Designing an Instructional Model for
Smart Technology-Enhanced Team-Based Learning
Soo-Young Lee
Seoul National University of Education, Korea
sylee@snue.ac.kr
Youngmin Lee
Sookmyung Women’s University, Korea
ymlee@sookmyung.ac.kr
Abstract: The purpose of this study is to explore and develop a new instructional approach to atechnology-enhanced collaborative learning environment called Smart technology-enhanced Team-Based
Learning (denoted as S-TBL). We designed a novel instructional model that combines mobile technology,
collaborative teamwork, problem-solving process, and a variety of evaluation techniques in theperspective of a conventional team-based model. Team-Based Learning (TBL) is an instructional modelthat is based on procedures for developing high performance learning teams that can enhance the qualityof student learning in various fields. TBL has the following defining characteristics and procedures: (1)Lesson Panning, (2) Pre-Class Preparation, (3) Readiness Assurance Process, and (4) Application
Exercises. The traditional TBL has been implemented across a broad range disciplines and school levels,and proven to be educationally effective in various academic domains. We believe emerging technologies
that are now available in classrooms will bring us new opportunities to maximize the merits of TBL evenfurther. Along with the revision of the traditional TBL model, we integrated smart learning technologies(such as iPad or Galaxy Tab for 1:1 mobile computing): 1) to provide a holistic learning environment that
integrates learning resources (including reading assignments), assessment tools, and problem solving
spaces; and 2) to enhance collaboration and communication between team members, and between an
instructor and students. The S-TBL instructional approach combines: 1) individual learning andcollaborative team learning; 2) conceptual learning and problem-solving & critical thinking; 3) individual
assessment and group assessment; 4) self-directed learning and teacher-led instruction; and 5) personalreflection and publication.
Keywords: Team-Based Learning, Smart Technologies, Learning Method, S-TBL

I. Introduction
In these days, smart technologies and smart devices including smart phones, smart pads (e.g., iPhone, iPad,
Galaxy Tab) are becoming indispensable in our everyday life. People are Internet surfing, shopping, and social
networking through these smart technologies. Smart technologies have also changed education and schools aswell as our everyday life. Emerging technologies have provided education with both opportunities we havedreamed of as well as challenges we need to overcome. The role of technology on teaching and learning isgetting more attention from educators these days than ever before. Upon understanding the importance andpotential of smart technologies, Korean government developed the “Smart Education Strategic Plan” and has
made efforts to support schools to implement “Smart Education” using smart technologies and smart devices in
the field. The Ministry of Education in Korea collaborates with schools and teachers to diffuse smart education
by appointing research schools that adopt innovative technologies, and develop and implement new instructionalmodels and materials for smart education.
Smart education through smart technologies is the most appropriate to design social media based learning
environments in which a large number of learners can learn through collaboration and cooperation utilizing
various Apps and wire- or wireless Internet. In addition, smart education has high potentials to provide
customized learning contents based on individual learner’s needs, and problem-based case learning through peer
collaboration rather than teacher-directed lectures. Smart education also promotes knowledge sharing andexchanges among learners so that same contents found in traditional textbooks can be re-constructed and regenerated. Smart technologies can also enable interactive collaboration and cooperation between students andbetween a teacher and students. Moreover, smart technologies can bring changes on teacher’s role being afacilitator rather than a knowledge transfer; students’ role being a self-directed and self-regulated learner; andcurriculum being more customized and differentiated based on students’ unique needs.
However, technology itself does not promise anything regarding teaching and learning effectiveness. In
order to bring the best educational benefits out of technology, careful research, development, andimplementation are critical. While many researchers are paying attention to possibilities and potentials of smart
education, others are rather skeptical about smart education. They have pointed out the fact that the same pitfalls
and problems with e-learning or ICT (Information Communication and Technology) education can be repeatedwith smart education. Smart education can be only another fad entailing emerging technologies and devices.
Technology itself cannot guarantee desirable learning outcomes that many researchers and teachers are hopingfor. As Clark (1983) has argued, new media itself cannot guarantee to cause a positive effect. It is not the media
itself but the way those media are utilized in a learning environment can change teaching and learning, and inturn those changes can lead to desirable outcomes of learning.
Thus, it is important to research how to maximize the educational potentials of smart technologies bydesigning and developing instructional models, strategies, methods, and materials which can be worked in the
education. As one of promising instructional models, we propose smart technology-enhanced Team-Based
Learning (denoted as S-TBL). Team-Based Learning (denoted as TBL) is known for a well-structured learning
process that is effective for promoting problem-solving, collaboration, and communication skills. If we
implement Team-Based Learning in smart technology-enhanced learning environments, we can expect
promising learning outcomes from a synergy between the two – i.e., smart technologies and TBL.
Nevertheless, further research is needed to develop an appropriate and specific model for Team-based
Learning in smart technology-enhanced learning environments and specific guidelines for how to implement themodel in the classroom. As the first step for further research, this paper presents a conceptual model for Smarttechnology-enhanced Team-Based Learning(S-TBL). The conceptual model will provide a blueprint for actual
development and implementation of S-TBL in the real classroom by providing a modified Team-Based Learningmodel that is designed to be worked best in smart technology-enhanced learning environments where wirelessInternet and smart devices are available for individual learners.
Research questions in this paper are as follows: 1) what design principles can be employed to develop
Smart technology-enhanced Team-Based Learning? ; 2) what are the learning processes in Smart technologyenhanced Team-Based Learning environments?; and 3) what are the specific learning activities in Smarttechnology-enhanced Team-Based Learning environments?

II. Review of the Conventional Team-Based Learning Model
The conventional Team-Based Learning model is composed of the following four stages; ‘Lesson Planning’– ‘Pre-Class Preparation’ - ‘Readiness Assurance Process’ – ‘Application Exercises’(Michaselsen, Knght, &Fink, 2004; Michaselsen, Sweet, & Parmelee, 2009).
First, the Lesson Planning stage involves a systemic planning of learning processes that will be
implemented in real educational settings. It includes setting up learning objectives, analyzing learning
environments, analyzing learners, selecting & sequencing learning contents, developing learning materials, anddesigning an assessment and evaluation system. Setting up learning objectives involves identifying andspecifying learning objectives and outcomes that should be accomplished as students learn through Team-Based
Learning. Analyzing learning environments involves identifying and surveying whether the current school andclassroom environments are appropriate for Team-Based Learning and whether they are all equipped withnecessary resources and equipments. Analyzing learners involves identifying and assessing participating students’prior knowledge, skills, attitudes, and learning styles. Selecting and sequencing learning contents involves
selecting contents which will be covered during Team-Based Learning, and sequencing the contents based on the
structure of the model. Developing learning materials and strategies involves selecting from ready-madenecessary learning materials or creating new materials including reading materials, references, individual & teamassessments, and concept-applied authentic problems. Designing an assessment and evaluation system involves
developing evaluation methods and a scoring system to assess both individual and team achievements.
Second, the Pre-Class Preparation stage requires learners to individually study pre-assigned materials
before the class. It includes examining learning materials, studying reading assignments, searching & integratingreferences, and organizing key concepts. Examining learning materials and studying reading assignments
involve prior learning of the concepts and materials that will be covered during the class. Individual learners are
required to study before the class and are responsible for their own conceptual learning of topics for the TBL
lessons. The contents of reading assignments should include key concepts for the lessons, and understanding of
those key concepts will be assessed at the next stage, i.e., Readiness Assurance Process. Instructors can also ask
learners to search additional information and references for given topics and integrate those information andreferences with other learning materials. Organizing key concepts involves summarizing, reviewing, andintegrating key concepts learners have read and studied during the Pre-Class Preparation stage. Through theseprocesses, individual learners prepare for the following Readiness Assurance Process.
Third, the Readiness Assurance Process stage involves introducing a TBL lesson, individual & team test,
team appeal, instructor’s feedback, and summarizing key concepts & understanding. A TBL lesson in the classbegins with the Readiness Assurance Process. Introducing a TBL lesson includes orienting students about TBL,
forming teams, developing team rules, and checking students’ prior learning of topics for the lesson. Then,
students are asked to complete an individual test, which is often a multiple choice test with 4-5 questions. The
purpose of the test is to check whether students have understood fundamental knowledge and concepts coveredin the learning materials and reading assignments they studied during the prior Pre-Class Preparation stage
before the class. After the individual test, a team test follows. The team test has the same questions as theindividual test. During the team test, team members are encouraged to discuss and debate whenever they havedifferent answers. After team discussions each team decides their team answers for the test and writes down theanswers on a paper or a team board. An instructor asks teams to raise the answer board simultaneously and thenthe instructor is able to quickly check whole class understanding. If answers are not correct, students return to
the test questions and discuss further. Then, the teams are invited to appeal in writing answers they got incorrect
due to ambiguity in questions or ambiguity in readings. The instructor can provide a mini lecture or clarifications
on topics that many students showed difficulties or misconceptions. Through these processes, the instructor canassure that all students have acquired the fundamental knowledge and concepts necessary for the next stage,
Application Exercises.
Fourth, the Application Exercises stage asks student teams to solve authentic problems by applying theknowledge and concepts that they studied prior the class and re-checked during the Readiness Assurance Process
stage. This stage involves solving real-life problems, presenting & evaluating solutions, and evaluating teammembers. The instructor presents the class authentic problems from real-life cases. As a team, students solve theproblems through collaboration and discussion. Often, the teams create artifacts to show their best solutions forthe problems and they also need to justify their solutions. Student teams present and share theirsolutions/artifacts and they evaluate the solutions and justifications with each other. Through this Application
Exercises stage, students will be able to make a link between conceptual knowledge they have acquired in theclassroom and authentic problems that they would encounter in the real-life. Students are asked to peer-evaluate
team members for their individual contribution to the team solutions. As a closure of the lesson, the instructor
summarizes the lesson and students’ accomplishments.

III. Design Principles for an S-TBL Model
For this paper, we developed instructional design principles for the Smart technology-enhanced TeamBased Learning (S-TBL) model by reviewing previous research on smart education and the TBL model in thefield of educational technology, cognitive psychology, computer sciences, and instructional methods. The
instructional design principles we developed for the S-TBL model are below.







Principle 1. S-TBL should employ the same basic process of TBL as an instructional model.
Principle 2. S-TBL should make a clear link between concepts and problems.
Principle 3. S-TBL should provide authentic problems through a multimedia problem-set.
Principle 4. S-TBL should provide various Internet resources in a structured way.
Principle 5. S-TBL should systematically evaluate students’ individual and team learning.
Principle 6. S-TBL should promote effective interactions between students.

These six design principles will be able to guide us to develop an S-TBL model that can be effectively
implemented in the classroom.
Principle 1. S-TBL should employ the same basic process of TBL as an instructional model.
The first design principle of S-TBL is to follow the same basic process of TBL, which is validated as aneffective learning model. The new model should take advantage of smart technology-enhanced learning
environments while maximizing the benefits of TBL as an instructional model. In other words, we adopt TBL as
an instructional model, and in order to boost learning potentials of TBL we will utilize features and functions ofsmart technologies. For example, online learning environments can provide more dynamic, up-to-date, andvarious resources. Using smart devices, instructors can provide more immediate and individualized feedbacks.
Interactive communication tools can foster inter- and intra-team communication and collaboration. In addition,
we believe S-TBL should be worked in regular schools and classrooms where necessary smart technologies anddevices are available rather than implementing in entirely online learning environments. Thus, we see TBL as
the primary instructional model with smart technologies being background conditions and tools. From thisprinciple, we will first analyze learning processes and activities of TBL that are validated to be effective inprevious studies. Second, we will examine features and functions of smart technologies and smart devices
available in regular schools and classrooms. Then, we will match learning processes and activities of TBL withsupporting technologies.
Principle 2. S-TBL should make a clear link between concepts and problems.
Traditional textbooks often include general concept-based knowledge and principles. Contents in the
textbooks are static and limited in the nature. Textbook-based instructions (often in the form of lectures) are also
limited to concept learning. Students are given a limited chance to apply those concepts to real-life situations. On
the other hand, Problem-Based Learning (PBL) focuses on problem solving processes. While PBL is widely
employed in educational settings as an effective learning model to promote problem solving skills, theimportance of conceptual understanding that is necessary to solve problems is often overlooked in PBL. There is
no structure for learners to ensure concept understanding in the process of PBL. As a consequence, learners withlimited prior knowledge often show difficulties in solving real-life problems. It is a distinctive feature of TBL
that addresses the importance of both concept learning and authentic problem solving. TBL addresses theimportance of real-life application of concepts and knowledge. The main activity of TBL is the Application
Exercises stage, but in order to solve authentic problems at the Application Exercises stage, students should
build understandings and acquire necessary concepts and knowledge through Pre-Class Preparation andReadiness Assurance Process. The links between concepts and real-life problems can be made both by
instructor’s guides or learners’ own inferences and reasoning. As accumulating exercises with various related
concepts, problems, and real-world cases, learner’s schema will advance with more complicated and complex
integration of concepts, problems, and real-world cases.
Principle 3. S-TBL should provide authentic problems through a multimedia problem-set.
The TBL model is designed to give learners responsibility for their own learning. Students should be readyfor the class through their prior learning at the Pre-Class Preparation stage. Students are asked to solve real-life
problems, applying their knowledge and understanding which are assumed to be acquired by individual studies.

Through learning materials and reading assignments at the Pre-Class Preparation stage and problems at the
Application Exercises stage, students encounter various cases and problems. These cases and problems arecomplicated and unstructured problems found in real-life situations. S-TBL should present these complicatedand unstructured authentic problems through multimedia such as movies, animations, images and sounds. In
addition, S-TBL should develop an online multimedia problem-set so that learners and instructors can search andselect appropriate problems for a given TBL topic. The problem-set should also provide necessary scaffolding
and supports for solving the problems.
Principle 4. S-TBL should provide various Internet resources in a structured way.
S-TBL will allow learners to search, explore, and utilize various Internet resources related to concepts,
problems and cases throughout the whole learning processes. Based on wireless Internet environments andindividual smart devices, learners can engage in Resource-Based Learning. However, unlike Resource-Based
Learning which learners are given a high level of control and responsibility for topics they explore, TBL setsboundaries for topics and themes learners investigate according to the specific processes of TBL. TBL
instructors should review and pre-select Internet resources and provide them in a structured way. For example,
instructors need to organize Internet information and resources, and present them as reading assignments. One
way to organize Internet resources is categorizing information and resources by themes or topics, andhyperlinking related websites.
Principle 5. S-TBL should systematically evaluate students’ individual and team learning.
One of the most promising features of S-TBL is a possibility of collecting students’ learning activities andachievement records throughout the whole learning process, and in turn, evaluating performance based on
various evaluation criteria. Evaluation in the traditional TBL includes the readiness assurance process forconceptual understanding; the quality, creativeness, effectiveness, and practicality of solutions to real-life
problems; peer-evaluation on team members’ contribution; and instructor’s assessment on the degree of students’participation. Through these multiple evaluation processes at multiple points across the whole learning processes,
instructors can effectively evaluate both individual and team performance based on learning activities andachievements within team practices. In addition, students are required to evaluate other teams’ solutions(between teams evaluation), which becomes another learning opportunities for learners. Despite the merits of
those multiple evaluation processes of TBL, it takes up too much time in evaluation. S-TBL has a potential tosave times for evaluation by collecting related learning activities and achievement records (both individual andteam) online and analyzing the records and providing evaluation results in real-time. Immediate and ongoingevaluation system on S-TBL will provide both instructors and students with on-time feedback.
Principle 6. S-TBL should promote effective interactions between students.
The Pre-Class Preparation stage in the conventional TBL is quite restricted to individualized learning as
homework assignments. Thus, interactions between students rarely occur during this stage. S-TBL provides
learners with an opportunity to interact more easily even during the Pre-Class Preparation stage through various
communication tools. Both synchronous and asynchronous communications can be used for effective
interactions. Moreover, multiple interactions like one-to-one interaction, one-to-many interactions, and many-tomany interactions can occur. However, if students are only interested in individual performances andaccomplishments in this students-directed learning stage, interactions between students should be fosteredthrough scaffolding and specific guidelines for effective interaction processes. In addition, during team activities,
collaboration, and discussion among team members can be fostered through effective interaction andcommunication tools. Off-line and online communication and interaction can complement each other. Also,
online communication and sharing tools enable students to exchange and co-construct multimedia artifacts andcollective knowledge.

IV. Overview, Process, and Activities of the S-TBL Model
In referring to the six design principles, we have discussed in the previous section, we developed the S-TBL
model. The S-TBL model allows learners to develop understanding through both individual and team activities.
Learners will engage both interdependent and independent activities to produce desirable outcomes within agiven timeline. S-TBL is expected to maximize the merits of the conventional TBL by taking advantage ofemerging smart technologies. The S-TBL model should create synergistic effects of TBL and smart technologies
rather than a mere implementation of TBL in smart technology-enhanced environments. While S-TBL is based
on TBL as a learning model, S-TBL should be able to further advance the conventional TBL model as adding on
features and potentials of more effective learning.
Overall, S-TBL will follow the basic processes and stages of TBL. First, at the Lesson Planning stage
instructors make a plan for S-TBL lessons. To make an S-TBL lesson plan, instructors first should decide forwhich subject area, which grade level, which time of an academic year S-TBL will be implemented. For example,
some instructors may choose to employ S-TBL when they teach a regular subject in the curriculum, while others
may decide to teach an after-school extra-curricular program, applying the S-TBL model. Some instructors may
design a whole semester to be taught based on the S-TBL model, whereas others only plan an S-TBL based
lesson on a specific topic only. Instructors can choose a subject or topic from the curriculum which is moresuitable for the S-TBL model in its nature, or create a new topic for S-TBL by re-arranging and integrating
existing topics and themes in the curriculum. After instructors choose subjects and/or topics of the S-TBL lesson,
they need to identify future learners’ levels of prior knowledge on the topic, Internet and smart technology
experiences, and basic learning skills. Since familiarity and proficiency of smart technologies may vary acrossleaners, tutors or facilitators can be arranged to provide necessary personal supports during the class or during a
pre-workshop. In addition, it is critical to check availabilities and conditions of smart technology facilities,
devices, software, and contents beforehand. Instructors should have enough proficiency of operating smart
technology devices and applications as both learning and teaching tools.
Moreover, it is important to develop a Learning Management System that is link to the S-TBL model.
Learning Management System denoted as LMS should provide features and functions which allow to record
individual learners’ learning histories and to support information sharing and interaction among learners – e.g.,
discussion boards, 1:1 instant massaging or chatting and e-mail system. LMS can also support learners’ PreClass Preparation by systematically presenting necessary information and resources. Concepts, information,
related cases, and real-life problems are organized and stored in a database in multiple formats including text,
movie, animation, graphic image, sounds, etc. Learners can find information or resources by searching throughthe database. LMS also collects all learning activities and artifacts throughout the whole processes and cananalyze the activities and achievements. Instructors’ feedback, peer-evaluation, and self-evaluation system arealso available on S-TBL LMS.
Second, at the Pre-Class Preparation stage, learners will access to LMS, and review learning resources andreadings concerning a topic of the lesson. Self-directed learning of key concepts, related cases and problems will
be encouraged. When a learner encounters difficulties due to his level of understanding, an adaptive coachingsystem will guide the learner through scaffolding appropriate for his current competency level and learningpotential. The Pre-Class Preparation involves not only acquiring key concept understanding, but also developing
understanding for how those concepts can be applied in solving real-life problems. Through this stage, learners
will find out which concepts they need to understand and which aspects of those key concepts are critical for thefollowing learning processes.
Third, the basic process of the Readiness Assurance Process of S-TBL will be similar to the conventional
TBL. Instructors can form teams (each team with 3-4 students) based on learners’ achievement level and othercharacteristics. Instructors save information regarding team formation in LMS and then LMS automaticallypresent related information to appropriate learners. Some information is available to everyone, while otherinformation can be shared among team members only. At the beginning of this stage, each individual learner
logs on to LMS and completes an online individual test. Instructors can compose a test by selecting appropriate
test items from a database or an item bank. The individual test is automatically scored, and test results will be
stored in LMS as one of individual learning achievement records. Both individual learners and the instructor cancheck the results, and personal feedback can be provided to learners. Then, as a team students complete a teamtest with the exact same questions as the individual test. During this team test, active interactions among teammembers are encouraged. Team members can discuss or debate when discrepancies in their answers occur. They
can keep a record of their discussions and findings for future use. After discussion, each team decides theiranswers for the test, and the answers are stored and scored in LMS. The stored scores will be used to evaluate
individual and team performance at the end. The instructor then check each team answers immediately and canjudge which concepts learners have difficulties in understanding. Therefore, the instructor can more easily
provide customized and immediate feedback. In turn, learners can clarify and strengthen their conceptual
understanding.
Forth, at the Application Exercise stage, the instructors select appropriate real-life cases or problems fromthe problem-set database and present them to learners. Those cases and problems are not presented in a mere text
form. Rather, they can be presented in various multimedia forms most appropriate to the nature of real-life cases
or problems. Learners as a team solve the problems by applying concepts they have acquired from the previous

stages and also utilizing Internet information and resources. Solutions to the problems can be in a text form or
multimedia artifacts. Learners share their solutions online and other teams are invited to evaluate thesolutions/artifacts. Learners can decide which final products should be public and which interim products andprocesses should be shared within a team only. However, the instructor can view the whole learning processes ofindividual and team activities. After between team evaluation on team solutions/artifacts, students are asked tocomplete self-evaluation and peer-evaluation. Self-evaluation helps each student reflect their own learning
processes and performance. Through self-evaluation, learners can be more aware of the responsibility for theirown learning. Peer-evaluation asks students to assess the level of participations and contributions of teammembers. Team scores are based on the effectiveness, creativeness, and practicality of the solutions; or othercriteria that the instructor and the class have set for the lesson can be used. Finally, the instructor wraps-up thelesson by summarizing the concepts, cases and problems investigated during the lesson.

IV. Conclusion and Suggesion
This paper proposed a new learning model called S-TBL, which is based on the conventional TBL modelwith adding on known merits of smart technologies. S-TBL is expected to maximize the effects of TBL by
utilizing smart technologies – e.g., wireless Internet, 1:1 smart devices, and appropriate applications. In
particular, S-TBL can be effective to foster self-directed learning skills and at the same time collaborative
problem solving skills. However, in order to ensure the effects of S-TBL in the real classrooms, a verification
process of the model is required. Field research is needed to verify the effectiveness of the conceptual model andto enhance usability and usefulness of the model in real classroom settings. Developmental research or formative
research can be implemented to verify the effectiveness of the model, and revise & improve the conceptualmodel to be more practical working model. Also future research should evaluate validity of the model and assess
the completeness of the model. One to one expert evaluation, small group evaluation, and focus group interviews
can be employed to identify problems and issues of each element of the model. A survey of current status ofInternet and smart technologies in schools is important. In particular, the Learning Management System should
be customized to support features and functions specific to S-TBL such as Pre-Class Preparation, Readiness
Assurance Process, and various evaluation processes.
In order to implement the S-TBL model in the real schools, both a short-term and long-term plan for
introduction and adaption of the S-TBL model are critical. In addition to research on the learning model itself, it
is important to raise awareness of S-TBL among teachers, students, parents, and school administrators throughworkshops and guidebooks. Also media literacy of instructors should be strengthened to prepare for smart
technology-enhanced learning environments. Concerning technological innovations in schools, often teachers are
regarded as a critical changing agent who can bring a visible and lasting success in technology-rich learning andteaching experiences. Some teachers are tech-savvy and willing to accept changes, whereas many more teachers
are reluctant to changes. Thus, professional development for S-TBL should consider not only technical aspectsof S-TBL implementation, but also fundamental discussions on learning and teaching issues in technology-richenvironments. Finally, specific guidebooks and manuals on how to implement S-TBL in schools will enhanceusability of the S-TBL model in the field.

REFERENCES
Clark, R. E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4),445-459.
Michaelsen, L., Knight, A. B., & Fink, L. D. (2004). Team-Based Learning: A Transformative Use of Small
Groups in College Teaching. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.
Michaelsen, L., Sweet, M., & Parmelee, D. (2009). Team-Based Learning: Small Group Learning's Next Big
Step: New Directions for Teaching and Learning, Number 116. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.