This workshop will be an introduction to Team-Based Learning™ (TBL) conducted in the TBL format. Participants will be given a preparatory assignment, divided into teams, given individual and team readiness assurance tests with immediate feedback, and achieve consensus with their team on a set of increasingly challenging application-based questions.

The goal of this workshop is for participants to demonstrate a thorough understanding of the fundamental components, sequence of events, and benefits of TBL.

Learning Objectives:

1. Describe the essential principles and components of Team-Based Learning (TBL).
2. Explain how and why TBL works.
3. Discuss the benefits of using TBL.
4. Illustrate how to transform a small group into a productive learning team.

1. compare and contrast 3 definitions of mentoring in relation to process and outcomes. 
2. choose an appropriate mentor or mentee.
3. describe the characteristics of a functional mentor-mentee relationship.
4. assess tangible outcomes of mentoring and evaluate whether the mentor-mentee relationship is accomplishing its purposes.

The program builds on the very successful Research Development Day in 2018. You will learn from several experienced and high-level TBL researchers, as well as from structured and practical exercises with potential collaborators. These will help you to develop your particular research idea, and/or to team up with others to identify a new business idea and plan a research project. 

 

We recommend that you also register for the Research Development Day Follow-Up on the Saturday of the conference. These two sessions are a “must” for those wishing to develop or improve their understanding of research knowledge and who wish to increase their research output. Detailed information about the Research Development Day at the 2018 Conference is on the TBLC website (Communities of Practice: Research and Scholarship). 

You may wish to order a boxed lunch for this full-day program.

This workshop is for educators who have completed the introductory workshop on Team-Based Learning™. The entire workshop will be conducted in a TBL format including a preparatory assignment, individual and team readiness assurance tests, and application-based questions.

The goal of this workshop is for participants to understand the steps involved in designing an effective TBL module relevant to their fields of instruction.

By the end of this workshop, participants will be able to use backward design to plan a TBL module:

1. Prioritize key performances necessary to demonstrate learning;
2. Determine the module elements necessary for a high functioning TBL classroom that optimizes quality discussion and prepares learners for key performances;
3. Apply the 4S framework (Significant Problem, Specific Choice, Same Problem, and Simultaneous Reporting) to construct application activities aligned to the learning outcomes;
4. Ensure that the readiness assurance process sets the foundation for application exercises;
5. Create a facilitation plan that engages learners as teams and individuals, promotes critical thinking, manages time and resources, and ensures a quality learning environment.

• Identify a process for leading change.
• Select appropriate strategies to initiate and sustain change.
• Compare factors based upon role (i.e. faculty, departmental leadership, institution wide oversight) and apply appropriate strategies to enable action.

This 90‐minute session will engage participants in an interactive, hands‐on application of concepts and strategies related to leadership and change process and management. Participants will work through a scenario depicting an initiative to establish team‐based learning within a MD degree program. Both small and large group learning activities will be used. By the end of the plenary session, participants will enhance their abilities to facilitate successful change from introduction to adoption to implementation to institutionalization (long‐term, sustainable change).

Imagine a class in which students ask you to give them another exam; in which students know exactly which skills they have mastered and which they need to practice; in which students walk in to your office and say, "Professor, let me show you I know how to...?" instead of begging for partial credit. This is the environment created by a grading system called Standards Based and Specifications Grading (SBSG). In this workshop, you will be introduced to Standards Based Grading and Specifications Grading and begin incorporating them into your TBL class. We will discuss the behavioral shifts we see in our students in SBSG courses. You will discover how Specifications Grading allows you to eliminate false equivalences created by traditional (weighted average) grading schemes, and keep measures of student learning independent of behavioral incentives (such as readiness assurance tests and peer evaluations). You will also learn how Standards Based Grading inherently produces data measuring how well students are meeting your TBL course's learning outcomes, which can be used to guide and evaluate future pedagogical innovations in the course.

 

Connect with Drew Lewis on Twitter @siwelwerd and use hashtags #SBG and #MasteryGrading

Team-based learning (TBL) is part of a larger movement in higher education to make learning more growth oriented and challenging. TBL practitioners largely apply TBL methods to develop learners in the Bloom's cognitive (knowledge) and psychomotor (skills) domains, leveraging readiness, team applications, and facilitated class discussions to deepen learning and elevate critical thinking. The phased-structure of the TBL classroom provides a framework for teams of learners and educators to work together to problem-solve, discuss attitudes, express arguments and give feedback with the potential to drive deeper learning that challenges mindsets. The compelling need for learners to demonstrate competency in the affective domain is documented by The Association of American Colleges and Universities within the LEAP Essential Learning Outcomes, which call for ethical reasoning and cultural competency as part of graduate readiness. These outcomes require higher levels of emotional intelligence and moral behaviors, which are critical competencies necessary for developing compassionate, practice ready professionals. TBL provides a platform which can facilitate the development of emotionally intelligent and morally competent graduates when designed to meet these outcomes. This workshop will provide a framework for developing moral agency and emotional intelligence in learners using TBL through focused readiness assurance activities, 4S designed application exercises and intra- and inter-team discussions. Application exercises will adapt the Lind's Konstanz Method for Dilemma Discussion (KMDD) as well as the Gloria Willcox Feeling Wheel to help learners discuss emotions and attitudes. Readiness will include orientation to these methods and a sample ethics case to be discussed. As part of closure, facilitators will share survey findings regarding learners comfort in displaying empathy, compassion and facing moral and ethical dilemmas. This model provides systematic methods for educators to create a TBL module targeting emotional intelligence and moral agency with methods that could support development across the entire affective domain.

Each of us has the opportunity to be a leader in education, whether it is implementing TBL, or establishing a vision for a course, an office, or modeling behaviors that others may emulate. Our success depends on identifying leadership opportunities within our area of influence. The fast pace of academia often leaves little time for reflection or for developing and practicing the skills needed to be intentional and authentic leaders. The goal of the session is to offer participants a facilitated opportunity to explore their personal leadership behaviors. Participants will also be able to identify the styles of their colleagues, a skill that can help further their own growth as a leader. Practical cases will be analyzed in small groups to identify leadership opportunities and explore how different styles can potentially address the described challenge. There will be time to share challenges with the group and seek solutions, in addition to using a worksheet to record how the lessons learned can be applied to bring enhanced leadership to their own position.

 

Connect with Chris Burns on LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/drcmburns

Roberson & Franchini (2014) proposed five possible uses of MCQs in TBL. First, MCQs may be useful as 'naive' tasks presented before the RAT to stimulate interest/ engagement. Second, MCQs may be useful as knowledge/ comprehension RAT questions (@ 2/3 of a typical RAT). Third, MCQs may be useful as entry-level application RAT questions (@ 1/3 of a typical RAT). Fourth, MCQs may be useful as low-level informed Application Activities. Fifth, MCQs may be useful as high-level informed Application Activities. Because they have many important uses TBL, instructors must be able to evaluate MCQs for quality, for cognitive level, and for place-of-best-fit in TBL. That is, instructors must know the 'rules' for writing high quality/ varying cognitive level MCQs and decide whether available MCQs are of high, medium, or low quality. In addition, they must understand Bloom's Taxonomy and determine the cognitive level of available MCQs. Specifically, instructors must be able to determine whether MCQs assess the knowledge/ comprehension, application/ analysis, or synthesis/ evaluation levels. Finally, instructors must be knowledgeable about the purpose/ makeup of RATs and Application Activities and use that knowledge to decide the place-of-best-fit is for available MCQs. The Workshop will be conducted using a TBL format. Attendees will be provided with pre-workshop reading assignments related to evaluating MCQs and using them in RATs and Application Activities. The Workshop will begin with an IRAT and a TRAT and will continue with a series of Application Activities. Application Activities will support participants in evaluating the quality, cognitive level, and place-of- best-fit for selected MCQs; and provide practice in creating MCQs for their courses.  By the end of the workshop, attendees will be able to evaluate the quality, the cognitive level, and place-of-best-fit (in RATs and Application Activities) for MCQs and create MCQs for their courses.

The purpose of this workshop is for participants to explore the Integrated Online model, an online TBL course design that utilizes both asynchronous and synchronous modes of engagement. With the steady increase in online course enrollment, methods of providing online students with the same learning and engagement opportunities TBL often provides within face-to-face environments are greatly needed. Although best practices around implementing TBL within fully asynchronous and synchronous courses have been shared, a model that leverages both modes of engagement might be more helpful for particular courses and/or instructors. As such, the Integrated Online model was designed to combine the flexibility of asynchronous engagement with the connectedness offered through synchronous meetings. Further, the related essential principles of TBL were considered in the design of the Integrated Online model to ensure opportunities to establish cohesive teams remained central. The Integrated Online model includes synchronous class sessions for the course orientation and to start each module. The synchronous class session for each module includes the RAP and one or more 4S application activities. Additional 4S application activities are also assigned and completed by teams asynchronously. The Integrated Online model has been implemented within a single education course during two semesters and both learned best practices and students' perceptions of the model were collected. Workshop participants will gain an overview of the Integrated Online Model through preparation materials and the RAP. Workshop participants will also consider students' perceptions of the Integrated Online Model to determine possible challenges and affordances of adopting this TBL model. Lastly, workshop participants will consider how the Integrated Online model might be implemented within their own courses by sequencing phases of TBL and corresponding technology platforms within and across modules.

The purpose of this workshop is to empower attendees to explore common barriers and problem-solve proposed solutions through collaborative discussion of context and assumptions followed by critical analysis against a quality learning environment criteria. A brief summary of TBL texts and publications that address TBL barriers will be presented as part of readiness. Ofstad and Mohr will also present findings from a survey of current TBLC Certified Trainer Consultants to further identify common barriers and potential resolutions to use as a foundation for workshop applications and facilitated team and classroom discussion. Attendees will also be guided through a structured exploration of the TBL Listserv to sample additional problems and analyze resolutions shared by the Listserv learning community.

 

By the end of this workshop, participants will be able engage in self-directed problem solving for improved TBL delivery:

Popular culture artifacts (PCA) and gamification are growing in importance as methods to increase student engagement and learning. Combined with TBL, engagement grows exponentially. The purpose of this workshop is to share our approaches using PCA and gamification in courses, while having participants develop or rework their own TBL module utilizing these approaches. The workshop will provide a basis for use by faculty regardless of discipline. PCAs are recognized and accepted representations of cultural importance and shared meanings. For example, Harry Potter is a global PCA. There are approximately 500,000,000 HP books in print in 80 languages (Pottermore, 2018). Other examples of PCAs include superheroes, TV shows, movies, etc. PCA can draw upon and engage students' experiences and knowledge (Guenther & Dees, 1999). Students can identify discipline-specific theories in PCAs and, in turn, be able to apply said theories in work contexts, developing theory-to-practice thinking (Callahan, et al., 2007). Gamification is another method increasing in popularity in academics. Gamification is the use of game elements in non-gaming environments (Deterding, 2012). It has found its way into higher education classes in areas such as biochemistry, medicine/surgery, nursing, research methods, and business. Game elements will be discussed ranging from badges and characters to risk and immersion. We will discuss how we enhance the TBL experience using PCAs and gamification in our courses. We will show our examples of how we use PCAs and gamification as part of our TBL design to increase an engaged learning environment. We will then have participants work both individually and in teams to identify areas in their course module where they can add specific PCA and gamification components. TBL is an especially effective learning strategy to engage students in PCAs and gamification.

One of the key components for successful implementation of TBL pedagogy is to ensure students' engagement and participation in team activities. TBL offers the tools and the infrastructure to hold students accountable in the learning and teaching process. In fact, the instructional shift from providing knowledge in traditional lectures to asking students to use critical thinking skills to locate, analyze, and/or apply knowledge, and to participate in team and class discussions, greatly relies on student engagement and commitment to learn. Therefore, effective facilitation is an integral component of successful delivery of a TBL module. Facilitation is a complex activity which requires the instructor to implement strategies that engage the audience and promote intrinsic motivation to participate. The purpose of this workshop is to share a diverse range of facilitation strategies which instructors can adapt and use to enhance their facilitation skills.

BACKGROUND: Team-based Learning (TBL) is an active learning strategy with few reports of its use in graduate medical education, mostly describing pilot studies with limited curricular scope.

 

OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to develop a comprehensive medical knowledge curriculum for an internal medicine residency and assess its feasibility.

 

METHODS: We developed a 135-topic TBL curriculum to replace a noon-conference lecture series and implemented it over a 3-year period (2013-2016). We chronicled planning, curriculum development, and faculty recruitment and created resource materials to assist faculty in designing lessons with a specific structure. We assessed feasibility in terms of faculty participation, resident preparedness, resident and faculty satisfaction measured in surveys, and cost.

 

RESULTS: Most faculty were initially unfamiliar with TBL. With use of resource materials including a TBL overview, lesson prep tips, and a sample lesson, as well as faculty development, participating faculty increased from 3 to 74. In a 2015 faculty survey (N = 64, 69% response rate), 73% reported faculty development was adequate, 70% indicated lesson preparation time was reasonable, and 95% reported preparation materials were helpful. A 2016 resident survey (N = 89, 72% response rate) revealed that most residents prepared by completing reading assignments in advance, 78% found the readings manageable, and 77% felt they learned better from TBL compared to lectures. Costs included compensated time for 1 faculty TBL "champion" and an assistant.

 

CONCLUSION: Implementing a comprehensive medical knowledge curriculum using TBL in an internal medicine residency was feasible and resulted in high faculty acceptance and learning satisfaction. Departmental support of a TBL champion, and faculty development using well-designed resource materials were determinants of success.

Peer evaluation is an essential element of team-based learning. Although a variety tools and techniques are readily available to help faculty implement it in their courses, successful peer evaluation remains a significant obstacle to adopting TBL. This is largely because of student inexperience and anxiety about formal peer evaluations. Providing students with training in giving and receiving feedback is one way to overcome this obstacle, however it takes considerable time and effort to be effective. We suggest another approach using team-level formative feedback that focuses on the team’s problem-solving strategies and teamwork skills. This approach has a number of advantages. Conceptually, team-level feedback may be more effective in fostering team development because it both makes it explicit that students are supposed to be developing teamwork skills and identifies the desired behaviors and attitudes. Practically, team-level feedback is a low stakes, easy introduction to giving and receiving feedback because it focuses feedback on the team rather than on individuals. Unlike individual-level peer evaluations, students require little or no training to provide appropriate team feedback, so it can be included very early in the course. It allows rapid self-correction of problems and helps instructors quickly identify teams that are struggling. It is also compatible with using individual-level summative peer evaluation later in the course to hold students accountable for making positive contributions to the team. In fact, items from the team-level instrument can be adapted for use in the summative individual-level instrument. We report on our experiences using team-level feedback in various small group settings.

Assessment is often used to ensure that students attain a minimal level of academic performance prior to progression in a program. However, meaningful assessment can also provide rich learning and growth opportunities, when combined with effective feedback and reflection. In fact, one of the four "œessential elements" of TBL is giving timely feedback to enhance learning and attention. Timely feedback allows students to actively think through the problem-solving process, allowing for clarification and deeper understanding of concepts and material. Furthermore, timely feedback and reflection enhances the metacognition process by allowing students to analyze their own approach to preparation, taking risk, solving problems, working as a team, and performing aligned to key outcomes. Timely feedback is an integral part of each TBL module, traditionally through discussion of RATs and application exercises. However, there is no standard procedure to provide immediate feedback to students on assessments addressing multiple TBL modules, such as midterm and final exams. In this workshop we will explore different ways of integrating assessment across a TBL course to provide students with immediate feedback for outcomes spanning multiple TBL modules.

Changing the culture of teaching practice from traditional approaches to active and collaborative learning approaches, like team-based learning (TBL), often brings challenges. As individuals are trained in TBL and seek to support others at their institution in utilizing TBL effectively, they may face skepticism or need to overcome limited time and financial resources. In this interactive, TBL workshop (preparation, readiness assurance process, and 4s application activities), participants will work in teams to explore and develop models for changing the culture of teaching and/or training through TBL. Institutional opportunities and challenges will be explored, and we will address issues like creating institutional buy-in, supporting faculty in their use of TBL, and overcoming obstacles to TBL implementation. We will relate leadership approaches to increasing implementation of TBL and discover practical solutions like faculty communities of practice and online resource repositories. As one example of institutional change, the University of South Alabama has implemented TBL as a campus-wide Team-USA Quality Enhancement Plan since 2013. Focused on high-quality professional development and ongoing support for faculty, an early adopter model was used to identify and train more than 300 faculty from varied disciplines. TBL effectively improved collaboration (p<.001, n=4382), critical thinking (p<.001, n=3172), and student learning (>89% mastery of student learning targets) across various disciplines and levels. TBL courses yielded significantly fewer D's and F's and more A's and B's. Persistence was also higher for TBL courses, with a withdrawal rate of 3.85% for TBL courses compared to 7.98% for other courses. This degree of project success is directly linked to thoughtful change execution, effective communication, experiential professional development, and meaningful assessment. TBLC Conference participants have the unique opportunity to take what they've learned and to lead efforts in changing teaching culture through TBL implementation. From planning to implementation to assessment, this workshop will support participants in developing a strategy for increasing TBL utilization at their institutions of various sizes, resources, or capacities.

The purpose of this workshop is to review the best practice principles for creating and implementing the Readiness Assurance Process (RAP) and 4S application activities in an online course. The workshop will be delivered in a hybrid format with both face-to-face and online components. In the pre-workshop online portion, participants will reading materials, form teams, and conduct an online RAP process. In the workshop itself, the face-to-face portion, participants will complete their team-RAT with their other team members, engage in discussion, and conduct 4S application activities where teams will continue collaborating in the online format while they complete these application activities. Finally, barriers to success (i.e. cheating or team loafers) and strategies to proactively reduce these barriers will be discussed. Presenters will (1) review recommendations from the TBL Online Community of Practice Applications Group manuscript, in process, and (2) discuss how these principles can be integrating into the design and development of online courses utilizing the TBL instructional strategy, and (3) consider alignment of these principles with QM Standards. Participants will have the opportunity to experience use of an online platform to deliver the RAP and application exercise components of TBL. Through the interactive session, participants will have a clearer perception of students' online experience and how making use of existing tools can simplify the process and assist in running these components of TBL smoothly. This workshop is for individuals familiar with TBL who are currently teaching online courses, designing online courses, delivering professional development, and/or are interested in how TBL may be facilitated in an online environment. TBL educators who are looking for ideas or how to resolve issues they are encountering, particularly in the RAP and 4S application exercise components of delivering TBL online, may also find this workshop valuable.

Peer feedback (PF) is an important component of Team-Based Learning (TBL) that is often overlooked. It is the final practical element of TBL, in which students are expected to provide feedback to their teammates about their contributions to the success of the team. Such feedback provides information to help individual students improve team performance, as well as develop interpersonal and team skills that are essential for future success. It can provide students with a deeper understanding of how their actions not only impact their own learning experience, but their peers' learning experiences as well. While the literature supports the many advantages of PF in TBL, there aren't many resources focused on implementing a PF system in a manner that both develops the students' ability to provide quality feedback and tracks their continuous mastery of this skill.

 

The objectives of the proposed workshop include:

Several theories of motivation appear to be relevant to the TBL classroom, including self-determination theory, self-efficacy theory, and the theory of planned behavior. Self-determination theory says that social factors meet (or fail to meet) core psychological needs, impact level on the self-determination continuum, and thereby impact behavior. Self-efficacy theory says that performance accomplishments, vicarious experiences, social persuasion, and physiological/ affective states influence efficacy expectations and, thereby, impact behavior. The theory of planned behavior says that beliefs, attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control impact level of intention and, thereby, impact behavior. Recent studies suggest that TBL may beneficially impact key constructs from these theories of motivation, including level of self-determination, level of self-efficacy, and level of intention/ perceived behavioral control. To maximize these beneficial motivation-related effects, the course policies TBL instructors include in their syllabi should ideally 'fit' (i.e., support the development of) these constructs. The Show Me Your Syllabi workshop will be conducted using a TBL format. Attendees will be provided with pre-workshop reading assignments related to several TBL-relevant theories of motivation, including self-determination theory, self-efficacy theory, and the theory of planned behavior. The Workshop will begin with an IRAT and a TRAT and will continue with several Application Activities. Application activities will challenge teams to evaluate the 'goodness of fit' (with the aforementioned theories of motivation) of several examples of course policies. By the end of the workshop, attendees will be able to determine the extent to which their own course policies 'fit' the aforementioned TBL-relevant theories of motivation and revise them if necessary.

Distance education enrollment is continuously increasing and accounted for approximately 5.8 million students in 2014. Massive open online courses (MOOCs) are also becoming increasingly popular due to their ability to deliver content to a wide audience quickly. The popularity of online learning is likely to continue, highlighting a need for infrastructure to be in place for TBL to be implemented effectively in this setting. However, it can be challenging to establish the level of social engagement afforded by face-to-face TBL in an online environment. There is a clear need for strategies that increase social engagement in online TBL classes. Virtual Reality (VR) can simulate face-to-face environments online, and may therefore serve as an excellent platform for online TBL. In this workshop, we aim to demonstrate how social VR programs can be utilized for TBL, address the current limitations of VR and discuss the potential applications of VR for TBL in the future.

Graduates from higher education are expected to approach new ideas as critical thinkers and problem-solvers, with a growth mindset, holding themselves accountable, persisting through challenge, willing to take risks and work collaboratively as a team player. Instructors using team-based learning (TBL) recognize that TBL methods create an environment (i.e. personal and team responsibility for readiness, problem-solving challenging significant problems using the talents of a diverse team, elevating critical thinking through facilitated inter-team discussion) that can influence attitudes and behaviors beyond the explicit subject specific content and skills that are targeted by the learning outcomes. These essential attitudes and behaviors are often the implicit foundation that drive a positive and caring classroom, with learners engaged as self-growers and willing to learn about themselves and others. However, we often do not explicitly identify those desired affective outcomes or associated classroom performance elements, and rarely are they systematically measured. This workshop will introduce taxonomy that can be used to structure the attitudes and behaviors in the affective domain and create more meaningful learning experiences. Attendees will learn about two taxonomies (Krathwohl's taxonomy and Fink's taxonomy) that can help define and structure outcomes in the affective domain. Strategies for readiness and assessment methods that align to the affective domain will also be applied.