Navigating the Complexities of Evaluating Team-Based Learning in the Graduate Classroom

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 254-260
Author(s):  
Shannon L. Sibbald ◽  
Ava John-Baptiste ◽  
Mark Speechley
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Group Work ◽  
Peer Assessment ◽  
Public Health Practice ◽  
Health Educators ◽  
Unequal Distribution ◽  
Team Members ◽  
Interdisciplinary Field ◽  
Team Based Learning ◽  
Team Functioning

Team-based learning (TBL) appeals to public health educators because it mimics the real world of public health practice. Public health is an interdisciplinary field in which practitioners from various professional backgrounds come together to apply their different skills and competencies to a steadily changing array of public health problems. In addition to fostering synergistic learning, TBL can break down barriers between people from different professions and backgrounds. Many students have had past negative experiences with group work such as perceptions of unequal distribution of work and responsibility among team members. TBL extends beyond group work by supporting a pedagogical philosophy to empower students. Various methods of peer assessment have been proposed that embolden team members to evaluate one another’s contributions to group learning. We describe our TBL approach along with the strategies we employ to mitigate this particular challenge associated with TBL. Overall, we believe our approach to peer assessment in the context of TBL to be effective; students are more satisfied with the authentic assessment, and it has led to improved team functioning.

Comparing Student- and Teacher-Formed Teams on Group Dynamics, Satisfaction, and Performance

2019 ◽  
Vol 50 (4) ◽  
pp. 443-457 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shayna A. Rusticus ◽  
Brandon J. Justus
Keyword(s):  
Group Dynamics ◽  
Group Work ◽  
Group Formation ◽  
Methods Course ◽  
Team Members ◽  
Individual Interviews ◽  
Formation Method ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Team Functioning

We compared student- and teacher-formed teams on aspects of group dynamics, satisfaction, and performance. Two sections of an introductory psychology research methods course were randomly assigned to either student-formed or teacher-formed teams. We conducted t tests on 10 measures related to group dynamics, satisfaction, and success. Academic performance and group work contribution were the only measures found to be statistically different, with the student-formed teams scoring higher than the teacher-formed teams. Follow-up individual interviews or focus groups conducted with 13 students suggested a slight preference for the teacher-formed method because it was transparent and eliminated the stress of having to choose one’s team members. We further recommend this method because of its simplicity and closer approximation to real-world scenarios. Several factors identified as being important for effective team functioning, regardless of group formation method, are also discussed.

Expanding Opportunities for Data Dissemination Through Collaborative Writing Teams in Public Health Practice Settings

2021 ◽  
pp. 152483992110293
Author(s):  
Tramaine Paul McMullen ◽  
Jennifer Mandelbaum ◽  
Kristian Myers ◽  
Courtney Brightharp ◽  
Kelly Kavanaugh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Knowledge ◽  
Data Dissemination ◽  
Environmental Control ◽  
Collaborative Writing ◽  
Public Health Practice ◽  
Health Departments ◽  
Health Practice ◽  
Team Members ◽  
The Public

Government health departments at all levels make meaningful contributions to advancing the public health of communities, yet state health departments lack the time and infrastructure to share their findings with the broader scientific community. To address this gap in data dissemination, the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control developed a “collaborative writing team” (CWT) pilot. As part of this pilot program, teams of staff members leveraged existing data to advance the public health knowledge base, with an emphasis on public health practice. The six steps of the CWT included (1) identify team members’ skills/strengths, (2) discuss available data, (3) determine opportunities to share data, (4) divide responsibilities based on team members’ strengths, (5) write and submit product, and (6) debrief. Between December 2019 and November 2020, the team had six abstracts accepted to two national conferences, one abstract accepted to a state public health conference, and one editorial published in a peer-reviewed journal. Feedback from participants indicated that self-efficacy in areas including writing, project facilitation, and analysis had increased among team. CWTs are a framework for people working within public health practice settings to disseminate findings.

Assessment of Individual Student Performance in Online Team Projects

2011 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jay Alden
Keyword(s):  
Student Performance ◽  
Group Process ◽  
Online Courses ◽  
Peer Assessment ◽  
Individual Student ◽  
Assessment Practice ◽  
Group Project ◽  
Team Members ◽  
Team Projects

The use of team projects has been shown to be beneficial in higher education. There is also general agreement that team efforts should be assessed and that the grading ought to represent both (1) the quality of the product developed jointly by the team as well as (2) the degree of participation and quality of contribution by each individual student involved in the group process. The latter grading requirement has posed a challenge to faculty so the question addressed in this paper is “How should individual team members in online courses be assessed for the extent and quality of their contributions to the group project?” To answer this question, four common team member evaluation practices were reviewed and compared to seven criteria representing positive attributes of an assessment practice in an online learning environment. Whereas the Peer Assessment practice received the greatest support in the literature in face-to-face courses, this study that considered the perceptions of graduate faculty and students recommended the Faculty Review practice as the default assessment

scholarly journals What makes a ‘successful’ collaborative research project between public health practitioners and academics? A mixed-methods review of funding applications submitted to a local intervention evaluation scheme

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter van der Graaf ◽  
Lindsay Blank ◽  
Eleanor Holding ◽  
Elizabeth Goyder
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Collaborative Research ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Public Health Practice ◽  
Rapid Review ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Evaluation Scheme ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Public Health Practitioners

Abstract Background The national Public Health Practice Evaluation Scheme (PHPES) is a response-mode funded evaluation programme operated by the National Institute for Health Research School for Public Health Research (NIHR SPHR). The scheme enables public health professionals to work in partnership with SPHR researchers to conduct rigorous evaluations of their interventions. Our evaluation reviewed the learning from the first five years of PHPES (2013–2017) and how this was used to implement a revised scheme within the School. Methods We conducted a rapid review of applications and reports from 81 PHPES projects and sampled eight projects (including unfunded) to interview one researcher and one practitioner involved in each sampled project (n = 16) in order to identify factors that influence success of applications and effective delivery and dissemination of evaluations. Findings from the review and interviews were tested in an online survey with practitioners (applicants), researchers (principal investigators [PIs]) and PHPES panel members (n = 19) to explore the relative importance of these factors. Findings from the survey were synthesised and discussed for implications at a national workshop with wider stakeholders, including public members (n = 20). Results Strengths: PHPES provides much needed resources for evaluation which often are not available locally, and produces useful evidence to understand where a programme is not delivering, which can be used to formatively develop interventions. Weaknesses: Objectives of PHPES were too narrowly focused on (cost-)effectiveness of interventions, while practitioners also valued implementation studies and process evaluations. Opportunities: PHPES provided opportunities for novel/promising but less developed ideas. More funded time to develop a protocol and ensure feasibility of the intervention prior to application could increase intervention delivery success rates. Threats: There can be tensions between researchers and practitioners, for example, on the need to show the 'success’ of the intervention, on the use of existing research evidence, and the importance of generalisability of findings and of generating peer-reviewed publications. Conclusions The success of collaborative research projects between public health practitioners (PHP) and researchers can be improved by funders being mindful of tensions related to (1) the scope of collaborations, (2) local versus national impact, and (3) increasing inequalities in access to funding. Our study and comparisons with related funding schemes demonstrate how these tensions can be successfully resolved.

scholarly journals Virtual external implementation facilitation: successful methods for remotely engaging groups in quality improvement

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine W. Hartmann ◽  
Ryann L. Engle ◽  
Camilla B. Pimentel ◽  
Whitney L. Mills ◽  
Valerie A. Clark ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
National Program ◽  
Extensive Experience ◽  
Evidence Based Practices ◽  
Team Members ◽  
Virtual Experience ◽  
Key Points ◽  
Program Content

Abstract Background Relatively little guidance exists on how to use virtual implementation facilitation to successfully implement evidence-based practices and innovations into clinical programs. Yet virtual methods are increasingly common. They have potentially wider reach, emergent public health situations necessitate their use, and restrictions on resources can make them more attractive. We therefore outline a set of principles for virtual external implementation facilitation and a series of recommendations based on extensive experience successfully using virtual external implementation facilitation in a national program. Model and recommendations Success in virtual external implementation facilitation may be achieved by facilitators applying three overarching principles: pilot everything, incorporate a model, and prioritize metacognition. Five practical principles also help: plan in advance, communicate in real time, build relationships, engage participants, and construct a virtual room for participants. We present eight concrete suggestions for enacting the practical principles: (1) assign key facilitation roles to facilitation team members to ensure the program runs smoothly; (2) create small cohorts of participants so they can have meaningful interactions; (3) provide clarity and structure for all participant interactions; (4) structure program content to ensure key points are described, reinforced, and practiced; (5) use visuals to supplement audio content; (6) build activities into the agenda that enable participants to immediately apply knowledge at their own sites, separate from the virtual experience; (7) create backup plans whenever possible; and (8) engage all participants in the program. Summary These principles represent a novel conceptualization of virtual external implementation facilitation, giving structure to a process that has been, to date, inadequately described. The associated actions are demonstrably useful in supporting the principles and offer teams interested in virtual external implementation facilitation concrete methods by which to ensure success. Our examples stem from experiences in healthcare. But the principles can, in theory, be applied to virtual external implementation facilitation regardless of setting, as they and the associated actions are not setting specific.

scholarly journals Patterns and correlates of mis-implementation in state chronic disease public health practice in the United States

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret M. Padek ◽  
Stephanie Mazzucca ◽  
Peg Allen ◽  
Emily Rodriguez Weno ◽  
Edward Tsai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
United States ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Chronic Disease ◽  
Multinomial Logistic Regression ◽  
Public Health Practice ◽  
State Level ◽  
The United States ◽  
Organizational Level ◽  
Effective Programs

Abstract Background Much of the disease burden in the United States is preventable through application of existing knowledge. State-level public health practitioners are in ideal positions to affect programs and policies related to chronic disease, but the extent to which mis-implementation occurring with these programs is largely unknown. Mis-implementation refers to ending effective programs and policies prematurely or continuing ineffective ones. Methods A 2018 comprehensive survey assessing the extent of mis-implementation and multi-level influences on mis-implementation was reported by state health departments (SHDs). Questions were developed from previous literature. Surveys were emailed to randomly selected SHD employees across the Unites States. Spearman’s correlation and multinomial logistic regression were used to assess factors in mis-implementation. Results Half (50.7%) of respondents were chronic disease program managers or unit directors. Forty nine percent reported that programs their SHD oversees sometimes, often or always continued ineffective programs. Over 50% also reported that their SHD sometimes or often ended effective programs. The data suggest the strongest correlates and predictors of mis-implementation were at the organizational level. For example, the number of organizational layers impeded decision-making was significant for both continuing ineffective programs (OR=4.70; 95% CI=2.20, 10.04) and ending effective programs (OR=3.23; 95% CI=1.61, 7.40). Conclusion The data suggest that changing certain agency practices may help in minimizing the occurrence of mis-implementation. Further research should focus on adding context to these issues and helping agencies engage in appropriate decision-making. Greater attention to mis-implementation should lead to greater use of effective interventions and more efficient expenditure of resources, ultimately to improve health outcomes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document