Although collaborative work is promoted as a way to practice real-world teamwork, these assignments, more often than not, fail to do so
I have never been a huge fan of group work, especially when I was randomly assigned members to work with. I'm sure many students also feel the same about group assessments. Although unpleasant, they were more manageable in high school as if need be, we as individuals had the time to carry an entire assignment and avoid facing the consequences of working with others who may not meet the work ethic of others.
However, in university, there is truly no time to carry out an entire project without it impacting your performance in other courses. In university, group projects are intended to be completed through collaboration between students because they are often weighted heavily and are too large to manage on your own. Group projects are also typically high-stakes assessments, which forces students to rely on their peers even when the quality of work produced can be a hit or miss.
The most common reason behind implementing group projects to a high degree within university courses is that it prepares us for collaborative efforts in the workforce. Although the reasoning behind this may have good intentions, the execution of group work is done poorly.
I will admit that some courses have a better way of implementing group projects than others but they all have their flaws. As a result, group projects in university fail to provide an accurate representation of what collaboration looks like in the workforce, defeating the purpose of group work altogether.
For example, you may be putting in a certain level of effort compared to your groupmates because you're working toward a particular goal. However, because their goals for the project don't match yours, you could find yourself doing more work to achieve this goal.
You may also start completing the work earlier on to seek feedback for improvement and often find yourself prompting your groupmates to contribute their fair share. It can be very tricky to navigate this in an academic setting.
Within the workforce, collaboration seems to be much easier as there is more to risk when not contributing your fair share. For example, you may have meetings with human resources, miss the deadline, causing repercussions for the company, lose privileges and in extreme cases, get fired from your job.
Collaboration in the workforce puts forth real consequences aside from the poor grade you might assigned in university; you can even lose potential references for future jobs. However, the challenges of working toward a common goal are lessened in the workforce because everyone has signed up for the same job and is working to accomplish the same goal.
Unfortunately, this is not the case with group projects at university. Many individuals have varying goals and work ethics which make it difficult to create harmony and success. Everyone working at their own pace to achieve their unique goals can be especially difficult when you aren't familiar with your other members and don't have adequate ways to contact them, which is not something that happens in the workplace.
The aim of group work in university is well intended, but the execution of it in courses requires rethinking. We need to find new ways to truly mirror collaboration in the workforce, without hurting student grades in the process.
Perhaps individuals should always be able to choose their groupmates as individuals are more likely to work with others who share similar goals and work ethics. These shared similarities also exist in the workplace, as you often work with co-workers you know on a project.
Another modification could be to have the project adjusted based on the peer evaluations students anonymously provide each other. This method may not be implemented in the workplace. However, the credit for doing a certain aspect of the collaborative work, especially when helping others, usually does not go unnoticed.
Overall, the current framework of group projects is not reflective of collaboration in the real world, causing frustration and an unequal division of work. Instructors need to rethink current group project assessment methods to better prepare students for the real world.
By: Monica Takahashi
Group projects are becoming an increasingly unavoidable element of university. Nowadays, it seems as though group work is included in every course. There has been also been a simultaneous rise in project-based programs, especially at McMaster University.
Different courses treat group work differently. Some require students to answer a difficult problem that should, in theory, be easier to solve through collaboration. Other courses assign projects with a heavy workload under the assumption that this workload can be managed effectively by a large group of students.
In both situations, the individuals that compose the group can make or break the project. In theory, group projects are great. They teach students how to collaborate with different people and allow them to strengthen their communication and teamwork skills. In practice, however, group projects can be incredibly stressful.
As a fourth-year student in the Integrated Science program, a project-based program, I have been working in groups for the better part of my degree. I have had both positive and negative group experiences but ultimately am against the current structure of group projects in universities.
Even if all the group members are competent and invested in the project, it can be difficult to divide the work evenly. This difficulty can increase significantly when one or more of the group members is not well-versed in the course content or simply does not care about the project. When the volume of work that each person is responsible for varies dependent on the varied levels of interest and ability, things can become problematic as students receive credit they do not deserve.
I have found that there are three main types of group members who consistently cause problems. First, there are those who lack basic communication skills. These individuals are the ones who never respond to messages in a timely manner. Coincidentally, these individuals seem to also always encounter a “big emergency” hours before the project is due. Asking for help is fine but there needs to be adequate forewarning and a valid reason.
Then there are the group members who actually want to help with the project but lack the abilities to do so. While I recognize their attempts to help, the burden to teach these individuals should not fall on other students. It is true that part of group work involves learning through teaching each other, but there is a difference between discussing advanced concepts and teaching someone the very basics of a course.
Finally, there are group members who simply fail to contribute towards the project at all. These are the most infuriating to deal with and unfortunately, the most prevalent. There should be greater measures in place to ensure that students are not given marks they don’t deserve due to someone else’s extra efforts.
Professors could have a better way of modulating group projects. As it stands, there should be some metric whereby students receive a grade proportional to the work they put into a project. While some professors have implemented a peer evaluation process, many courses still lack this completely.
The courses that do have this evaluation could still be greatly improved and better managed. It is not enough to reward students’ additional efforts at the end of the project as this still leads to students being unfairly overworked and over stressed. Instead, courses that have large group projects can also have mandatory check-in periods to ensure that all students are contributing.
Working in groups is an important part of many jobs and so it makes sense to implement group work at the university level. However, until group projects are restructured, their existence will continue to be at the disservice of hardworking students.
[spacer height="20px"][thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
