Group Learning in Biology: What we've been running this past year....
I actually wrote this in July of 2014! Figured I'd put it out there. I should definitely update this...
Last summer I briefly posted about challenges in teaching and learning and how excited I was after attending ASMCUE (the American Society for Microbiology Conference for Undergraduate Educators). I continue to be excited by the conference, or more specifically the ideas shared at the conference, even a year later! Taking the last summer to plan, I have been able to bring some major changes to my classroom. These major changes have overall been awesome, even if the road has been bumpy to downright sinkhole filled at times. The biggest change is in how I have structured my classes, from a nonmajors contemporary (environmental) biology course to an introductory biology (molecular, genetics, cell and evolution) to microbiology for mixed majors (allied health mostly but some biology majors). After discussion with people at the conference and the help of a local instructor I met there, I decided a modified version of Larry Michaelson's "Team Based Learning" would work well for us. I'm also going to refer to this modified version as group learning so as not to infringe on the copyright and because I have changed things up a bit, mostly in not sticking to the prescribed method in the group work section. Basically, the semester is broken up into modules or sections. I tried to keep them to seven or eight per semester as suggested. Each module has a theme, eg. energy transformations, and begins with assigned readings. I have learned that students really appreciate outlines for this, so have provided them. It also helps if they have other ways to acquire materisl, eg. videos and importantly interact with the material such as easy (level 1 memorization of terms or very basic concepts) online quizzes. After that they take an individual readiness assessment test (RAT) then the same RAT as a team. While they are taking the tRAT I go and scan the iRATs to see what the students understand and what they need additional help with. The tRAT is taken using immediate feedback score sheets, scratch offs that reveal whether the answer chosen is right or wrong. This gets them talking about what the answers are and why they are correct or incorrect. In the future, I think more guidance day one on how this should work would be helpful. Usually students recite their answers and go with the majority if it is obvious. I'd like more discussion, especially when there is disagreement about why a certain answer is right or wrong. During and after the completion of the tRATs I walk around and look for questions that took more than one or two tries for teams to successfully answer, and mark those along with questions that were difficult for the class (over 50% incorrect on the iRAT). These mark the basis for short lectures throughout the module, focusing on concepts that were more difficult for the group. This is in addition to explanation of concepts that they traditionally find difficult to master, eg. cellular respiration. After this we move onto group work. The group work depends on the topic and what work would fit best with that. For example we do genetics problems when we are covering Mendelian genetics but a case study on the Tylenol murders to help drive home cellular respiration. I like to mix it up as well to keep things interesting for all of us. I do grade these and the group is assigned one grade. While the groups are working I walk around and interact when necessary to encourage, coach, cajole and answer questions. Sometimes a group has a question that would benefit the entire class and we discuss that briefly as a class.
What have been the advantages?
Students have said via CATME or in their reviews that they learned from their classmates, including new ways to study and doing problems in class helped. Students definitely got to know each other better and improved in their collaborative skills. In general they reported liking the active style better than just lecture and felt that working with their teammates helped improve their collaborative skills. In addition I have been able to get to know my students better and help them more in small groups or even one on one by doing in class activities.
What have I learned?
The biggest sinkholes we (the class and I) have fallen into was with a small class with one team, small teams in general, and with teams with a majority of very low contributing students, and one high contributing. One class had the former and the latter, which lead me to not give up on the model but become a more active facilitator. I also had to split the final lab project for that class as it was clear, after two tries and conversations with team members, that some were not going to contribute for whatever reason. I learned in that situation that running this model with a low performing, small class might not be the best education solution or perhaps severely modifying the model as I did can improve the outcome.
Links
"Team Based Learning"
American Society for Microbiology Conference for Undergraduate Education
Last summer I briefly posted about challenges in teaching and learning and how excited I was after attending ASMCUE (the American Society for Microbiology Conference for Undergraduate Educators). I continue to be excited by the conference, or more specifically the ideas shared at the conference, even a year later! Taking the last summer to plan, I have been able to bring some major changes to my classroom. These major changes have overall been awesome, even if the road has been bumpy to downright sinkhole filled at times. The biggest change is in how I have structured my classes, from a nonmajors contemporary (environmental) biology course to an introductory biology (molecular, genetics, cell and evolution) to microbiology for mixed majors (allied health mostly but some biology majors). After discussion with people at the conference and the help of a local instructor I met there, I decided a modified version of Larry Michaelson's "Team Based Learning" would work well for us. I'm also going to refer to this modified version as group learning so as not to infringe on the copyright and because I have changed things up a bit, mostly in not sticking to the prescribed method in the group work section. Basically, the semester is broken up into modules or sections. I tried to keep them to seven or eight per semester as suggested. Each module has a theme, eg. energy transformations, and begins with assigned readings. I have learned that students really appreciate outlines for this, so have provided them. It also helps if they have other ways to acquire materisl, eg. videos and importantly interact with the material such as easy (level 1 memorization of terms or very basic concepts) online quizzes. After that they take an individual readiness assessment test (RAT) then the same RAT as a team. While they are taking the tRAT I go and scan the iRATs to see what the students understand and what they need additional help with. The tRAT is taken using immediate feedback score sheets, scratch offs that reveal whether the answer chosen is right or wrong. This gets them talking about what the answers are and why they are correct or incorrect. In the future, I think more guidance day one on how this should work would be helpful. Usually students recite their answers and go with the majority if it is obvious. I'd like more discussion, especially when there is disagreement about why a certain answer is right or wrong. During and after the completion of the tRATs I walk around and look for questions that took more than one or two tries for teams to successfully answer, and mark those along with questions that were difficult for the class (over 50% incorrect on the iRAT). These mark the basis for short lectures throughout the module, focusing on concepts that were more difficult for the group. This is in addition to explanation of concepts that they traditionally find difficult to master, eg. cellular respiration. After this we move onto group work. The group work depends on the topic and what work would fit best with that. For example we do genetics problems when we are covering Mendelian genetics but a case study on the Tylenol murders to help drive home cellular respiration. I like to mix it up as well to keep things interesting for all of us. I do grade these and the group is assigned one grade. While the groups are working I walk around and interact when necessary to encourage, coach, cajole and answer questions. Sometimes a group has a question that would benefit the entire class and we discuss that briefly as a class.
What have been the advantages?
Students have said via CATME or in their reviews that they learned from their classmates, including new ways to study and doing problems in class helped. Students definitely got to know each other better and improved in their collaborative skills. In general they reported liking the active style better than just lecture and felt that working with their teammates helped improve their collaborative skills. In addition I have been able to get to know my students better and help them more in small groups or even one on one by doing in class activities.
What have I learned?
The biggest sinkholes we (the class and I) have fallen into was with a small class with one team, small teams in general, and with teams with a majority of very low contributing students, and one high contributing. One class had the former and the latter, which lead me to not give up on the model but become a more active facilitator. I also had to split the final lab project for that class as it was clear, after two tries and conversations with team members, that some were not going to contribute for whatever reason. I learned in that situation that running this model with a low performing, small class might not be the best education solution or perhaps severely modifying the model as I did can improve the outcome.
Links
"Team Based Learning"
American Society for Microbiology Conference for Undergraduate Education
Comments