Team-based learning in an engineering course: An experience in Brazil

Team-Based Learning (TBL) is an active learning strategy, used for the first time in medical education, and its use in Engineering Education is still not well established as in health science education. This work is about an experience of use of TBL in two consecutive years (2017 and 2018) in undergraduate Engineering course in a public university in Brazil. The objectives are to describe an experience using TBL, its impact over students' performance and perception of students and teacher about this approach. Initially, students were divided into groups from 5 to 7 members. The subject of the courses was divided into 4 modules, each one of 4 weeks. Each module started with the Readiness Assurance Process - RAP (pre-class individual assignment, e.g. readings), followed by in-class Individual Readiness Assurance Test - iRAT, and Team Readiness Assurance Test - tRAT. Both tests were applied using Information Technology tools, in this case either Socrative, or Kahoot or Plickers. During classes, students performed activities designed to develop students' critical thinking skills, applying concepts learned from RAP. Moreover, the students had to perform processes of self and peer-assessment. Average scores from the RAP were statistically higher in tRAT (group tests) than in iRAT (individual tests) (t-test; p≤0.05), in both years, indicating that teamwork and peer-instruction were important to achieve a greater understanding of the subject. The perception of the students about TBL was collected by an end of class questionnaire. For 81% of the students, TBL methodology was better than teacher centred classes. Another point to be highlighted was the use of Information Technology tools for feedback, approved by 100% of the students who answered the inquiry. As suggestions for future improvements emerged the need to improve the didactic material for pre-class studies.This work has been supported by FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia within the Project Scope UIDCEC003192019

Outcomes of implementing Team-Based Learning (TBL): the experiences of UK educators

YesTeam-Based Learning (TBL) is a collaborative learning model that refocuses classroom time to solving relevant problems instead of dispensing information. This is accomplished by a pre-class readiness assurance process that promotes accountability to self-directed learning and teamwork. While research related to the student experience with TBL is present in the literature, there is a relative lack of research published on the experiences of academic staff with TBL. Using a qualitative approach and a semi-structured interview format, this study explored the experiences of 26 academic staff in the UK who implemented TBL using a semi-structured interview format. Thematic analysis of interview text yielded five themes related to curriculum design, student outcomes, and the professional development of academic staff.Supported by a grant from the Regis University Research and Scholarship Council

Leading academic change: experiences of academic staff implementing team-based learning

YesTeam-based learning (TBL) is a collaborative learning model that shifts classroom time from a teacher-centred to student-centred approach. TBL emphasises accountability to learning, teamwork, immediate feedback, peer feedback, and critical thinking. While many educators value the increased student engagement that results from TBL, the transition from traditional teaching methods to TBL poses challenges. Using a qualitative approach, this study aimed to explore the experiences of 26 academic staff in the United Kingdom who implemented TBL in the higher education setting. Thematic analysis of interview text generated eight themes related to preparing academics to use TBL, challenges related to TBL, and engagement of students with the curriculum. Derived from these themes, a set of recommendations for supporting academic staff who transition to TBL was developed

Enriching Pre-Clinical Education with Near-Peer Learning Experiences

The purpose of this mixed methods study was to examine the outcomes of two instructional methodologies (traditional and peer-assisted learning; PAL) used in a clinical methods course for undergraduate speech-language pathology (SLP) students. The sample included 53 undergraduate SLP students (near-peer learners) as well as 27 graduate SLP students and 7 clinical fellows (near-peer tutors). Traditional instruction was used during the first half of the course and PAL was added during the second half. The undergraduate SLP students’ weekly written reflections and grades (mid-term and final) were collected for analysis. Students demonstrated a preference for peer- and near-peer learning experiences and commented positively on learning via stories throughout the course. They exhibited more positive attitudes during PAL instruction. Further, students reported less clinical confidence and more confusion as the course progressed and they learned more about the demands and expectations for clinical practice. Implications and recommendations for SLP students’ clinical training are discussed

"Will They Revolt?": An Examination of Student Response to Types of Instruction in the Engineering Discipline

Researchers have long emphasized the need to improve the quality of undergraduate teaching through the use of evidence-based instructional practices (EBIP), particularly for courses in the Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics fields. Despite research supporting the benefits of EBIP in the engineering field, the response from faculty to incorporate a diversity of practices in their classrooms has been mixed. Prior research has found that there are a number of barriers to the adoption of these practices, including student resistance to active learning. Concerns about student resistance, whether evidenced through formal course evaluations or expressed in other ways, has an alarming effect on instructors’ willingness to adopt EBIP. This study seeks to explain the relationship between student response to various types of instruction in their prior and current courses, the frequency with which each type of instruction is used in engineering courses, and how students ultimately evaluate their courses and instructors. The following broader research questions guide this study: 1. What types of instruction are being used in introductory engineering courses at a large research university? 2. How do students respond to different kinds of instruction in these courses? How does their previous experience with different kinds of instruction influence their response to its use in their current course? 3. What relationships exist between prior response, current response, the frequency with which each type of instruction is used in the current course, and how students subsequently evaluate the course and instructor? To answer the research questions in this study, I employed a mixed methods approach to data collection and analysis, integrating quantitative and qualitative data. Specifically, I randomly selected one large, gateway course from each of the five largest engineering disciplines in the College of Engineering at the University of Michigan. From a total population of 539 students, 242 students participated in two surveys, and 20 students (who completed both surveys) participated in one of five focus groups. I discovered that the perceived use of EBIP practices in these five courses at the University of Michigan shows promise of more active types of instruction being used in these engineering classrooms. Additionally, I found that students in this sample often have similar positive responses to constructive and active types of instruction as they do passive ones. In contrast, I found that students often placed a lower value on the interactive type of instruction examined in this study, and based on focus groups, found that this was often caused by poor prior experiences with group work in past courses. Furthermore, through a hierarchical multiple regression model, I found relationships between student evaluations and their prior response to the passive type of instruction and current response to active, constructive, and interactive types of instruction. I also found that the frequency with which each type of instruction is used is associated with similar increases/decreases in students’ evaluation of the course and instructor. While my findings suggest that instructors may need to worry less about negative student response to these practices, future research should focus on how to positively engage students in these practices, and institutions should support the use of instructor strategies to highlight the benefits of EBIP to the students in their classrooms.PHDHigher EducationUniversity of Michigan, Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studieshttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/149825/1/mdemonbr_1.pd

Introducing Team-Based Learning in a Pharmacy Curriculum: A Qualitative Study of Staff and Student Experiences

There is an increasing move towards an outcomes-based approach to educating healthcare professionals including the development of key skills such as problem-solving and critical thinking. Some healthcare regulators have changed accreditation criteria to ensure that graduates can apply knowledge and skills, analyse complex situations, and develop the skills to learn independently. There is a move to ensure that curricula are designed to take into account modern educational theory and research and promote active and deep approaches to learning. Accordingly, educators have redesigned curricula to be delivered by more learner-centred approaches involving active problem solving and peer and collaborative learning. These approaches require educators to adapt from the role of content deliverer to that of learning architect and facilitator of learning. This qualitative research study takes a phenomenological approach to consider the experiences of pharmacy educators and students in a pharmacy school that has designed its curriculum to be delivered predominantly by team-based learning (TBL). The findings of the study include: a dissatisfaction with traditional methods in engaging and motivating students; mixed feelings about the initial idea of TBL; the need for substantial resources for planning, staff training, designing and quality assuring resources when transitioning to TBL; improved student engagement and student preparation with TBL; staff benefits in working more collaboratively and enhanced enjoyment of teaching using TBL; perceived benefits of peer learning and transferable skills development; substantially higher staff workload during transition; challenges in writing effective application exercises, and developing the facilitation skills needed for a learner-centred classroom. In addition there is the need for substantial planning around timetabling, sourcing suitable rooms, ensuring consistency of approach across educators, and the development of bespoke quality assurance processes. Overall this research suggests that the majority of participants supported the implementation of TBL in the curriculum and that the benefits outweighed the challenges