What We Learned, 1997 Workshop

Demographics/Environment

• + Heterogeneous groups provide a richer environment.
• + Students learn to interact, communicate and appreciate those who are different from them.
• + Them becomes us.
• + They becomes we.
• + I becomes we to reduce student anxiety of feeling "stupid".
• + Perception of a better environment for female students.
• - Working or commuting students may have trouble attending out-of-class meetings, although this situation can be a motivation for in-class activities to create a sense of belonging.
• - Age, sex, religion, nationality, disabilities, socio-economic factors may make participation in heterogeneous group difficult or impossible.
• - Group may want to carry meetings out electronically and some group members may not have access at home.

Closed Labs

1. Scenario 1: All groups working on same assignment with group members working together on each step.
   • + Two heads are better than one.
   • + Group members can help each other debug work.
   • - Coat tail effect---individual non-participation may not be recognized.

2. Scenario 2: All groups working on same assignment with group members working individually on separate machines on component parts which will be combined together.
   • + Can give a more meaningful assignment.
   • - More obvious to team members when an individual doesn't carry own weight.

Programming Assignments

• + Assignment can be big enough that only reasonable way to do it is to have individuals work on pieces and then assemble the whole as a group turn-in.
• + Develops responsibility.
• + Prepares for real world environment.
• + Enforces modularity.
• - If one part doesn't work, whole group suffers.
• - Student conflicts within group.
• - Faculty member doesn't ever really know what an individual is capable of.
• Have required number of meetings formalized and require groups to keep written minutes of meetings and turn them in.
• Set up groups carefully and have a plan for resolving conflicts.
• Prepare a project grading sheet in advance and distribute it to students to that they know what factors will contribute to their evaluation.

Grading in the Context of Group Work

• Group work that counts as a non-trivial portion of a student's grade needs to be assessed both on a group and an individual basis.
• Student evaluations of each other increase individual accountability, but introduce potential conflicts and lack of objectivity on the part of students.
• students eval each other (conflict, lack of objectivity)
• Students need to obtain a foundation of knowledge for introductory courses---group projects need to be mixed with individual assignments to reduce the potential of peer "mooching".
• Participants suggested between 5 and 30% of a student's grade should be based on group work.
• Group exams are not considered appropriate.

Potential Risks

• Resistance---students can be uncomfortable in doing "non-traditional" activities
• Time management---activities in the classroom can take time away from covering material, although students may actually learn more and lead to covering more material.
• Group conflict---some degree is inevitable. Need mechanisms for helping students resolve issues (such as upper-level student peers to facilitate group activities).
• Teacher not doing their job---need to clearly communicate a set of expectations so students know what to expect of the teacher and themselves.

Additional Comments

• Participants generally felt that the instructor should choose the groups rather than using student-selected groups.
• Different activities will work for different instructors and situations.
• Initially use peer learning techniques with minimize risk.
• Have to be willing to change philosophy and shift responsibility to students
• Group activities are not just individual tasks assigned to a group. Thought must given to designing good group activities.
• Students need to be given preparation for working in groups.