group projects

Post Reply New Topic

My way of dealing with group projects is as follows.

Me: Who wants an A?

Various people: .... me?

Me: Then siddown, shuddup, and stay out of my way.

Various people: .... OK!

Me.... *works*

Later: A

that reminds me of what happened last year, we were supposed to be communicating online through the school blackboard website. this is very important to me. I am really rigid, don't text me, IM me or e-mail me, the school program is what we are supposed to do projects on. Some girl got my phone number and called me. I hate talking to people on the phone unless we are really close. Like, I have one ex that I like to talk with on the phone, that's about it. I never called her back, I just did my work. When I got there they had done my work for me cause I didn't call the girl back (in my defense it was long distance, too). So I went to my instructor and said here is my contribution do you want it, and she said put it with my group paper so I did. Before we even got started I specifically made a point of establishing that we were going to communicate through the e-mail program on that school program, I've taken tons of online classes and it has never been a problem before. But they didn't listen, and the girl acted snotty because I didn't call her back. Like I wasn't participating, when in fact I had my work done before she even called me, which she would have known if she'd check the stupid school online class program, because I freaking sent my contribution to everyone in the group in a word document. NIMRODS...and that is not the word I want to use. I guess I am in for it, but I am hoping for alot bigger nerd quotient this time around since it's a computer curriculum and maybe we can all be awkward about it together, fingers crossed.

I told a nice lady about my troubles with groupwork once. I told her about people "freeloading" off of me and how people always chatted off task. She said that this kind of groupwork isn't what happens in real life in the workplace.

So, if this kind of work doesn't happen in real life, then why was I being forced to work this way to complete my learning course? If this style of working doesn't happen in real life, then why was I being told by careers people and teachers that it did happen in real life? Why was I being told that if I didn't become a team player, I would be a failure.

This woman was absolutely right.
In real life, many people work alongside each other, they don't often all sit in a circle as this groupwork approach avocates. In the workplace, I have worked very successfully alongside other people doing my own task. I have helped others on a one to one basis very successfully too and yet, on learning courses, this kind of working alongside approach isn't credited or even recognised.

I think that learning to get along with others and communication is important.
I just don't understand why teamwork is being encouraged to the exclusion of other things, like helping people constructively and actually learning the material.

Oh and actually getting the job done.

Last edited by AmberEyes on 21 Mar 2010, 1:33 am, edited 4 times in total.

I don't really mind group projects; they take a load of work off my shoulders.

I totally dislike group projects. I actually get a tad bit angry inside when the professor or someone else suggests that we work in groups. Especially when the project can easily be done individually. I think the hardest part about working in groups is actually forming the group. I always awkwardly wait for people to finish forming their groups and see if people are missing a member.

Thinking about it, an unstructured groupwork "team" approach would be incompatible for someone who was determined, driven, systematic, self-reliant, an independent thinker, industrious, self motivated, not gossipy and enjoyed working solo.

: Right class everyone get into groups of 4...

: I see you don't have a group, who do you want to go with?....
: uuhh, well, no bo..."
: Come and work with these if you want...
: Oh... ok...
: blah blah blah, what are we doing blah blah blah....

I normally just go with the group work since I seem to be pretty good at working as a group but it would be easier if I already knew the person or who I tend to feel comfortable with.

Me with a group of strangers, I would probably not say a single word for a whole blooming hour, it would used to take me days and days, weeks and weeks to get used to being in groups when I was younger which I seem to gotten over now.

I'm even doing one now in my media lesson on interview young people on what they think of the society today which is NOT going to be easy plus I might also get filmed at the same time.

Alot of teachers in the States don't even know how to deal with autistic individuals in classrooms, I went to a community college and all the teacher did was ask questions on how to treat me, if I could do the work or not, didn't even know if group work was going to be challenging, thank goodness it isn't for me.

Your post gives me hope. I, too, was recently told by my uni advisor that if I HAD to learn group work or I would never get a job. This upset me greatly. Perhaps I might be able to handle a bit of group work if it didn't mean we were constantly in each other's faces 100% of the time.

From what I can gather, there seem to be two schools of thought on this issue:

One camp seems to consist of older people who haven't had the teamwork approach rammed down their throats since they were five years old. These people seem to come from an era where education was about sitting quietly in rows of desks and learning things. Their training was skill orientated and revolved around solo assignments. This is the "Old School".

There's another camp: the "New School". This mainly consists of younger people, employers and educators who advocate the teamwork ethic. They believe that people learn best if they actively discuss things. They believe in pushing tables together to encourage discussion: so that the students face each other and not the board. They also believe in teaching inclusion: everyone should all join in and "hold hands" because they believe that this will increase people's emotional intelligence and will lead to social harmony. They seem to think that lone workers are being deliberately anti-social. They also think that it's better for a team of people to brainstorm than it is for one person to develop his/her own ideas. They believe that socially networking increases productivity. They believe that silent libraries should be transformed into resources centres filled with "productive chatter". They don't understand how anyone could learn or work anything out by his/herself.

amen. I hate this new crap. If they want people to learn well why not take tips from the smartest people (which alot of times are the ones who are not constantly jawing, in groups, etc). It was awful how much of this there was in my nursing program. maybe not coincidentally I have never seen so much cheating in a curriculum in my entire life. People texting through tests, etc. it was unreal. For online classes they would all call each other up in groups and take the test at once, assigning each person a certain number of questions to answer. It was unbelievable to me how much of an imposition my classmates felt doing one's own work was. I don't think they should abolish it I just don't think they should discriminate against people for whom this is torture and who prefer to do all of our own work very much to the unpleasant experience of having to negotiate tasks and anticipate for inferior output. and I really can't stand how people think libraries are places to go chat people up now.

Libraries? These overheated, highlighted public places with many people? I keep myself away from them if I don't have to go there.

Is education all about battery rearing kids now?

If that's true, then that's sad.
The outdoors can be a brilliant teacher.




I just think that it's ironic that supposedly "inclusive" approach actually alienates hard working, independent learners.

Is that really appreciating "diversity"?

Ever since I was young, I've been forced to sit at grouped desks; hold hands with people; express my inner feelings and sit in a circle in educational settings.

As a result of this emotional overload and enforced conformity, I now feel incredibly ill. I have also felt depressed as a result of other's social expectations of me and them wanting me to fit into a compliant mould. I have felt depressed because my solo style of contribution was deemed not valid. I also felt devalued as an individual and not able to express myself fully.

I think that emotions and camaraderie are very important and have their place, but do they really have to be forced onto people to the exclusion of everything else?


As I see it, the main reasons why I had difficulties were:

-The humiliation and ostracism that I felt at not being able to find a group to work with.
Also the humiliation of the teacher glaring at me as if to say:
"You're so intelligent, but lazy: you should've found a group by now."

-The social and emotional overload

-Being expected to be able to engage in fast, complex social processing: talking with more than one person at a time. Many successful adults have never been forced to do this kind of work, yet they have to tell the kids to do this because it's allegedly "what the government and employers want". I find this approach strange and alien. I was raised by my family to talk to one person at a time and to treat people equally. Feelings were reserved for special occasions or expressed wordlessly. I found out (the hard way) that this was completely incompatible with the work/social cultures I found in the schools I attended.

Unfortunately, I often acted out as a kid because I was often forced into social working situations that were beyond my capabilities for simultaneous social processing. I often felt trapped and angry. I remember feeling really confused and disorientated by the hubbub around me. I remember longing for my own personal space. When adults claimed that there was "something wrong" with me I said: "You don't understand." I didn't feel like there was anything wrong with me. I think a lot of people still don't understand.

When an astronomer came to school with a planetarium and lectured us, I calmed right down. It was quiet and I was engaged. The social pressure was off. It was fantastic. I asked him lots of interesting questions. I was really well behaved and my contribution was valued.


What about a more balanced approach?

Looking back on it, I would have much preferred my emotional issues to remain in my private life and socialised as a leisure activity. I would have preferred to do productive/creative work at school in a more independent way.


I think that people should be allowed a choice.
This approach works really well for some people and they really gain a lot of useful things from it.

The people who are more productive working alone, should be allowed to work alone and then report back, either by presentation or on a one to one basis.

That's my take on the whole thing.
I think that different learning/socialising styles should be accommodated and not stigmatised.


I think it's sad, that in order to go on formal learning course now, I'd have to declare myself as "disabled" because of the compulsory group-work. I find this ironic because I'm good at researching and learning the subject material. I've also helped a lot of people out one to one using my knowledge. People have appreciated this help and thanked me. These relationships were meaningful to me: cliquish relationships were not meaningful.

I've often felt socially disabled by the education system.

I love people and helping others, but not by being forced to interact with them constantly all day.


The ethos I grew up with at home was:
"Do good work to make friends."


The education system's ethos seems to be:
"Make friends to do good work."


These approaches are total opposites of each other.

I used to find it very difficult to work in a group. As many others on here, I preferred to work on my own.
So when I had to work in a group I would be on the outside and work on a designated task that would contribute to the project when it was finished.

There's also the issue of teachers asking people to get into groups without any detailed instruction on how to work in groups.


Also, there's little meantioned on dealing with cultural differences.

What about different styles of group work?

For example, I've noticed that many school based group activities revolve around abstract ideas. There's a group of people sitting facing each other and there's no physical focus or "touchstone" for the discussion. There's also a lot of direct eye contact. This eye contact can rapidly scan from person to person.

This contrasts sharply with my family's style of discussion: physical objects are used as anchors for the social interaction. If an abstract idea is being discussed, the book that it came from is placed on the table. Physical props and diagrams are used to move the discussion forward. Diagrams are drawn on pieces of paper to illustrate ideas and structures too remote to physically place on the table. Eye contact is brief and usually directed more towards the object being discussed. Wildlife is pointed to and discussed. I find this kind of interaction much more comfortable than the kind I was expected to do at school, even if people did often talk over each other and topics were either intense or meandered all over the place.

It's the same with informal social occasions, the tasks and objects drive the interaction.