Topic: Bang Your Head on Your Desk - the thread of teaching despair!

[marshwiggle]

I never assign group projects without incorporating an element of anonymous peer review that is factored into a student's grade.  It doesn't solve the problem of freeloading entirely, but does provide an incentive for students not to slack off.

I've done two approaches, separately, both imperfect but both help I think:
-Peer review. Their grade has a component determined by the average grade given, anonymously, by their team mates.
-The other one is what I like to think of as "real world rules" - freelancing or starting your own business are not theoretical constructs in all fields, and neither are quitting or getting fired. Thus I let those who want to to go it alone, and they can also subdivide the original team however they choose. Thus while the initial teams are assigned to them, they don't have to stay intact.

I came up with something like this a few years ago for a course where students do a project with a partner. So far no-one's ever taken that option, so I haven't seen it in practice.

I'd be interested to hear more about options like this, because I think it's a good idea.

[traductio]

I never assign group projects without incorporating an element of anonymous peer review that is factored into a student's grade.  It doesn't solve the problem of freeloading entirely, but does provide an incentive for students not to slack off.

I've done two approaches, separately, both imperfect but both help I think:
-Peer review. Their grade has a component determined by the average grade given, anonymously, by their team mates.
-The other one is what I like to think of as "real world rules" - freelancing or starting your own business are not theoretical constructs in all fields, and neither are quitting or getting fired. Thus I let those who want to to go it alone, and they can also subdivide the original team however they choose. Thus while the initial teams are assigned to them, they don't have to stay intact.

I came up with something like this a few years ago for a course where students do a project with a partner. So far no-one's ever taken that option, so I haven't seen it in practice.

I'd be interested to hear more about options like this, because I think it's a good idea.

Except in cases where projects must be done in groups (which is rare in my courses), I always give students the option of working alone or in a group. I do this for papers, too, especially now during online teaching -- my approach to cheating is simply to say any resource or friend they want to consult is fair game (within the rules of academic honesty), and then to write exams that require them to synthesize ideas. The idea is that having Wikipedia at your fingertips won't help or hinder your work, since the answers won't be found there anyway. The same idea for working in self-formed groups, if they so choose -- there's value in having someone to develop ideas with. As long as group-members know they're getting the exact same grade and the exact same feedback from me (something I tell them upfront), I'm fine with that. It puts the onus on them to choose groups wisely, if they want to choose them at all, and then to find ways to work together productively.

For the last set of papers I just finished grading, about 10 papers (of 65) were co-written. Added bonus: fewer papers for me to grade.

[marshwiggle]

I never assign group projects without incorporating an element of anonymous peer review that is factored into a student's grade.  It doesn't solve the problem of freeloading entirely, but does provide an incentive for students not to slack off.

I've done two approaches, separately, both imperfect but both help I think:
-Peer review. Their grade has a component determined by the average grade given, anonymously, by their team mates.
-The other one is what I like to think of as "real world rules" - freelancing or starting your own business are not theoretical constructs in all fields, and neither are quitting or getting fired. Thus I let those who want to to go it alone, and they can also subdivide the original team however they choose. Thus while the initial teams are assigned to them, they don't have to stay intact.

I came up with something like this a few years ago for a course where students do a project with a partner. So far no-one's ever taken that option, so I haven't seen it in practice.

I'd be interested to hear more about options like this, because I think it's a good idea.

Except in cases where projects must be done in groups (which is rare in my courses), I always give students the option of working alone or in a group. I do this for papers, too, especially now during online teaching -- my approach to cheating is simply to say any resource or friend they want to consult is fair game (within the rules of academic honesty), and then to write exams that require them to synthesize ideas. The idea is that having Wikipedia at your fingertips won't help or hinder your work, since the answers won't be found there anyway. The same idea for working in self-formed groups, if they so choose -- there's value in having someone to develop ideas with. As long as group-members know they're getting the exact same grade and the exact same feedback from me (something I tell them upfront), I'm fine with that. It puts the onus on them to choose groups wisely, if they want to choose them at all, and then to find ways to work together productively.

For the last set of papers I just finished grading, about 10 papers (of 65) were co-written. Added bonus: fewer papers for me to grade.

The interesting thing in Stockman's rules is the chance for groups to dissolve during the project; so that people don't have to stay in a group that turned out to be dysfunctional. Having people start out as individuals  is much easier.

[evil_physics_witchcraft]

A student who has been giving me crap all semester is now waiting in my WebEx (I just got an email).

Um, it's Spring Break and I'm having surgery tomorrow, so NO, I am not meeting you. You didn't follow directions. You didn't email me. You tried to turn in labs over a month late.

Just NO!

[kiana]

For the last set of papers I just finished grading, about 10 papers (of 65) were co-written. Added bonus: fewer papers for me to grade.

I had a similar proportion in math projects. Added bonus: The ones that were done in groups tended to have the very best scores; most students who worked as individuals did not come anywhere near the quality.

[the_geneticist]

A student who has been giving me crap all semester is now waiting in my WebEx (I just got an email).

Um, it's Spring Break and I'm having surgery tomorrow, so NO, I am not meeting you. You didn't follow directions. You didn't email me. You tried to turn in labs over a month late.

Just NO!

Put your email in vacation mode so it auto replies that you are not available.  Or reply with some boilerplate "Course grades have been submitted to the registrar."

[Stockmann]

I never assign group projects without incorporating an element of anonymous peer review that is factored into a student's grade.  It doesn't solve the problem of freeloading entirely, but does provide an incentive for students not to slack off.

I've done two approaches, separately, both imperfect but both help I think:
-Peer review. Their grade has a component determined by the average grade given, anonymously, by their team mates.
-The other one is what I like to think of as "real world rules" - freelancing or starting your own business are not theoretical constructs in all fields, and neither are quitting or getting fired. Thus I let those who want to to go it alone, and they can also subdivide the original team however they choose. Thus while the initial teams are assigned to them, they don't have to stay intact.

I came up with something like this a few years ago for a course where students do a project with a partner. So far no-one's ever taken that option, so I haven't seen it in practice.

I'd be interested to hear more about options like this, because I think it's a good idea.

In this particular course, for logistical reasons the enrolled students were divided into teams of 4. In the Before Times, students self-assembled into these teams, and I don't think there was ever an instance of them breaking them up, though it was always an option. Since we've been doing this online, the "teams" have been assigned to them and some students have indeed gone it alone or split the original team into smaller teams. Nothing is set in stone about the teams until their reports are submitted; in that sense there is no default - they are in a "team" in that they have common deadlines and data sets but they can work from the start as a team or not.

[teach_write_research]

So how do you deal with the freeloader problem?   Denying its existence, or requiring undergrads to solve it themselves, both are more or less nonstarters.   Even in fields that require collaborative skills.

That must be difficult if you deny the freeloader problem or require students to solve it themselves.

I use a definition of freeloader
1. multiple students in the group report concerns
2. student has multiple missing individual assignments
3. student shows no efforts to catch-up or participate
4. my communication/meeting with the student shows no major disruptions - one person's perception of a freeloader might actually be a student in crisis

The consequence is then point adjustments such that they only get credit for the parts of the project they contributed to, with an opportunity to complete it independently.

[Langue_doc]

Writing class was given an exercise on in-text citations. The exercise and the answer key are on the MLA website. Guess how many students found the answer key and used that information to complete their assignment? Guess how I found that the students had found the answer key? The directions were to correct the mistakes in the paragraph. The answer key also included explanations for the mistakes. The explanations are in boxes in the margins. Student assignments also contain explanations identical or almost identical to those in the answer key in boxes in the margins. The directions did not ask for explanations. One student uploaded the answer key as Stu's assignment, so now I have to report Stu. Argh!!!!!

[evil_physics_witchcraft]

Writing class was given an exercise on in-text citations. The exercise and the answer key are on the MLA website. Guess how many students found the answer key and used that information to complete their assignment? Guess how I found that the students had found the answer key? The directions were to correct the mistakes in the paragraph. The answer key also included explanations for the mistakes. The explanations are in boxes in the margins. Student assignments also contain explanations identical or almost identical to those in the answer key in boxes in the margins. The directions did not ask for explanations. One student uploaded the answer key as Stu's assignment, so now I have to report Stu. Argh!!!!!

Dang!!!

[Langue_doc]

Students were given the opportunity to revise a couple of assignments for higher grades. Guess how many of them were actual revisions? One student was creative enough to use a different font for the same assignment.

I'll have to start taking off points for submitting so-called "revised" assignments.

The head bang is for the time I spent comparing the "revised" assignments with the original ones.

Same class, yet another opportunity to revise an essay for a higher grade.

Other than moving a few words around in the introductory paragraph, "revised" essays are identical to the original essays. One supposedly "revised" essay now has a missing title.

If students refuse to read the feedback and waste their time merely shuffling a few words around intead of actually revising, which would help with their upcoming assignments, it's their tuition money going down the toilet. I'm paid to give detailed comments, so I'm not complaining.

[marshwiggle]

Students were given the opportunity to revise a couple of assignments for higher grades. Guess how many of them were actual revisions? One student was creative enough to use a different font for the same assignment.

I'll have to start taking off points for submitting so-called "revised" assignments.

The head bang is for the time I spent comparing the "revised" assignments with the original ones.

Same class, yet another opportunity to revise an essay for a higher grade.

Other than moving a few words around in the introductory paragraph, "revised" essays are identical to the original essays. One supposedly "revised" essay now has a missing title.

If students refuse to read the feedback and waste their time merely shuffling a few words around intead of actually revising, which would help with their upcoming assignments, it's their tuition money going down the toilet. I'm paid to give detailed comments, so I'm not complaining.

Are there any high schools where points are given for merely submitting a "revised" version of something, regardless of whether anything was changed? It seems to me there must be something in these students' pasts making them think this will work.

[apl68]

Students were given the opportunity to revise a couple of assignments for higher grades. Guess how many of them were actual revisions? One student was creative enough to use a different font for the same assignment.

I'll have to start taking off points for submitting so-called "revised" assignments.

The head bang is for the time I spent comparing the "revised" assignments with the original ones.

Same class, yet another opportunity to revise an essay for a higher grade.

Other than moving a few words around in the introductory paragraph, "revised" essays are identical to the original essays. One supposedly "revised" essay now has a missing title.

If students refuse to read the feedback and waste their time merely shuffling a few words around intead of actually revising, which would help with their upcoming assignments, it's their tuition money going down the toilet. I'm paid to give detailed comments, so I'm not complaining.

Are there any high schools where points are given for merely submitting a "revised" version of something, regardless of whether anything was changed? It seems to me there must be something in these students' pasts making them think this will work.

It makes you wonder, all right.

Understand that there are high schools where submitting anything for an assignment is basically passing work.  A lot of posters here at The Fora deal with students who have been accustomed to having to clear a very, very low bar in all sorts of things.

[fishbrains]

I've worked in high schools for our dual enrollment program where the lowest grade a teacher would give on an assignment was a 60. The policy was actually that the teacher couldn't assign a final grade for the course lower than a 60 without the special permission of the principal; but, of course, the grade book had to involve some kind of math to justify the final grade coming out to a 60. (Note: This policy obviously didn't apply to dual enrollment).

My dual enrollment students often complained about some of their other HS classes where students would just put their names on blank pieces of paper, hand them in, and receive a 60 for a grade; these slackers would then suddenly work "hard" the last few weeks to bring the grade up to something that was barely passing. My students questioned the value of receiving the same high school diploma as these students. I pointed out that this might be one of the reasons they were taking a dual enrollment course--that they were playing the long-qame. They were not amused.

Oddly enough, the "60" policy has a certain logic. If a student earns less than a 60 in a given quarter, there would be no reason for that student to even try for the next quarter because the averaged grades couldn't be passing no matter what the student did for the next quarter. What a mess.

[Caracal]

I've worked in high schools for our dual enrollment program where the lowest grade a teacher would give on an assignment was a 60. The policy was actually that the teacher couldn't assign a final grade for the course lower than a 60 without the special permission of the principal; but, of course, the grade book had to involve some kind of math to justify the final grade coming out to a 60. (Note: This policy obviously didn't apply to dual enrollment).

My dual enrollment students often complained about some of their other HS classes where students would just put their names on blank pieces of paper, hand them in, and receive a 60 for a grade; these slackers would then suddenly work "hard" the last few weeks to bring the grade up to something that was barely passing. My students questioned the value of receiving the same high school diploma as these students. I pointed out that this might be one of the reasons they were taking a dual enrollment course--that they were playing the long-qame. They were not amused.

Oddly enough, the "60" policy has a certain logic. If a student earns less than a 60 in a given quarter, there would be no reason for that student to even try for the next quarter because the averaged grades couldn't be passing no matter what the student did for the next quarter. What a mess.

In practice, I don't really give grades lower than 60 if a student has made something vaguely approaching a good faith effort to do the assignment. Lower than that is for when the student turned something in, but the thing was so deeply inadequate that the credit they get for that should be limited. However, if you don't enforce that very low standard you end up with ridiculous results. I'm fine with students who get a C in my course with a pretty minimal amount of effort and application, but you do have to do that minimum.