Modified Team-Based Learning

Team-Based Learning
,
1

Hi everyone!

In my own teaching, I don’t count the IRAT toward the grade—it primarily helps students gather their thoughts before doing the TRAT. When it comes to application exercises, I always recommend that students take a bit of individual thinking time before diving into discussion. I’m also interested in learning about your approach.

How important is individual thinking time before team discussions in your TBL sessions?

  • Very important – It helps students organize their thoughts and boosts team discussions.
  • Somewhat important but not necessary – Depends on the complexity of the topic.
  • Not at all important – I prefer students to jump straight into group work.
  • I haven’t tried allocating individual time before team tasks.
  • Other (please comment)
0 voters

If this topic or the modified TBL approach interests you, join me for my upcoming Modified TBL webinar on May 21, 12pm EDT / 5pm BST. I will talk about my modified TBL approach that leverages focused IRAT/TRAT strategies and InteDashboard to boost student success and engagement

2

Dear Steve,

I personally believe individual thinking – around the IRAT – is important to enable engaging TRAT & Application discussion. Without “counting” IRAT, could leave some students to rely on their team work rather than having some accountability for doing the pre-work and thinking. I do believe the level of learner is important – highly motivated medical students might be obsessive enough to prepare, but other learners might not be so motivated – and may require some accountability leverage.. Whether or not you “count” them, the advantage of an IRAT is that the faculty can see who has prepared - We had an expectation that the IRAT reached a certain level – and if not achieved a discussion was had with the learner to explore reasons – lack of prep, lack of motivation, lack of understanding….. Now if you have a robust peer evaluation – the accountability for coming prepared and engagement might come from that – but I wouldn’t count on it. I wouldn’t rely only on a midterm or final to be the place I learn if an individual had some understanding or lack of preparation/engagement.

3 Likes
3

I completely agree with @SandyCook’s discussion of iRATs and individual accountability. This is exactly how we run the iRATs. Every TBL and its associated iRATs contribute to high frequency low stakes assessments ie counts towards the summative written Applied Knowledge Test (AKT). It works really well with medical students. We do not grade our tRATs or T-APPs, although I wonder if we could?

1 Like
4

Same here. I have iRAT 20%, tRAT 10%, application 20%. The application activity is an in class activity, typically 30-45 minutes at the end of a TBL Module. This is preceded by a set of formative applications that scaffold the summative application. The entire module is 4-8 hours of contact time with the first hour being RAT and the last hour being the summative application. In an additional twist, I implement a ‘sliding scale’ cap for the summative application, using teh phrasing 'applications submitted on time are eligible for 100% of the mark , up to 1 minute late 90% of the mark, 2 minutes late 80% of the mark… (you can adjust the sliding scale to suit your own timing). The ‘empowering’ language (it is students choice to take the hit to improve their work) is an idea suggested, I believe, by @lmichaelsen (of course!) and I like the idea of getting away from ‘late penalties’ the language of which is disempowering and hurts class dynamics.

2 Likes
5

I love the idea of using empowering language! @SteveCayzer Do you also allow students to take their individual thinking time before beginning the team discussion for a summative application?

6

I don’t, but I think it is a good idea.

1 Like
7

I always had students set the grade weights for my classes. They could distribute the score between Individual Permormance, Team Performance and a Peer Evaluation with a minimum in each category (depending on the level of the class). Typically, the individual component was made up of the sum of their iRATs and their score on a final exam (which was always an application exam). I gave students the opportunity to weight both iRAT and Final Exam between 0% and 100%. Most classes chose the iRAT sum to be around 30% of their individual score component. Over the years, I had only two classes that weighted the iRAT as 0. Both of these classes were unique in that they were taught on military bases and in a very condensed format. In both cases, students were still well-prepared for class. My take-away was that, because of the norms about “supporting the team” was so widely accepted in that context, students simply were not concerned that their peers might slack off.

8

Thanks to everyone who took the time to share your thoughts and experiences in response to my original post—I’ve really enjoyed reading your perspectives!

Thanks as well to everyone who joined my recent webinar on Modified Team-Based Learning!

I thought I’d share a few reflections from my students, along with some of the modifications I’ve made to the traditional TBL format that seemed to make a real difference in their learning experience.

Here are some of the key changes I’ve implemented:

  • I increased the difficulty of the IRAT/TRAT questions to push for higher-order thinking. These questions can’t be easily looked up in the readings—they’re meant to challenge students to apply concepts.
  • The IRAT isn’t graded. Students can use their notes, and only the TRAT counts toward their score.
  • I allow more time for IRAT/TRAT discussions and focus more on the questions themselves rather than traditional application exercises.
  • I added a short reflective writing component after each session where students identify their knowledge gaps and outline how they plan to improve.

And here’s what my students shared about how this approach has felt from their side:

  • Less stress, more thinking: With the IRAT not graded, students felt less pressure and more space to really think and prepare.
  • Mistakes were okay (and useful!): Students said it felt safe to be wrong—because those moments often led to great team discussions and deeper understanding.
  • Confidence grew over time: One student mentioned she was quiet at first, but thanks to the TRAT and encouragement from her group, she felt more comfortable contributing.
  • Reflection still mattered: Even though it wasn’t graded, students took the self-reflection seriously and found it helped them track their progress and stay accountable.
  • Small teams made a difference: Groups of 5–6 (with a mix of backgrounds) helped keep everyone involved and reduced the chances of anyone checking out.

If you’ve been exploring ways to modify TBL to better suit your students, I’d love to hear what’s worked in your context too!

2 Likes