Uni group project assessments

[Bellini12]

DD is 2nd year at uni. In the first year one of her module assessments was group work. Luckily she had one other girl who was motivated like her. 3 other lads involved - one did a little, one did the absolute bare minimum and one never even turned up! She said it was like pulling teeth trying to get the others to work/meet up to discuss. The 2 girls carried the project and they got an ok mark. They tried telling the tutors the situation but the tutor just sent various emails to the lazy participants to no avail.

Now she has another group task (obviously now all counts towards final mark). It’s random and she’s been put with 4 lads. She met (online) with them. 2 never even went to the related lectures or done any ground work/reading. Only 1 of the lads spoke! It wasn’t a confidence thing - It’s obvious they are not serious about their degree. DD accepts that’s she is going to have to carry the whole project and is already stressed. They make no allowances and everyone ends up with the same mark regardless of who does the work!

She hates these group assessments and they seem wholly unfair! I’ve read enough in the past to see this is quite common. Just wondered how other DC’s coped? Or do they just accept they won’t get the best mark? Such a shame when if she could pick a group she would pick her motivated peers!

Commenting to give this post a bump as am interested to see if anyone has any good solutions to this persistent issue.

Think of it as preparation for the real world. The marks are usually fairly insignificant proportionally. (Yes, I know it’s irritating).

As a former teaching prof, I didn’t set group work where students were effectively penalised for others’ laziness. Group work took place in formal teaching time (‘lectures’ or lab practicals) and each student wrote up their own paper afterwards for their individual marks. This rewarded personal attendance, effort and enthusiasm.

If any student had a fair reason for missing the session, I’d offer a tutorial or group catch up - but only once.

We were a highly regarded department.

How does your daughter feel about asking her named personal tutor for a 1:1 meeting? The whole arrangement sounds shaky. It has to come from her, though.

Your story brings back one of my own unfortunate experiences from uni.

I was a mature student our second year project was a group one involving a survey. There was a significant age difference between myself and the four other members. We had different skills sets. I had considerable experience at market research. Others in the group had more experience of statistical analysis . We worked together on some of the tasks. However I did the bulk of the interviewing. I also had a big input in designing the questionnaire. I was relying on reciprocal help with the final report since other group members had more experience in this area. We had decided at an earlier stage to do a group report. So everyone would have contributed to some degree and we would obtain the same mark.. At a later stage the rest of the group decided to do individual reports, leaving me high and dry. Yet they had profited from my earlier work in the interviewing stage. It meant that I felt at a loss over some of the statistical analysis needed for my final report.

I went to the tutor and explained the situation. She arranged an extra session for those students who felt they needed more support with the statistics. It was late on a friday and open to all the course participants. Only 4 of us turned up. so we got plenty of one to one assistance from the tutor. I was also able to call on my experience at the interview state, and therefore had access to a fund of knowledge which the other group members lacked. As a result I received a significantly higher mark for my individual report . It was of sufficient quality to pull my overall mark for the course up to a 2/1.

The others all got a 2.2 and were not pleased. They actually complained that I had got "extra help". The tutor responded that those who had shown up for the final session had done "extra work" whereas the rest had "voted with their feet". The result did not count towards my final degree but I was very careful to avoid group work thereafter. I was working for a 1st and there was a lot at stake.

If the final report contributes significantly to her degree then I would echo the suggestion to discuss this with her personal tutor. If necessary to lodge a grievance about the unfairness of the assessment procedure. Its all very well arguing that the real world is unfair and that employees in work situations often meet this problem. I had already decided to become an academic. I needed a 1st to be in with a chance to win funding for postgraduare work. So it made me pretty ruthless in pushing my own agenda. As an older student I had made a financial sacrifice to leave a job and go into higher education. In the workplace I have never hesitated to speak up assertively and name names when someone was clinging to my coat tails in a group or team task.

It is great training for real life, unfortunately!

If the mark is going to significantly affect her overall grade she needs to speak to the lecturer.

She also needs to tell the others on her group that she is not going to cover for them.

It's not great training for real life. It's a shit assessment style where other people get to have their award improvemed by others' hard work and the hard workers get an even higher workload and may even get their overall award dragged down by it. You can 'prepare people for the real world' by doing formative group work. Summative group work needs to get in the bin.

The only way I would suggest such assessment could be improved and made a bit fairer is if part of the assessment was graded on self- and peer-assessment of the process itself and individual contribution. And/or of grades were awarded individually and included assessment of contribution as well as the output itself.

My dd constantly complained about group work particularly when her grade depended on the effort of others

I work in a top tier uni in London, and in my department the group work all have a peer review element equating to around half of the marks. If a student(s) lodge a grievance during the project (most of which is done during lectures, and there is also a portion of the marks awarded by the academic for "involvement/engagement" [for want of a better word!]) then the whole thing is reviewed again by the second marker who will deduct marks from certain individuals and potentially award more marks to others.

There are students in every cohort who take the mickey and it is the same in the world of work too. She needs to discuss this with her tutor/programme team/lecturer (whichever is more appropriate in her dept) and see what they say about next steps, as this will not be the first or the last time it has happened so there will be precedent if not a policy around this which has previously been approved by External Examiners. However, she should avoid using emotive phrases like "lazy" and "not bothered" (as this can't be proven and is just an opinion) in her complaint and stick to the facts, like you mentioned with the online call, who attended, what the steps were going forward wrt soft deadlines - who met them, who didnt, was there an explaination at the time etc and the impact of this on her. This will aid the marking team as they will need to justify why they are deducting marks and unfortunately "student A told me that student B didnt do their fair share and I believe them" won't stand up if student B appeals and/or submits MCs at a later date.

DD2 had this on her course, but I think it was in her 1st year. She complained that she had never met one of the group members, such was his lack of commitment. Whilst moaning throughout the duration to anyone who didn’t run away, at the end there was a mechanism for reporting the contributions of each member. She went to town on that and her overall mark was not negatively impacted.
Your DD should speak to her personal tutor and/or the people who accredit the course to find out the mechanism for reporting non-contributors.

Schools don't even do this anymore; students are always assessed on their own work/contribution, even in subjects like drama, where they might be performing in a group. All work is individual, independent and not done in conjunction with other pupils. Unis are behind the times on this.

Exactly the same with my dd's second year. She was having to carry the group and was the only girl in the group. I told her to do all the work to get the mark, but make sure her name was stamped on everything. It was desperately unfair, but she dragged them all through a pass for the module.

I think it's really poorly structured to have students ' marks dependant on the work of others at this level. They are paying a fortune to get these degrees, and investment should be made in finding another way of doing this.

I did a masters as a mature student, and we managed to get special permission to choose our group of only mature students - we all had jobs, family commitments etc, and didn't have time to spend ages faffing about over assignments or coaching lazy students who didn't want to contribute.

As a lecturer, I always set group projects, but with the opportunity for an individual assessment alongside. And I see who is contributing and who isn't as each of my groups gets at least one tutoriual on their project.

So I"d say your DD's assessments are not well-designed in that from what you say, there is no individual component.

The thing is, this kind of team work is very much the way many modern workplaces are organised. There's a project and a deadline and a team. And the team has to sort out roles and deliver. Those lazy boys will not survive in that situation!

Some things your DD might do:

• See her tutor straightaway, with documented meeting times and who was there etc. Ask her tutor how the participation aspect will be marked. Don'rt appear to complain - just passing on information. Bear in mind, however, a tutor can't comment to one student on other students - that would be very unprofessional. But I always thank students who let me know what's going on in their groups.

• Use the staff-student committee in her department to raise the issue of how staff will assess different levels of participation. Try to get change. I've had some very good suggestions from students about how I can assess different levels of contribution - I'm very grateful for those ideas from students.

• Your DD should keep records of arrangements for group meetings, with an agenda and who was there etc. She should use her university email to do this, and then she can show the tutor who is there & who is not.

• Again, she should try to come across not as "snitching" but asking tutor's advice about how to manage the situation.

• She should remember that all her work will mean she knows so much more than the lazy boys. It's a great learning experience for her, although she may not feel this! Understandably.

• She could make sure she doesn't do the work for the lazy boys. They've relied on women doing stuff for them all their lives. Lazy boy undergrads really annoy me - so I have a lot of sympathy for your DD.

• She could go nuclear: divide up responsibility for different areas of the project. Do her bit, and leave the rest - the boys don't do the work, and she leaves them hanging. And then she appeals the mark. BUT she can only do this if she has kjept the tutor FULLY informed of the lack of participation and has regularly sought advice from the tutor - weekly, I'd recommend.

Good luck to her

This

I think it is a way to bump up the grades of those failing so they can get more £ out of them for another term, personally.

The people coasting know someone will swoop in and save the day and learn that this is the best way to operate in the world of work.

One thing I would say is that if your DD can get buy in from the other group members via email, then if they don't actually turn up to the meeting or do the work, se has evidence that they agreed to a meeting at a cewrtain time, then didn't turn up.

One thing I have noticed is that sometimes students think that they'll get "good marks" by driving everyone to distraction by 5 hour meetings every second day! (I exaggerate but only a bit).

That sounds ideal! I missed out on a 1st because as the most able student I was put in with the all of the ones who were failing. It completely destroyed my drive and really made me see these failing students were retaking everything and still passing because it is a business model, not about learning or work ethic.

I don’t believe I have ever set a group assignment that didn’t have an element of peer assessment in it.

I would regard it as the norm with group work. It seems not.

Better not do computer science. ds2 had 4 group work projects in his second year all with deadlines within the same week or so. Nightmare. They do at least have peer review so you can't get away with total non contribution.

Group projects at university are a nightmare and I am very grateful that the university that our youngest DC currently attends there are no group projects at all. Students can get plenty of useful group work experience in student societies where there is far less at stake without carrying freeloaders.

Ds lost his chance to get a first because of group work in second and third year, even peer assessed because the uni he was at did not like to bump you into the next grade banding despite documented evidence of everything Ds did. Compared to his international students in his assigned group who didn't give a shit about their grades, they told him they were over here for the UK uni experience before returning home to work in the family business so if they got a third they didn't care. Ds and another student lied about knowing one another to get assigned into a 2 member group project because they knew they cared about their work.

It was soul destroying for him, being at a top uni, feedback through all the channels @ParmaVioletTea recommends, every meeting attendance was documented and even overseen by a student mentor. Totally shit.

Knowing this Ds2 has chosen modules in year 2 based on final exam assessment and not group work having been burnt in first year. This isn't like the real world and a job, this potentially tanks your ability to get a graduate job if you can't get a 2:1. I wish universities would stop setting group project work.

Ds2 has attended every lecture in person, it started out with 200 in attendance, slowly dwindled down to 27 by the end of first year. Not really committed are they?

Group work is often essential for accreditation by professional bodies.

I think it is an essential skill that needs to be learned.

We've all been through it. It's infuriating.

I don't know if there's a presentation element of your daughter's group work but that's where you can get your own back at least. When they want the information for their section, she too can go radio silent. Also, if the tutor asks questions, they will come undone then.

On my psychology degree, we had to present our research a few times. I remember one boy who did nothing at all did come to the presentation and read off the slide. The tutor asked questions, the other students - previously disinterested in the whole thing, asked questions and he just didn't know anything. It was satisfying to watch.

Ultimately though, as unfair as it is. She will just have to try and engage the others or just do most of it herself.

I agree it's an essential skill but I think it is far better acquired in low or no stakes settings.