Birds of a Feather Undermine Equity: A Strategy to Align Intent and Outcome in Team-Based Learning in Higher Education

TL;DR

The paper investigates how self-selected teams in Team-Based Learning can unintentionally reproduce socio-economic inequities. It introduces an Equity Score, derived from socio-economic background and self-perceived readiness, and uses a Greedy Algorithm to assemble balanced teams. Empirical results from two courses show that equity-driven formation yields more evenly balanced teams and improved performance, while self-formed teams exhibit greater inequity and lower outcomes for disadvantaged students. The findings reveal a behavioral gap between equity intent and practice, underscoring the need for structural supports to realize inclusive learning in higher education.

Abstract

Efforts to promote equity in higher education often rely on shared intent among instructors and students. Yet, as demonstrated in this study, when students form their own teams for Team-Based Learning (TBL) tasks, they unintentionally cluster with peers of similar socio-economic backgrounds, ultimately undermining equity. This study introduces a simple strategy to facilitate equitable team formation through a quantitative reflection of students' socio-economic backgrounds and their self-perceived preparedness. When applied, the strategy yielded balanced teams and improved performance. In its absence, team compositions became skewed and class performance declined. These findings highlight a behavioural gap between intent and outcome and underscore the need for structural supports to translate equity goals into practice.

Figures (4)

• Figure 1: Distribution of Student Characteristics and Equity Scores: The left panel displays bar charts representing the distribution of students across social background (major cities, state cities, towns, and rural settings), economic background (upper, upper-middle, middle, and disadvantaged), and self-perceived preparedness (self-sufficient, helped, and needing support). The right panel illustrates the distribution of students based on total equity scores, categorized as low, average, and high. High equity scores indicate students who require support from their peers to perform well in TBL assessments, while low scores represent those who perceive themselves as self-sufficient or opt out of equitable team formation.
• Figure 2: The distribution of students' self-perceived preparedness - self-sufficient, helped, and needing support - varies across social (major cities, state cities, towns, rural) and economic (upper, upper-middle, middle, disadvantaged) backgrounds. Students from disadvantaged backgrounds are more likely to seek peer support, while those from privileged backgrounds tend to feel self-sufficient, highlighting the impact of socio-economic factors on learning confidence and the need for equity-driven team strategies.
• Figure 3: Comparison of Equity Scores and TBL Assessment Marks Across Semesters. The left panel compares the equity scores of teams from the first semester (equity-driven team formation) and the second semester (self-formed teams), showing greater balance in the former. The right panel presents the TBL assessment marks for both semesters, highlighting the decline in performance when teams were self-formed.
• Figure 4: Relationship Between Equity Scores and TBL Assessment Marks in Self-Formed Teams. Equity scores compared with TBL assessment marks in the self-formed teams of the second semester. Two contrasting regions are highlighted: low equity score teams securing high marks and high equity score teams securing low marks. The pattern suggests that students who required support underperformed due to the lack of structured team formation, while self-sufficient students excelled, reinforcing the need for equity-driven team strategies in collaborative learning.