there are
opportunities for their collaborative efforts and the products of their studies can go to
greater depth and breadth than if they work individually.
Authentic approach to learning
Learning and production of projects in the real world rarely requires individual effort. While
individuals may have specific responsibilities most projects and enterprises require
marshalling a mix of expertise and responsibilities. Group work in university projects can be
used for real world work on authentic real world projects and to harness opportunities to
work in multidisciplinary teams as learning communities exploring specific themes or issues.

31

Phil Race Chapter 4 Making small-group teaching work

http://phil-race.co.uk/downloads/
Intended outcomes of this Chapter
When youve thought through the suggestions included in this Chapter (and tried out the most
relevant ones) you should be better-able to:

Confronted some of the behaviours (student ones and tutor ones) which can reduce the
success of small-group work;
Decide the optimum size of student groups for particular collaborative tasks you set;
Choose the best way to establish the group membership for your purposes;
Select from a range of processes such as rounds, buzz-groups, syndicates, snowballing,
fishbowls, crossovers, brainstorming and pair-dialogues, to help your students to learn
productively and actively in small-group environments.

Why is small group learning so important?

My aim in this chapter is to help colleagues increase the interest and diversity of the processes used
in small-group work with students. A common theme running throughout this chapter is the need to
help students to participate fully in small-group situations, so that the learning payoff they derive
from such occasions is maximised.
Small-group learning may be more important than we think. When most people think about
teaching in universities and colleges, the image that frequently comes to mind is of a large lecture
theatre full of students listening intently (or not) to a lecturer in full spate of erudition. Actually, a
large proportion of the most meaningful learning in higher education happens when students are
working in small groups, in seminars, tutorials, practicals and laboratories. Moreover, even more
learning can be happening in small group situations beyond timetabled sessions, where students
interact spontaneously with each other, and learn from each other. With increasing pressure on us
all to deliver the curriculum in ever more efficient and effective ways, the means by which we
manage small group teaching, and harness the potential learning payoff, come under close scrutiny.
This chapter is intended to help you to explore how we can do this to best effect.
Group learning is about getting people to work together well, in carefully set up learning
environments. The human species has evolved on the basis of group learning. Learning from other
people is the most instinctive and natural of all the learning contexts we experience, and starts from
birth. Although learning can only be done by the learner, and cant be done to the learner, the roles
of other people in accelerating and modifying that learning are vitally important. Other people can
enhance the quality of our learning, and can also damage it. But which other people?
We hear much of collaborative learning, as if its the most natural activity in the world. But it often
seems like the least natural, particularly amongst strangers. Sociological research tells us repeatedly
that it is human nature not to be involved with people we dont know. We might make a mistake, or
look stupid, or be attacked. We will, however, get involved with people we do know. Well help them
with their problems and even defend them. One key to working and learning with other people is,
therefore, the ability to lower barriers and become friends with would-be strangers, while
acknowledging differences and respecting different viewpoints.
Furthermore, much is now said about transferable skills, or key skills, particularly including oral
communication skills, problem-solving skills, self-organisation skills, and reflection. Many of these
32

skills can only be learned from, and with, other people, and cannot be developed solely by reading
and studying what others have written about them. It is now increasingly accepted that the most
important outcomes of education and training are about developing people, and not just what
people know or understand. Employers and managers plead for employees who are able to work
well with others, and organise themselves. Working in small groups can allow students to embrace a
range of interactive and collaborative skills which are often hard to develop in individual study
situations, and impossible to develop in large-group environments such as lectures. The small group
skills are precisely those required in employment and research, where graduates need to be able to:

work in teams,
listen to others ideas sympathetically and critically,
think creatively and originally,
build on others existing work,
collaborate on projects,
manage time and processes effectively,
see projects through to a conclusion,
cope with the normal difficulties of interactions between human beings.

The last of these may be the most important of all. Learning in groups allows students to develop
cohesion with their peers, when classes are becoming so large as to preclude feelings of whole group
identity, particularly under modular schemes where large cohorts of students come together from
disparate directions to study together on a unit.
Group learning has never been as important as it now is. Yet we are still in a world where most
teachers, educators and trainers are groomed in instruction rather than facilitation. Despite the
increased status of group learning, there is nothing fundamentally new in people learning together.
Some lecturers find working with small groups more anxiety-provoking than lecturing, because of
the necessity to work with students as individuals rather than in the anonymity of large groups.
Sometimes there are worries about student behaviour, that they might become too challenging,
disruptive or unfocussed. Otherwise, there are often anxieties about organisational issues, like how
to run a number of parallel seminars, based on a single lecture, with several tutors and research
assistants working with different groups. This Chapter addresses some of the reasons for persevering
nevertheless, and offers some practical suggestions on overcoming a wide range of difficulties.

Twelve tips for doing effective Team-Based Learning (TBL)

DEAN X. PARMELEE & LARRY K. MICHAELSEN

33

2010; 32: 118122

Twelve tips for doing effective Team-Based

Learning (TBL)
DEAN X. PARMELEE1 & LARRY K. MICHAELSEN2
1

Wright State University, USA, 2University of Central Missouri, USA

Med Teach Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by James Cook University on 09/05/11

For personal use only.

Abstract
Team-based learning (TBL) in medical education has emerged over the past few years as an instructional strategy to enhance
active learning and critical thinking even in large, basic science courses. Although TBL consistently improves academic outcomes
by shifting the instructional focus from knowledge transmission to knowledge application, it also addresses several professional
competencies that cannot be achieved or evaluated through lecture-based instruction. These 12 tips provide the reader with a set
of specific recommendations which, if followed, will ensure the successful design and implementation of TBL for a unit of study.

Introduction
Medical educators have long recognized two important realities.
One is that being able to recite all the subtle differences between
one form of a disease and another is a very different kind of
knowledge than being able to quickly diagnose the correct form
of that disease suffered by a real, living patient. The other is that
medical students must master both kinds of knowledge.
In traditional medical education, students were exposed to
the two different kinds of knowledge at different times and in
different settings. The content was typically taught in lecturebased courses and, later (some years later) students learned to
use the content during their time in clinical rotations.
Delaying students opportunity to learn to use the content,
however, does not fit well with what we now know about how
adults learn best the kind of learning that both sticks and
can be transferred to novel situations. As a result, medical
educators have experimented with a number of approaches
for enabling students to more closely connect the content and
concept acquisition with its application e.g. problem-based
learning (PBL), case presentation.
The purpose of this article is to describe an approach that,
like PBL, immediately and intensively engages students with
the kinds of problems they will encounter in medical practice.
With this approach, team-based learning (TBL), some classroom time is spent on ensuring that students master the course
content. However, the major emphasis is on concept application, and the processes through which students learn both the
content and the applications are specifically designed so that
student groups develop into self-managed learning teams. As
a result, a single instructor can both provide content expertise
and oversee the learning endeavors of an entire class.
For a course with TBL as part of its learning activities,
students are strategically organized into permanent groups (for
the entire term of the course) and the course content is
organized into major units (typically five to seven). Before each
in-class event, students must study assigned materials because

each module begins with the readiness assurance process

(RAP). The RAP consists of a short test (over the key content and
concepts from the readings or other activities, e.g. dissection)
which students first complete as individuals, then they take the
exact same test again as a team, coming to consensus on each
question. Students receive immediate feedback on the team test
and they then have the opportunity to write evidence-based
appeals if they feel they can make valid arguments for their
answers to questions which they got wrong. The final step in the
RAP could be a lecture (usually very short and always very
specific) to enable the instructor to clarify any misperceptions
that become apparent during the team test and the appeals, but
also could be a between-team discussion about why the
selected correct answers are best fielded by the instructor.
Once the RAP is completed, the remainder (and the majority) of
the learning module is spent on in-class activities and assignments that require students to practice using the course content
by solving challenging problems.

TWELVE TIPS
Tip 1: Start with good course design
TBL is an instructional strategy that works best when it is
integrated tightly with a courses design. It can be the primary
mode of instruction or work alongside other learning activities,
i.e. focused lecture, service learning, self-directed online
tutorials. We recommend using Dee Finks Creating
Significant Learning Experiences: An Integrated Approach to
Designing College Courses (2003) for guidance in defining a
courses (or curriculums) contextual issues, goals, assessments,
learning activities, and feedback mechanisms. Often, instructors
will try out a TBL module or two in an existing course, either
replacing a set of lectures or small group sessions that had
required recruiting and herding many faculties. This is a valid
way to gain experience with how to implement it, but, usually, it
is hard to incorporate the peer evaluation component since the
number of meetings will be few.

Correspondence: Dean X. Parmelee, Academic Affairs, Boonshoft School of Medicine, Wright State University, PO Box 927, Dayton, OH 454010927, USA. Tel: 1 937 775 3803; fax: 1 937 775 2842. email: dean.parmelee@wright.edu

118

ISSN 0142159X print/ISSN 1466187X online/10/0201185 2010 Informa Healthcare Ltd.

DOI: 10.3109/01421590903548562

Twelve tips

Team-Based Learning
(Repeated 5 7 times per course)

Advanced

Readiness Assurance
Peer Teaching &
Feedback

Development of Students Critical Thinking Skills

(pre-class)

1-hour + or

A few minutes to several hours (integrative)

Step1

Step 2

Step 5

Individual
Study

Individual
Test

Instructor
Input

Step 3
Team
Test

Med Teach Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by James Cook University on 09/05/11

For personal use only.

Application of Course Concepts

Preparation

Step 6
Application/Critical
Thinking
Activities & Problems

Step 4
Written Appeals

Figure 1. Instructional activity sequence for TBL content unit.

Tip 2: Use a backwards design

when developing TBL courses and
modules
With backwards design (Wiggins & McTighe 1998) the first
question to ask yourself is, What do I want my students to be
able to DO by the end of this unit of study? Whether designing
a single TBL module for a unit of study, e.g. Starlings Law and
cardiovascular physiology, or a series of modules that form the
basis of an entire course, clarify what you want the students to
be able to do by the end of the module or course. For
example, a goal for a module in physiology/pharmacology
focused on Starlings Law would be for the students to be able
to apply their understanding of Starlings law to accurately
interpret physiologic data from a case of congestive heart
failure, explain how Starlings Law governs which findings,
predict which pharmacologic agent will affect specific
components of heart function. A traditional course in anatomy
would have many TBL modules, each one presenting a new
clinical problem vignette linked to the cadaver dissection
component of the course and giving the students multiple
opportunities to learn the daily applicability of anatomy
knowledge for clinical practice.
This single question is often the hardest one for instructors
who are content-driven to ask themselves. There is just so
much content that we feel our students must know before
they can make use of it but, TBL provides a way to have
them master the content while they are applying it and get
feedback on how well they are getting it as they go.

Tip 3: Make sure you organize the

module activities so that students
can reach your learning goals and
you (and they) will know that they
have done it
After clarifying what you want your students to be able to do
by the end of the module, the next step in backwards design is
creating a group application exercise. This should be a

problem that requires students to use all of the preparatory

knowledge and their teams brainpower to analyze, interpret,
and then commit to a choice or a decision. Further, you should
avoid the temptation to ask a series of questions as a means of
leading students through the thinking process. It is far better
to require them to make a difficult choice and let them work
together to master the concepts and to discover and internalize
the relationships between them in the process of coming to a
conclusion.
Once you have decided what you want students to be able
to do and how you will assess whether or not they can do it,
the next two steps in backwards design are identifying what
content elements the class must master before they are ready
to solve the problem (i.e. the information that the students
need to learn outside of class to be prepared for the module)
and write the questions for the readiness assurance test (RAT)
(and do not call it a quiz its purpose is readiness assurance
and you should emphasize its role by the terms you use in
talking about it).

Tip 4: Have application exercises

that promote both deep thinking
and engaged, content-focused
discussion
Over the years, we have come to realize that the single most
important aspect of successfully implementing TBL is what
your assignments require students to create. Whatever the
content, if you ask them to produce a lengthy document, they
will divide up the work which, in turn, will reduce learning
and, all too often, will result in negative feelings about their
peers and skepticism about working in a group. On the
other hand, we have learned that, by using well-designed
assignments, students will both learn from each other and
develop a great deal of confidence in the value of working in a
team.
The key to designing effective assignments is ensuring
that what students are asked to do is characterized by 4 Ss at
each of the stages in which they engage with the course

119

D. X. Parmelee & L. K. Michaelsen

content working alone, working within their team,

and working across teams (i.e. whole-class discussion). The
4 Ss are:

Med Teach Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by James Cook University on 09/05/11

For personal use only.

Significant Problem
For a successful group application exercise, select or create a
problem that the student can readily recognize as the kind of
problem that will be encountered in real life, make it
Significant. In medical education, this is easy there are an
infinite number of patient cases that are rich with data to be
interpreted, decisions to be made. But, there has to be a clear
link between the content that underlies the exercise and its
application. At the conclusion of the hypothetical module on
Starlings law/physiology, you want to hear your students
talking about how the basic principles of the law are
applicable to understanding cardiac contractility in stress
situations and how to approach interventions. In addition,
the answers to these questions should never be discoverable in
a text or article or lecture notes they can only come from
team members collaborating to figure them out.

Same Problem
With TBL, all of the small groups must be working on the
Same Problem. If you assign different problems to different
small groups, students are not accountable to each other
because you lose the benefit of having any semblance of a
robust discussion (and learning!) between-group discussion of
the problem. Further, if you allow groups to choose their own
problem, they are not even accountable to you unless you
are willing to do the research that you hope they would do.

Specific Choice
When your assignments require students to agree on a specific
choice, the only way they can accomplish the task is by
working together to critically appraise a situation, examine the
existing evidence, and make a professional judgment. Further,
the more specific the question, the better the learning. For
instance, if your module was about depression and pharmacologic interventions, a good question would be Identify the
set of neurotransmitters that are affected by the best drug
choice for this patient and not What would be the best drug
for this patient because a more specific question requires a
deeper analysis.

Simultaneous Report
You create an important moment of truth when all the small
groups are asked to post their responses to a question at the
same time. Two things happen as soon as students realize that
the choice they will be making will be open to challenges from
other groups. One is that, because of the potential of an us
versus them situation, group cohesiveness increases. The
other is that students are far more engaged in the
within-groups discussion because they realize that they
would not be able to hide if they do not get it right. In
addition, by engaging students exploring how they arrived at
120

Figure 2. RAT scores.

their respective answers, you can readily create a class

discussion that is far more informative to you and your
students than asking, Somebody say what they think about
thus-and-such.
We have also learned two lessons sometimes by sad
experience about the 4 Ss. One is that failing to do any one
of the 4 Ss substantially reduces both the intensity of class
discussions and the resultant learning. The other is that, if you
fail to do any two of the 4 Ss, learning is minimal and pretty
much the only reason that students are willing to complete the
assignment is that it will have a negative impact on their grade.

Tip 5: Do not underestimate the

importance of the RAP
The RAP is designed to link students advance preparation to
the group application exercises and provides a remarkable and
powerful opportunity for individual feedback and peer teaching within the teams. In addition, the RAP lets you (and the
students) know if you need to address gaps in their
understanding. If the content area is particularly difficult, e.g.
autonomics, odds ratios and predictive values in critical
appraisal, liver pathology, then the RAP should be separated
in time from the group application exercise so that the
instructor can give corrective feedback and/or provide additional input before they begin to tackle the group application
exercise. However, you do not have to cover everything only
what you (and the students) know they need help with.
The RAP, when done well, unfailingly produces five
priceless outcomes even though it typically uses only a
fraction of the overall class time (usually about 2530%) for
any given unit of instruction. These are:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)

Effective and efficient content coverage.

Development of real teams and students interpersonal
and teamwork skills.
Students gain an experience-based insight about the
value of diverse input.
Development of students self-study and life-long
learning skills.

Twelve tips

Med Teach Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by James Cook University on 09/05/11

For personal use only.

(5)

Class time during which you can provide the content

expertise to ensure that students develop critical
thinking skills.

In addition, data from the RAP provides data that definitively

answers the question of whether or not individuals are likely to
be held back by working in teams. Based on data from the past
23 years of using TBL (Michaelsen and Parmelee, unpublished), teams will score higher than their own very best
member 99.9% of the time1 and the most common outcome
is that the worst team score will be higher than the highest
individual score in an entire class.
Unfortunately, we have seen some instructors miss out on
part or all of these valuable outcomes because they have, for
whatever reason, decided to: (1) skip either the individual or
the group component or both; (2) use questions that are
merely designed see if the students did the reading, e.g. asking
picky or meaningless questions unrelated to the objectives of
the module; and (3) view this process as a way of getting
another assessment for their course grade. The RAP is not just
another quiz and neither instructors nor students will reap its
many potential benefits if it is treated as such.

Tip 6: Orient the class to why you

are using TBL and how it is different
from previous experience they may
have had with learning groups
Most students will not have had a classroom experience like
TBL. In fact, the majority of their experience with group work
will have been struggling to complete poorly designed
assignments that forced them into the uncomfortable position
of having to choose between doing more than their fair share
or risk getting a bad grade and/or having to deal with difficult
group members just to get anything done at all.
These concerns are real and must be addressed or you will
have a difficult time getting student buy-in unless students
understand both why you are using TBL and how TBL is
designed to avoid the problems that they, all too often, have
come to expect are a normal outcome from doing group work.
At a minimum, you need to outline your course objectives and
provide an explanation of how they would be achieved in a
traditionally taught course versus how you will achieve them
by using TBL. Other suggestions to help them understand and
accept TBL include: (1) giving a practice RAT (many use the
course syllabus as the subject matter for the test); (2)
engaging them in the process of determining the grading
system for the course (Michaelsen et al. 2004) and, throughout
the course; and (3) reminding them about the benefits they are
experiencing along the way.

Tip 7: Highlight accountability as the

cornerstone of TBL
The cornerstone of success of TBL is that the natural outcome
of its processes is that individuals, teams, and the instructor are
immediately and clearly accountable for behaving in ways that
promote learning. Students are accountable for coming to
class, preparing before they come, and investing time and

effort working in their team. The instructor is accountable for

providing students with the cognitive foundation they will
need to be ready to tackle the kinds of problems they will face
in medical practice and giving them opportunities to practice
developing their application skills.
When TBL is fully employed, the vast majority of students
are prepared, come to class, and engage each other in
productive ways as they work together. As a result, even the
students who start out with a skeptical attitude because of past
negative experiences with learning groups will eventually
embrace TBL Finally, hard work as an individual and hard
work as a group pays off.
As for the accountability of the instructor, some students will
inevitably start out with the impression that he/she is not
teaching as in other classes, i.e. using lectures to state what will
be on the final exam, and, worse, we (the students) are having
to do all the work. Further, if the instructor is not following
through with his/her side of the bargain doing a good job of:
(1) providing students with the opportunity to practice using
well-designed applications assignments (i.e. using the 4 Ss) and
(2) reminding students of the benefits that they are getting
then the doubts and the resentment are likely to persist.

Tip 8: Providing a fair appeals

process will inspire further learning
Inevitably, some students will disagree with your selection of a
best answer on a RAT question. They will do so on one of two
bases: the question was written in such as way that they were
confused or they feel you made an error in your interpretation
of the content. The appeals process (Michaelsen 2008, p.24)
provides the opportunity, preferably while they are still in
class, to either re-write a question that they feel was poorly
written or articulate, in writing, why they feel their answer was
better, using references if appropriate. Accept appeals from a
team only; award credit to the appealing team(s) only and to
the individual scores of the members of those teams.
The appeals process provides a number of benefits. One is
that it motivates students to do a focused re-study of the exact
material that gave them the most trouble. Another is that, the
process of trying to put together a successful appeal requires to
think deeply about both the specific ideas and the overall
context within which they reside. Finally, students can often
re-write your questions so that indeed they are better!

Tip 9: Peer evaluation is a

challenge to get going, but it
can enhance the accountability
of the process
There are several ways to set up a peer evaluation process for
the course, and it may take some trial and error to find the one
that fits well with your institution or courses culture (Levine RE
2008, Chapter 9). There are, however, numerous benefits from
putting forth the effort. One of the most important is that, when
you use peer evaluations, students are accountable to the
members of their team. Another is that a well-designed peer
evaluation process enables students to learn how to give

121

Med Teach Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by James Cook University on 09/05/11

For personal use only.

D. X. Parmelee & L. K. Michaelsen

constructive feedback to one another and to gratefully receive

constructive feedback from peers an invaluable competency
for future practice.

the class when speaking you will not need a roving

microphone once they learn to be quiet when someone is
speaking.

Tip 10: Be clear and focused with

the advanced preparation

Conclusions

A criticism of TBL is that the instructor identifies the learning

needs for the students, thereby robbing them of the opportunity
to explore the potential domain of the content and make some
judgments about what they need to know. Based on past
experience, when you are specific about what you want them
to master before a TBL module, including posting actionoriented objectives such as Be able to articulate how dopamine
affects sodium channels at the receptor level, you invite them
to go beyond doing the minimum of preparation since that will
only help for the individual part of the RAP. They learn quickly
that for their team to be really successful in the group work,
they must master the advance assignment assiduously and
devote additional effort to exploring the content domain. Tying
the TBL objectives to the course objectives is essential.

We are grateful to have been invited to provide these 12 TIPS.

Over the past few years, we have provided many faculty
development workshops and consultations, around the world,
to introduce medical educators to TBL and assist them with its
implementation in a variety of settings. In most cases, TBL has
produced a positive transformation of the classroom experience for both the students and the instructor. Sometimes,
however, we hear comments from faculty such as: I tried it a
few times, but gave up because the students didnt like it, or
Does one have to use all the components? The GRAT sounds
like a waste of time. Unfortunately, whenever we ask about
the details of a less-than-successful attempt, we almost always
learn that one or more of the components had been omitted or
altered substantially. The strategy has been well tested and
works, but works best when all of the components are
included in the design and implementation.

Tip 11: Create the teams

thoughtfully
We have three principles to guide the process of getting a class
into teams: (1) make the process transparent so all students
know how they ended up in a particular team, even if the
process is totally random; (2) distribute what you define as
resources for a team as evenly as possible, for instance, a
beginning class of medical students might have several
students who have advanced degrees in one of the basic
medical sciences, so you want to assign them to different
teams; and (3) strive for the teams to have a diverse
composition, i.e. gender balance, rural or urban backgrounds,
science/nonscience majors. Letting a class know that teams
that have diversity within, however defined, will have unique
strengths to draw upon in the challenging modules ahead.

Tip 12: Several low-budget props

facilitate the implementation of a
good module
One does not need to spend several thousands of Euros for the
latest audience response system or any high-definition technology to get a well-constructed TBL module to work. We
recommend using IFATTM response forms for the group
readiness assurance because students will hover over the
scratch-off card, talk with each other, make eye contact, and
be passionate about whether or not the correct answer is going
to emerge. They receive immediate feedback, let one another
know things like You were right! Next time make us listen to
you! Prepare folders for each team, color code the components to make the sequence of activities clear, collect
everything so that you do not have to start de nova every
year a good module is a treasure. Buy or build flagpoles to
demarcate the position of teams; laminate the lettered cards for
simultaneous responses. Require students to stand and face
122

Declaration of interest: The authors report no conflicts of

interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and
writing of the article.

Notes on contributors
DEAN X. PARMELEE is the associate dean for Academic Affairs, and
devotes most of his time to improving medical student education.
LARRY K. MICHAELSEN is a professor of Management, an active teacher of
undergraduate business school students, and both he and Dr Parmelee
conduct workshops on TBL for faculty development at a variety of
institutions of higher learning internationally. He is also the David Ross
Boyd Professor Emeritus at the University of Oklahoma, a Carnegie Scholar,
a Fulbright Senior Scholar, and former editor of the Journal of Management
Education.

Note
1. Based on data from 6161 students in 1115 teams since
19861114 team scores were higher than the score of their
own very best member.

References
Fink D. 2003. Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated
approach to designing college courses. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Levine RE. 2008. Peer evaluation in team-based learning. In: Michaelsen LK,
Parmelee D, McMahon K, Levine RE, co-editors. Team-based learning in
health professions education. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing. Chapter 9.
Michaelsen LK, Knight AB, Fink LD. 2004. Team-based learning: A
transformational use of small groups in college teaching. Sterling, VA:
Stylus Publishing.
Michaelsen LK, Parmelee D. Analysis of individual versus team scores on
readiness assurance tests, undergraduate and professional student
performance. Unpublished data.
Wiggins G, McTighe JH. 1998. Understanding by design. Merrill
Prentice Hall.