Team-Based Learning (TBL)
Richard Yuretich
Department of Geosciences
University of Massachusetts Amherst
Sound Familiar?
Active Learning
 Project-Based
Learning
 Cooperative Learning
 Collaborative Learning  Case-Based Learning
 Team-Based Learning
 Problem-Based
Learning

Team-Based Learning
Details in Michaelsen et
al (2004)
 http://www.teambased
learning.org/
 Four major
components

1.
2.
3.
4.
Permanent teams
Readiness Assurance
Team Investigations
Peer Evaluation
Permanent Teams

Instructor forms teams
– Heterogeneous groups
– Class level
– Science knowledge
– Ethnic diversity
– Geographical
Distribution

90 students
– 10 tables
– 2 teams per table
– 4 or 5 members per
team
Readiness Assurance
Readings assigned at start of module
 Readiness Assurance Test (RAT) – first or second
class of the module

–
–
–
–
Selective-response assessment (!)
Round 1: Individual answers (closed-book) – 60%
Round 2: Team collaboration (closed-book) – 40%
Round 3: Challenge (open-book) – grade adjustment
Readiness Assurance
Preceded by “Concept Preview” Class
 Teams answer questions from readings

Team Investigations






Major effort during
class sessions.
Done only during
class time.
Collaboration around
a problem.
Teams investigate the
same or similar topic.
Simultaneous
reporting
Collective Discussion
Team Investigations: Example

Brief introduction on coastal erosion and
sea-level rise
Team Investigation: Example

Are there effective
measures against
coastal erosion? What
can be done to
address the problem?

Teams discuss and
post collective
responses
Team Investigation: Example
Discussion of team
responses
 Simultaneous
reporting: all team
responses are
displayed

Peer Evaluations
Individual
Accountability
 Mid-semester Survey

– Formative Feedback
– Intervention

End of Semester
– Grade allocation
Peer Evaluation
Basis for fair allocation of team grades
 Students assign points to other team
members based on contributions

Peer Evaluation

Comments are often frank, revealing, and
aligned with instructor’s observations.
Individual Effort

On-line Learning Management System
Assignments
 On-line homework and quizzes
 Individual effort and grading
Final Exam
Traditional with optional on-line team
follow-up
 Cumulative in content.

Student Satisfaction
4.8
4.6
4.4
4.2
4
3.8
3.6
3.4
3.2
3
p = 0.017
p = 0.13
p < 0.01
*
p < 0.01
*
p = 0.23
p = 0.06
p = 0.06
TBL
Legacy
t
s
e
e
ir
g
d
k
n
s
a
c
n
e
o
i
r
i
t
F
u
h
rn
ba
er
a
c
o
t
n
a
d
a
ip
e
C
e
io
In
e
c
t
L
i
e
t
T
a
d
t
r
F
u
n
a
l
l
re
i
u
a
P
fu
p
o
v
Perception of the course
s
e
d
E
m
s
e
In
t
A
U
a
is generally positive,
ul
im
with an incremental
t
S
improvement over the
large-lecture version.
Grade Distribution
30%
Improvement in
student
performance
is substantial
especially on
longer-term
retention
of concepts from
the
earlier parts of the
course.
25%
Percent of Students
Team-Based Learning
Legacy
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
A
A- B+
B
B-
C+ C+
C-
D+
D
F
Reflections on TBL
A more sophisticated and effective
application of collaborative learning
 Makes large classes (90 students in this
case) seem smaller
 Course schedule, team composition, and
team assignments need thoughtful
planning.
 Hi-tech classrooms helpful but not
required.

TBL Extensions

Used TBL principles in subsequent classes
without the high-tech support

Introduction to Geochemistry (24
students)
– Teams of Four
– In-class teamwork had two components:
 Short Investigations
 Long-term team project
TBL Extensions

Used TBL principles in subsequent classes
without the high-tech support:

Introductory Oceanography
(302 students)
–
–
–
–
52 teams (five or six students per team)
Traditional lecture hall
In-class investigations as in TBL model
Selective reporting for discussion
Other Observations
Students attend regularly and participate
actively.
 Team investigations reduce grading time,
permit “Just-In-Time Teaching” for the
following class.

Thanks to the Center for Teaching
and Faculty Development, UMass
Amherst
…and my dog Holly
(I ran out of relevant classroom pictures!)