Group Projects Suck!
"Group Projects Suck."
This was the opening line of a recent Emerald editorial on the uselessness of student group projects. The column prompted several faculty members to contact TEP in outrage and ask, "What are you going to do about this?"
The editorial went on to say that professors loved to require group projects because they made for fewer papers to grade and fewer lectures to give (and more time on the golf course, no doubt). This student didn't buy the idea that group projects had anything to do with the real world; instead they "force hardworking students to carry the weight for the unmotivated, and they allow students who would normally fail to bask in the glow of others students' work."
Most damning of all was the columnist's claim that "group projects were academic welfare." The poetic end to this editorial flame was, "In the sea of life, the life jackets have to come off sometime. Let the weak drown."
Cooperative and collaborative learning approaches have recently become increasingly popular in higher education for at least two reasons. First, literally hundreds of studies have shown these techniques to be highly effective. And second, both public and private sector employers are demanding that college students graduate with basic skills in creative and critical thinking, teamwork, and group communication.
More and more successful organizations have small groups at the core of their operations. According to Sun Microsystems' chief technology officer Eric Schmidt: "The proper arrangement at a company is a very large number of very small businesses. The best things were done by very small engineering teams." (Investor's Business Daily, 17 January 1996 A1).
It's clear that group work skills are becoming increasingly important, and there is no denying that students and faculty have had negative experiences with group learning and group projects. But, as with any other teaching strategy, positive results depend on careful lesson planning, a thorough knowledge of the students' abilities, and good teaching. I would add two more components to this formula: strategic (rather than random) grouping of students, and group skills training.
Expertise in anything requires practice. Cooperative and collaborative teaching strategies are not simply another technique to try once in a while, but part of an overall teaching philosophy. Students and teachers must be convinced that working together to construct knowledge is often better than what individuals can accomplish on their own. They must also be sold on the value of learning how to teach and manage others, how to assume leadership, and how to facilitate group interactions. Students must have confidence in their ability to explore, question, challenge, and wrestle with information, ideas, and insights. They must value their own thoughts and the thoughts of their fellow students.
Group learning is hard work for everyone. It can be risky and unpredictable. Teachers give up a significant amount of control when they use these techniques. Group work can be difficult to monitor and assess. It requires a great deal of initiative, maturity, flexibility, and patience on the part of students in order to work successfully in teams and accomplish something worthwhile together.
According to the editorial writer's view of the real world, "flakes who don't show up for group projects and don't complete their work are fired." If only it were that simple. How many of our co-workers might have benefitted from some group skills training and teamwork practice before they ever got to our offices and departments? How many of them end up getting fired for functioning inadequately or being difficult to work with? Very few. All the more reason to have numerous opportunities to practice teamwork before graduates enter the job market. Candidates who know how to work well in groups and demonstrate skills in leadership, facilitation, and teaching will be at the top of the hiring list.
Most disturbing in the Emerald column, though, was the closing sentiment: "Let the weak drown." The world is changing. Hierarchies are giving way to distributed power and leadership. Students are now teaching their teachers how to navigate and survive in cyberspace. The emphasis is no longer on competition and survival of the fittest, but rather the richness of diversity and the value of a collective effort to garner the best in all of us.
Lizard 32 Winter 96
Address questions or comments about
TEP or this site to:
Georgeanne Cooper, Program Director,
64 PLC
Phone: 541-346-2177 Fax: 541-346-2184
© Copyright 2000-2006 Teaching Effectiveness Program, University of Oregon.
Last Modified:
01/11/08
