Working in groups

[Perd Hapley]

To continue my misanthropic streak, what is it with teachers always making you work in groups these days?  I hate that crap.  I'm not in class to make friends.  Nor do I need or want any "help" from any of my fellow students. 

[taurusowner]

I've heard that it's because you have a high chance of working on projects in groups when you get into your career.

[BlueStarLizzard]

the problem is that you usually end up with folks who don't work, work too much or just can't figure out what the hell they need to do.

its rare you end up in a group that can work together.

i used to end up going "shut up! now the project is this, so..." after about a hour of useless chatter.

[Nitrogen]

It's obviously conditioning for our future conversion to Communism by Obama.

[Regolith]

I've never been a big fan of group projects in college but...it's the default for 90% of jobs out there (if not more) that you're going to be working in groups with other people towards a shared goal.  So, there is some validity to reasoning that it'd be a good idea to have people work in groups and get used to it before you release them into the job market.


I think my biggest problem with group projects is that they lack the direction and cohesion you normally encounter in the real world, and that can lead them to be a great deal more frustrating than is normal.

[mtnbkr]

1.  Because much work in real life requires working with others.  On any given task in my job, I might need the input or participation of 1-10 additional people due to the complexity and scope of my work.

2.  Because a group will ferret out details or points of view missed by an individual.  Happens all the time in my line of work (IT, specifically "internet operations").

Chris

[Harold Tuttle]

because its easier to grade 6 projects

[HankB]

College was OK because 1) the groups were small; and 2) we formed OUR OWN groups.

I used to HATE group assignments in elementary school because the nuns (yep, went to a Catholic grade school) always seemed to inflict my group with one or more dopes - they were anchors that dragged down the group.

And hoo, boy, did one of the nuns get mad when a couple of us on one of the groups - mere STUDENTS - had the audacity to object IN CLASS about some of the people we were saddled with. :rolleyes: (There's a long story here . . . one I don't feel like typing out . . . but it ultimately involved parents and the PTA.)

[T.O.M.]

the problem is that you usually end up with folks who don't work, work too much or just can't figure out what the hell they need to do.

That sounds surprisingly like the last committee I was assigned to here at work!

[zahc]

Haven't you heard? We're all Socialists now.

[FTA84]

I also hated group projects.  In college, I would always pick the weak/lazy students to work with.  They wouldn't complain when I just did everything myself, got the A, and went on with my studies.

I think that real life is working in groups but that colleges largely fail at replicating the situation.

In real life, you work in a group because other people in that group either (possibly both)
a) Have different expertise/knowledge than you. (i.e. An electrical engineer with a mechanical engineer to design an automated assembly line)
b) Are closer in ability to you. (Students of different abilities get different level jobs.  If you graduate as an A+ student, you shouldn't expect you'll land a job with a company where the C student is your equal)

[AZRedhawk44]

A friend of mine went to University of Phoenix for a master's degree.  She despised it due to the focus on group work.  Invariably, the groups she got were 3/4 populated by slackers or idiots, with 1-2 people to actually pull the weight and get the project done.

Talked to several people who attended UniPhx since then and they concur: the group focus allows for a higher graduation rate of leeches.

Yep:  Socialism at work in education.  From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

[roo_ster]

I think that real life is working in groups but that colleges largely fail at replicating the situation.

In real life, you work in a group because other people in that group either (possibly both)
a) Have different expertise/knowledge than you. (i.e. An electrical engineer with a mechanical engineer to design an automated assembly line)
b) Are closer in ability to you. (Students of different abilities get different level jobs.  If you graduate as an A+ student, you shouldn't expect you'll land a job with a company where the C student is your equal)

Let me add that in the workplace, most groups have a manager and/or designated leader involved.  Helps to attenuate the ceaseless dithering found in some groups.

[Boomhauer]

I'm fortunate in that most of my history profs don't do the group work thing.

Invariably, it's the low level gen education classes that do.

The worst group problems I've ever had are lab groups. Both of my lab groups were populated by lazy worthless idiots, and I had to work with them each week.

Like AZRedhawk says, it's for the higher graduation rate of leeches.

[alex_trebek]

If I had to guess, then I would say in grade school it is to teach social skills to children.  Not really a bad idea.

In my engineering courses it was for four reasons (that I can discern):

1.  Engineers don't like talking to other people, but will have to anyway at their job.
2.  In the professional world if only one person designs something, there is probably something seriously flawed with it.
3.  Communicating in a group increases total knowledge.  Often my group members would point something out I missed in the lecture, because I was too busy daydreaming about guns.
4.  Engineers suck at communicating, and working in a group kind of helps.

I hated the group thing for a long time, but towards the end of my college career the people who didn't work had been either reformed by failure, or weeded out entirely.  I started to appreciate it more then.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

there is a team building execise they used to use at management seminars a long time ago called walking/stranded on the moon. its supposedly done with a lil help from nasa. you are supposedly stranded on the moon with a list of supplies.  you need to orioritize since you can't keep em all.  you do it by yourself then with someone else and in theory your score should rise . they use it to help folks who don't play well together see the value of the other person in their joint effort.  they did it with me and david hantoot the restaurant manager after i threatened to kill him. i scored a 90 he scored 80   when we did it together he managed to bring it down to 80 for us both. my boss was most unhappy when i said thanks for proving my point. i eneded up catching a beating from my boss before it was all over but it was worth it

[AmbulanceDriver]

I always hated the group assignments because of the very theory of the "group" grade.  Invariable, one or two would be slackers who knew the rest of us that actually *wanted* a good grade would get the work done and they'd just bask in the glory (gee, that actually *does* sound like the work environment.....)

Until I had a professor that saw a way around it.  We were to work in groups on the project, and yes, there would be a group grade, but your individual grade would be based on your portion of the group assignment.  Each group would divide the list of tasks amongst themselves and submit it to her so she would know who worked on what segment of the assignment.  You should have seen the slackers in our group get the "deer in the headlights" look....  Was priceless.

[Marnoot]

because its easier to grade 6 projects

*Ding!*

We were constantly working in groups in my major (MIS). It usually ended up being me and one or two others that did the work, while the others piggy-backed. I understand them wanting to "prepare" you to work in groups in the workplace, but the whole dynamic is much different in the workplace, at least for me.

In school, 2 or 3 people can just do nothing and leech off the hard work of others. At work, most members of the group have different roles and if they don't do their job, it doesn't get done and it's obvious they weren't working.

[RevDisk]

To continue my misanthropic streak, what is it with teachers always making you work in groups these days?  I hate that crap.  I'm not in class to make friends.  Nor do I need or want any "help" from any of my fellow students. 

Harold hit the nail on the head.  It cuts down on the number of papers or results to grade.  Plus, it allows idiots to pass thus boosting attendance, thus more money.

I just told the rest of the group to STFU, "proofread" the paper I wrote, and then turn it in claiming the entire group helped write it.  If there were intelligent people in the group, we'd rotate who did the work. 


In the real world, folks eventually do notice who are the workers and who are not.  If you provide a bit of viciousness and ruthlessness, the time required to differentiate is significantly reduced. 

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

[b If you provide a bit of viciousness and ruthlessness, the time required to differentiate is significantly reduced.  ][/b]


a man after my own heart! i have a review that says "works with a chain saw but gets results"

[RevDisk]

If you provide a bit of viciousness and ruthlessness, the time required to differentiate is significantly reduced.

a man after my own heart! i have a review that says "works with a chain saw but gets results"

My last review included "Does not play well with others", just prior to "customer relations" section of my review being removed.  The Powers That Be determined that my effectiveness can best be gauged by how many people want my head on a pike. 

People can and will tolerate chainsaws so long as the chainsaw in question is reasonably polite, even in application, and first and foremost, discreet.

[Nightfall]

I like group work, that isn't graded.  I HATE group work that is.  I do not want my 4.0 depending on some other idiot.  I work hard, usually get stuff done right, and always on time.  Too many other people just don't.  All too often I end up taking charge, and doing half the work because too many other people are too damn dumb to do it well enough themselves.

Sorry, I've got a group project that just started, and it worries me.  I have nightmares of my 97% in the class dropping hard because of some lazy incompetent... guess I just needed to rant, too.  

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

and if you deliver the bottom line.  when i interview for management jobs i point out i've never had an unemployment claim in 20 years outside of a couple cases where places just closed. and that i've fired  a union shop steward.


the same guy that gave me the chain saw review also gave me one that said  outstanding employee  should be watched at all times.   he was a great boss  knocked the crap outa me once though   and did such a good job i never wanted it to happen again. former pro hockey player with bad knees   knees did not affect his fighting and he held back on me. i know he did cause i saw him hit someone else once full tilt and the guy went to his knees and cried. obviosly i'm not too bright cause we fought AFTER that

[41magsnub]

Let me add that in the workplace, most groups have a manager and/or designated leader involved.  Helps to attenuate the ceaseless dithering found in some groups.

Amen, group think drives me up the wall.  I'm cool with group work as long as there is somebody in charge, doesn't necessarily have to be me, but somebody better be calling the shots.

[Harold Tuttle]

(Students of different abilities get different level jobs.  If you graduate as an A+ student, you shouldn't expect you'll land a job with a company where the C student is your equal)

Nope, the C student's Frat brother's Father is the CEO, The C student becomes your boss