TeamBased Learning Collaborative

1
Team-Based Learning

• Research Supporting The Method
• Paul Haidet and Ruth Levine

2
Why use teams?

• In the work setting, teams are assembled based on
  members existing knowledge and skills to solve
  specific problems
• In education, the purpose of the team is to
  develop both knowledge and skills through the
  group activities and interaction.
• Teams can solve more difficult problems than an
  individual.

3
Teams and Higher-Level Thinking

• Educational activities that require students to
  engage in higher-level thinking increases their
  ability to recall and use information
• Using concepts to solve problems
• Being exposed to different views on a subject
• Resolving conflict in the process of making a
  decision
• Lazarowitz R. Learning biology cooperatively.
  Cooperative Learning 11(3) 19-21,1991
• Smith K, Johnson DW, Johnson RT. Can conflict be
  constructive? Controversy versus concurrence
  seeking in learning groups. Journal of
  Educational Psychology 73(5) 651-663, 1981.

4
High-Performance Teams

• Key member variables
• Adequate knowledge and skill for the task
• Appropriate task performance strategies
• Motivation to accomplish the task
• Hackman JR, ed. Groups that work (and those that
  dont). San Francisco Jossey-Bass, 1990.

5
Forming Teams for Learning Size

• 5-7 members is ideal
• Larger groups have more trouble developing group
  cohesiveness leading to
• Lower satisfaction with the group
• Less commitment to group success
• Not all members participate in discussions
• Smaller groups
• have fewer personnel resources, but
• Have greater cohesiveness and, as a result,
  greater effectiveness
• Kowitz AC, Knutson TJ. Decision making in small
  groups. Boston Allyn Bacon 1990
• Scheidel TM, Crowell L. Discussing and Decoding
  A deskbook for group leaders and members. New
  York Macmillian, 1979.

6
Forming Teams for Learning Diversity

• If groups can work together long enough to become
  cohesive, heterogeneous learning groups
  outperform homogeneous groups
• Diverse viewpoints enhance information gathering
  and processing
• Approximately 40 hours of working together before
  a diverse group leans how to use member resources
  effectively
• Watson WE, Michaelsen LK, Sharp W. Member
  competence, group interaction, and group
  decision-making A longitudinal study. Journal
  of Applied Psychology 76(6) 803-810, 1991.
• Watson WE, Kumar K, and Michaelsen LK. Cultural
  diversitys impact on group process and
  performance. Academy of Management Journal
  36(3) 590-602, 1993.

7
Forming Teams for Learning Mechanics

• Instructor should form the groups and use a
  method which evenly distributes resources
• Self-selected groups are generally homogeneous
• Students perceive self-selection gives some
  groups unfair advantage
• Instructor can identify/quantify experience or
  knowledge in learners that could effect group
  performance
• Bies RJ, Shapiro DL. Voice and justification
  Their influence on prodedural fairness judgments.
  Academy of Management Journal 31(3) 676-685,
  1988.
• Griffin J. Some Problems of fairness. Ethics
  96100-118, 1985
• Evans JR. Team selection. Social Science Journal
  2593-104, 1988

8
Task Performance Group Maturity

• New Groups
• Low trust in group or members
• No shared goals
• Self-interest rules
• Ignorant of others skills and abilities
• Depend on groups best member for success
• Conflicts avoided or resolved superficially to
  save face
• Lesser able to solve complex tasks

• Long-Term Groups
• Trust established through shared experience
• Shared goals with buy-in
• Members support and help each other for group
  benefit
• Recognize unique abilities of each member
• Focus all member resources on task for group
  success
• Differences openly discussed and resolved by
  consensus
• Greater ability to solve complex tasks

9
Task Performance The Task Itself

• Ideal intellectual tasks for groups
• Joint tasks (members jointly create a product) vs
  individual tasks (separate, independently made
  components)
• Appropriately difficult task
• Too easy group-think is not needed
• Too hard frustration disrupts group
• Task is significant students see the relevance
  and are motivated to accomplish it
• Michaelsen LK, Watson WE, and Black RH. A
  realistic test of individual versus group
  consensus decision making. Journal of Applied
  Psychology 74(5) 834-839, 1989.
• Birmingham C, McCord M, Team-Based Learning,
  SterlingStylus Publishing, pp 73-90, 2004.
• Eisenstat RA, Cohen SG. Groups that work (and
  those that dont). San Francisco Jossey-Bass,
  1990

10
Motivation Accountability

• Reward Characteristics
• Individual contributions to group measured and
  rewarded
• Individual accountable for actions and
  collaborative behavior
• Group performance externally evaluated
• Group has shared fates and goals
• Group performance determines reward

• Impact on Team Behavior
• Increased individual effort
• More and better individual contributions
• More cooperation and better team performance
• More and better member contributions
• Increased member commitment to the team
• Increased effectiveness of team member
  interaction

11
Motivation Feedback

• Timely performance feedback powerfully affects
  member motivation by influencing their choice of
  future personal goals.
• It also helps members understand how
• their individual effort effects group performance
• The way members work together effects group
  performance
• Birmingham C, McCord M, Team-Based Learning,
  SterlingStylus Publishing, pp 73-90, 2004.