The goal of
students is often to do well in courses, where performance is measured by
letter grade. In cases where students are enrolled in many courses, it becomes
more difficult to be focused on each individual course. Grades are meant to act
as metrics for gauging student understanding, but does not always accomplish
its goal. Group projects have varying dynamics; some of which promote gift
exchange, while others condone opportunism. I have not been in many groups
where other members were averse to contributing to the group’s success, but
when it did happen, the situation was far from desirable. At least partially,
the amount of effective teamwork that occurs in a group project is dependent
upon the rules for the assignment and the punishment(s) for poor performance/engagement.
David Brooks’ “The Power of Altruism” is
complicated when modeling academic group behavior. When considering the
conditions of college classes and perceived life after school, where good
grades lead to better job/grad school opportunities, the threat of opportunism
is too strong for there not to be punishment for lack of contribution. The
issue with punishing someone is determining where to draw the line between
slacking and participation.
Throughout this
post, I will discuss four, unique group project situations. The project is a
group paper, like the one that we have been assigned. The class has 30 students. Each group has
three students. Two of the groups have a non-participating/poorly participating
group member, who I will call a BAD APPLE. Two of the groups have specialized
grading for each member. These four cases are oversimplified, and do not
contain all of the possible outcomes, since participation is hard to evaluate.
In many situations, I would imagine it is an inefficient use of time to try to
determine who contributed to what and how much. Also, to simplify the table,
each group with a BAD APPLE only has one, whereas in real life there is no
limit. This model also assumes that BAD APPLES have faith in the other group
members to get the assignment completed.
Case 1: Everyone
gets the same grade. Everyone participates.
Case 2: Everyone
gets the same grade. Some groups have a BAD APPLE.
Case 3: Each
member gets a specialized grade. Everyone participates.
Case 4: Each
member gets a specialized grade. Some groups have a BAD APPLE.
|
Same Grade. No bad apple.
|
Same Grade. BAD APPLE
|
|
Specialized Grade. No bad apple.
|
Specialized Grade. BAD APPLE.
|
Thought I have
never graded anything in a university setting, I assume Case 1 is the easiest
to grade, because in this case, only ten projects need grading. The students do
not mind that they are receiving the same grade as their group members because
everyone contributes. The students perform better because they collaborate and
form a more cohesive paper. This is not to say that the groups are satisfied
with their grades, but instead that they believe that it was okay to grade them
as a group. This represents an ideal equilibrium, where both the professor and
student are better off.
Case 2 describes a
situation where the students who wants to do well in the course the most will
complete the assignment. The fully-participating group members must make up for
the less active member, broadening the division of labor, and creating a poorer
paper than groups who did not have a BAD APPLE. The grader still has ten
projects. The students may be disgruntled, which may lead to poorer evals. This
situation is unlikely.
Case 3 describes a
waste of the professor’s time, but it could also lead to a waste of time for
the students. Specialized grading requires a means to evaluate the contribution
of each group member, which is more trouble than it’s worth in this scenario,
encouraging students to spend their time inefficiently. Also, following the
idea of “The Power of Altruism,” students may act selfishly, and focus on their
own portion of the paper, as opposed to making it cohesive, lowering the
quality of the assignment.
Case 4 describes a
catch all scenario, where those who slack are caught, and those that perform
well are rewarded. The professor is worse off since they have to grade 30
students on 10 assignments. The students are possibly worse off if they act
selfishly, which, following “The Power of Altruism,” is expected.
I'd like you to consider further variants on what you've written. First, supposed the students in the group have different abilities to do the group project. Assume they all contribute but do so according to their ability. Are they all happy that each group member gets the same grade? Or does the highest ability person feel the others shouldn't get that grade but that person has made the largest contribution? Put another way, you seem to be implicitly assuming that there is little variation in ability within a group. Is that a good assumption to be making?
ReplyDeleteNext, let's consider the behavior of your bad apple students. You treat that behavior as exogenous in what you wrote. (Some of your classmates did likewise.) Might it be that the behavior has some underlying explanation, some issue the student is confronting, that if managed would convert the bad apple into a contributor?
Now I will ask about this from the good students point of view. Do they have an obligation to help the bad apple overcome whatever issue is holding the bad apple back? Or is that an unfair burden to place on them? If you address these questions, you might get deeper into this post. (I don't think there are right answers here, but there are interesting arguments to be made.)
I don't know if I agree with your statement that specialized grades would be a waste of time. In the past, I have done group projects in which each member "grades" the other members based on how much they participated and the quality of their work for the group. I think that this system would provide increased motivation for everyone to do their part while also rewarding those who work the hardest.
ReplyDeleteI would have liked to see a way that this idea could factor into your model and how you think it would affect student performance.
I agree with Joan’s comments, and I think specialized grades would not be a waste of time too. As Professor Arvan mentioned, even if everyone contributes to the project, there is ability differences among group members. So even if everyone participates, specialized grading will have a total different outcome with everyone getting the same grade, therefore could not be considered a waste of time. I do agree that when grades are specialized, students may act selfishly and focus on their own part of the project. So in my opinion, a better way would be including both individual and group components in the grades. E.g. 60% individual grade and 40% group grade. This might help to solve the issues. Students will do their best to get their 60% individual grade, and since the group grade component is pretty large as well, they will also put effort in coordinating their individual parts to make the project more cohesive. I think this way of grading will produce a better overall outcome than any of the 4 cases you mentioned.
ReplyDeleteLastly, I agree with Joan’s idea on peer evaluation. In the past, when I was doing a project when there are “BAD APPLES”, and the grade is given as a group, the thing I wanted the most was a peer evaluation… This may increase the group member’s motivation to contribute.
Finally, I think the situations students face are much more simple than the real world and workplace. Teachers and professors will try to evaluate each individual and guarantee fairness as much as possible for group work. However, a lot of the times in the real world/workplace people will care more about the ultimate outcome of your team, they might not care if there are “BAD APPLES” or not in your team. So I think being able to influence and motivate people, know how to deal with “BAD APPLES” and coordinate a team would be a critical skill for real life.
After re-examining my post, I think that a bad apple would be anyone who does not have equal ability to the other members of the group. Varying skill level is to be expected in real life, but that makes group project behavior increasingly difficult to model. Perhaps the bad apple does not like the other students, or they have a lot of outside schoolwork. Maybe there are issues at home. However, if students are graded by the information that they can display that they've learned, inevitably, they will not be able perform as well unless there are special rules for them.
ReplyDelete