SUBJECT: Groups and Lab Community
DATE: 2/95; 4/95; 11/95
Bob Ketcham has invited comment on group dynamics:
What I'm guessing has to
>happen is that the whole lab section needs to be functioning as a group
>at the beginning - working in one area, exploring what they do and do
not
>know already, exploring possibilities, and drafting potential experiments
>- the give and take, trial and error preludes to making decisions. Then
>they can break out into voluntary groups to do different things, but
they
>will still be able to talk and consult across groups, and will be able
to
>communicate their results to an informed audience.
>
I agree heartily and I think we have to accept up front that expecting students
to work cooperatively and effectively in groups flies in the face of many
of the ingrained assumptions that students have (and we often support) about
how to succeed at university. I am aware that much of what I do in the lab
has a subversive quality to it. I encourage them to cooperate rather than
compete, to let go of the "how many marks do I get for jumping through
this hoop" mindset, to discover a way to coordinate the exercise such
that everyone gets out on time, to believe that the "right answers"
come from thinking rather than knowing more stuff.
I credit any success I enjoy to a broader effort to engender a sense of
community in the room. We make a big production of meeting lab partners
and potential group members nearby. On the first day I suggest one way groups
in general might organize themselves is by defining or ritualizing responsibilities:
The Boss - responsible for overseeing the project and ensuring that everyone
has an opportunity to participate, buys coffee,
The Scribe - records and communicates decisions, data etc.,
The Timekeeper - relieves everyone else from time worries, reminds group
of impending due dates etc.,
The Coach - maintains morale, facilitates meetings, reminds everyone of
their job.
Students assume roles according to birthdate and I assign their first task:
In the next 4 minutes, develop a list of questions to put to the instructors.
No administrivia about the course allowed. Myself and 4 TAs line up at the
front of the room and field questions about our favourite beer, hobbies,
past interactions with law enforcement personel, future intentions, past
academics, current research interests and, of course, what we would take
to a desert island. Students are really asking, "Are you like me?"
The answer is "Yes and No" and the mood is set for more humane
interaction among students and instructors.
Everyone wears name tags. They hate it. I've discovered this paradox in
which students on the whole complain about not being seen - being known
as only a number- and yet are reluctant to help me learn their names. Is
this a widespread phenomenon?
Do others engage in deliberate community building exercises among students
and faculty?
That the atmosphere and expectations in my labs are different from others
is a theme I play up daily. I point out that, in other courses, most students
will meet in the same room with the same 20 other people many times during
the term and they will never know who those people are. I try to emphasize
the tremendous resource of knowledge and support that is in the room and
encourage them to access it by setting up the lab such that they are invited
to go beyond the few familiar faces to discover peers with similar interests.
If we all (students and instructors alike) considered our labs to house
an interdependent community of diversely talented people trying to understand
the world rather than just containing 25 students trying to get maximum
marks from 1 professor in as little time as possible, the issues of working
in groups would be moot.
The Cyberfloor is yours.
Tom
Tom Haffie Phone: 519-679-2111 (6502)
Department of Plant Sciences FAX: 661-3935
University of Western Ontario e-mail: thaffie@julian.uwo.ca
London, ON, Canada
N6A 5B7
Hi:
I've enjoyed the comments on lab groups -- and would like to ask a couple
of specific questions. These are based on the model of having groups work
together over multiple lab periods (or for the entire semester). First,
do y'all assign students to groups, or let them make up their own? I ask
because I've found that, while students seem more comfortable when they
make up their own groups, that approach frequently results in an unequal
distribution of highly talented (and, conversely, highly underprepared)
students among groups. I've tried assigning students randomly to groups,
and that seems to help -- except that students tend to resent it.
Another question is how to deal with those few (but not few enough) students
who simply don't pull their weight -- either refusing to participate, or
simply absent regularly?
Which leads to my last question -- how do you deal with absences generally?
If only one or two group members are present, do you have them work as a
pair, or assign them to another group with missing people? Or am I the only
one who has this problem? :)
Thanks!
Kerry Kilburn
Dept. of Biology
West Virginia State College
kilburn@wvnwvsc.wvnet.edu
>Hi:
>I've enjoyed the comments on lab groups -- and would like to ask a couple
>of specific questions. These are based on the model of having groups
work
>together over multiple lab periods (or for the entire semester). First,
do
>y'all assign students to groups, or let them make up their own? I ask
>because I've found that, while students seem more comfortable when they
>make up their own groups, that approach frequently results in an unequal
>distribution of highly talented (and, conversely, highly underprepared)
>students among groups. I've tried assigning students randomly to groups,
>and that seems to help -- except that students tend to resent it.
>
More and more of our labs are done in groups, and we find that assigning
groups works fairly well.
>Another question is how to deal with those few (but not few enough)
>students who simply don't pull their weight -- either refusing to
>participate, or simply absent regularly?
We use the approach that if a student does not do his/her work, their grade
will clearly reflect that situation - the very threat of a D or F seems
to work for those not willing to work on their own.
>Which leads to my last question -- how do you deal with absences generally?
>If only one or two group members are present, do you have them work
as a
>pair, or assign them to another group with missing people? Or am I the
>only one who has this problem? :)
An unexcused absence results in 25% of the grade being zero, while a second
unexcused absence results in a course grade of F. Since labs tend to be
small, it's much easier keeping track of people there than it is in large
lecture courses.
>
George Edick
RPI - Dept. Biology
Troy, NY 12180
edickg@rpi.edu
>Hi:
>I've enjoyed the comments on lab groups -- and would like to ask a couple
>of specific questions. These are based on the model of having groups
work
>together over multiple lab periods (or for the entire semester). First,
do
>y'all assign students to groups, or let them make up their own? I ask
>because I've found that, while students seem more comfortable when they
>make up their own groups, that approach frequently results in an unequal
>distribution of highly talented (and, conversely, highly underprepared)
>students among groups. I've tried assigning students randomly to groups,
>and that seems to help -- except that students tend to resent it.
>
I give TAs the option of determining lab groups composition in whichever
way they see fit. I tell them that past TAs have had success creating lab
groups that work by giving students a small piece of paper with a numeral
on it the first day students come to lab. There are four copies of each
numeral, and students with the same number end up at the same lab table
as lab partners -- a semester-long arrangement unless personality conflicts
or attrition make rearrangements necessary. This works well to split up
social groups (like roommates, fraternity brothers) and create groups whose
sole function is to work well together and help each other learn. TAs who
have done it this way always continue the practice in subsequent semesters.
I often ask how students react to this type of lab-partner assignment and
have never heard of any negative feedback from students.
>Another question is how to deal with those few (but not few enough)
>students who simply don't pull their weight -- either refusing to
>participate, or simply absent regularly?
In general, a way to deal with this if students are working together in
groups is to have them evaluate each other in a fashion that protects anonymity
(otherwise you will not get honest feedback).
>
>Which leads to my last question -- how do you deal with absences generally?
>If only one or two group members are present, do you have them work
as a
>pair, or assign them to another group with missing people? Or am I the
>only one who has this problem? :)
>
Our practice is that having any more than two unexcused absences from lab
results in the loss of all points connected with the lab portion of the
course. Since the lab accounts for about a third of their total points,
this usually results in failure of the course or, at the very least, in
having to re-take the course. This has happened only once among the nearly
2,000 students that have been through the course in the last three years.
Michael Dini
Biology Dept.
Texas Tech University
y3mld@ttacs.ttu.edu
Hi all,
If you assign lab groups, do you keep them together for the entire semester?
I've had some luck with assigning groups, but then mixing them up every
several weeks. In trying to get students to see the advantages of group
work, I've also had them first write reports individually. Then, before
they get any comments back, they meet as a group and write one group report
on the same lab. This way, they work together using each other's ideas to
create the best report they can. Each version is graded, with the group
version receiving more weight.
I'm a little leary of group work being voluntary. First, it's usually impossible
for a student to complete exercises in a reasonable period of time if working
alone. Second, if group work is voluntary, often the lone "non-traditional"
(i.e., older) student is shunned, as is the lone minority student, foreign
national, etc.
One problem I have is in trying to get the groups talking with each other,
so (as Bob Ketcham has stated) you get the whole lab section working together,
helping each other solve the problems at hand. I schedule group presentations
(a "conference" complete with munchies and drinks) of results
at several points throughout the semester. In one lab on plant hormonal
interactions, each group's work during the 2nd part (week) of the lab builds
upon the work of another group during the 1st week. So they *have* to listen
and ask questions of each other during the group presentations. It really
seems, though, that once I remove any strict incentive (an obvious better
grade) for groups working together, they revert back to their isolation.
As Tom Haffie mentioned, the key is probably a concerted effort toward better
community-building in the lab.
Mike O'Donnell
--------------------------------------------------------
Michael A. O'Donnell
Dept. of Biology
Trinity College
Hartford, CT 06106-3100
michael.odonnell@mail.trincoll.edu
>>In one lab on plant hormonal
>>interactions, each group's work during the 2nd part (week) of the
lab
>>builds upon the work of another group during the 1st week. So they
*have*
>>to listen and ask questions of each other during the group presentations.
Kerry Kilburn asks:
>I'd like to hear more about how you set this up. I've done multi-period
>projects in which students build on their own group's work; how, exactly,
>do you get the students to follow up on another group's work? Do you
>assign them? Or let groups choose?
In the first lab, student groups (I've been trying rotating group assignments)
use lettuce seedlings to investigate the influence of both light and various
concentrations of a hormone on both hypocotyl and root growth. Each group
either chooses, or is assigned one of four hormones to investigate: giberellic
acid, abscisic acid, indoleacetic acid, or kinetin. (Note: I let them "choose"
their hormone, but manipulate choices to ensure equal coverage of all 4,
so some of the last groups to choose may be told to go to their second or
third "choice.") Each group submits their data (mean hypocotyl
and root lengths of 48-hr seedlings) to the course folders on the campus
computer network, making results available to all students.
In the second lab, each group presents their results from last week to the
lab section. Each group then chooses a second hormone (again, I may manipulate
this "choice") and designs and carries out an experiment to answer
a question about the interactive effects of these hormones on lettuce root
and hypocotyl growth. To keep things simple, last year I told them that
if hormone 'A' was the one they used in the 1st week, then investigate the
effect of one concentration of hormone 'A' (the one with the greatest effect)
in combination with various concentrations (same as the 1st week) of hormone
'B'. Because they have heard reports from hormone 'B' groups, and have discussed
those results with the hormone 'B' groups, they will then examine the kind
of hormonal interaction that results: synergistic, additive, or inhibitive
response. When they write up the final report, they are to refer to the
other groups' results and cite them appropriately.
I've done this only once (last year), and students said they enjoyed it,
though they were a bit apprehensive about the oral presentations. This year,
this round of presentations will be the second that they have to do during
the semester, so I'm hoping the added experience will help.
The basic protocol for using lettuce seedlings comes from:
Webb, David T. 1992. Teaching concepts of plant development with lettuce
seeds and seedlings. Pages 27-49 in Tested studies for laboratory teaching,
Volume 6 (C.A. Goldman, S.E. Andrews, P.L. Hauta, and R. Ketcham, editors).
Proc. 6th Workshop/Conference of the Association for Biology Laboratory
Education (ABLE), 161 pp.
Mike O'Donnell
--------------------------------------------------------
Michael A. O'Donnell
Dept. of Biology
Trinity College
Hartford, CT 06106-3100
michael.odonnell@mail.trincoll.edu
Hi:
Actually, students work in at least pairs in all my labs. I didn't really
plan it that way -- we just don't have enough equipment and materials to
do
anything else. In general zoology, students work in pairs to study
representative specimens -- their lab manual explains the material they're
responsible for, and includes questions they have to answer from the text
and/or other readings. In upper-division labs, students work in groups of
2-4, depending on the lab exercise (pairs, for example, in comparative
morphology; groups of four in a "design your own nature preserve"
exercise
in vertebrate zoology).
I find that, generally, students work well together in their pairs or
larger groups. The problem I have is getting cooperation and collaboration
among groups. I've tried, mostly half-heartedly, to institute a practice
of "ask another group before you ask me" -- perhaps I simply need
to try
harder on this. I'd more than appreciate more concrete suggestions!
Thanks,
Kerry Kilburn
Dept. of Biology, West Virginia State College
kilburn@wvnwvsc.wvnet.edu
Ned Lyke asked whether anyone was successfully encouraging group work in
a
more traditional lab setting.
At a suggestion of my colleague, Sharron Clark, I am now using 3x5 cards
to
rotate lab table assignments. In lab the first day students select their
own
seating. By mid-lab they have completed a card that includes their name
(nickname encouraged), major (if any), and hobbies and interests. At every
lab thereafter, the students must come in and find the card on the lab tables
to determine their group assignment for the day.
To receive full credit for the lab, all students must participate in a
discussion of the day's work during the last 30 minutes of the alloted time.
On the rare occasion when all tables are done early, we discuss early.
Students are encouraged to help each other both within groups and among
groups. There is no reward in "finishing fast" because none leave
early.
After a few weeks, the entire room takes on a cooperative atmosphere since
the
students are all aquainted with each other. Students have commented at the
end of the course that they appreciated the experience of having to deal
with
groups of new people because they learned they had something to contribute
to
a group dynamic.
Personally, I think the system has helped with some classroom management
problems. Every now and then I have a student whom others are willing to
share but whom no one wishes to own. The rotating system solves this problem
nicely. I note that students tend to form their own study groups too for
the
lecture portion of the class and the cooperative spirit seems more in
evidence.
Overall, I'm satisfied with the system.
Bonnie=Roohk%ISDCCC%KOCE@banyan.cccd.edu
Discussion 4/95
Dear Bio-edders,
I know there was a discussion on group work some time ago on one of
these lists, and that was very helpful. I have saved the comments in a
file that I print out and use to help in training my GTA's and
undergraduate assistants. Now I have some questions that I don't feel
were addressed in that discussion.
Last year we required a group project in our linked biology/humanities
courses. Students wrote a proposal in the HU class, did the research in
bio lab, then wrote a journal article for the HU class. Those were second
term students who had already spent a term together and knew at least some
of the members of the class. This year, we have moved the linked courses
to the first term of the freshman year, a 10-week term. Because of the
shortness of the term, and at the urging of the students, we have decided
to begin the group work sooner so they can do adequate background reading
before the project must begin.
My first question is, how do you facilitate the selection of groups when
students have had so little contact with each other in a setting that
would help them choose? There will be 120 students, all bio majors, with
3 1-hour "lecture" classes per week, and 6 lab sections of 3 hours
each,
each linked with 2 1.5-hour HU recitation sections that have the same 24
students. I'll list my own ideas here so you can respond
with your experiences, but please provide me with your own ideas and
experiences as well.
1. Have a field trip the first lab so students are in an informal
atmosphere where they can get to know each other better. This will be
followed by an in-lab experiment on organisms collected.
2. Have discussions in the HU classes, where there are only 24
students, about how to make groups work, and have the students set up means
of
dealing with group members who do not pull their weight or don't complete
their responsibilities on time.
3. Have students fill out a questionnaire on their biology background,
likes and dislikes in biology, expertise in computers, data processing,
and word processing, interest in writing, graphics, illustrating, literature
searches, designing experiments, editing for grammar and organization -
what
else?
4. Have undergraduate teaching assistants, who took the course last year,
facilitate groupmate selection and alert students to potential problems
and solutions in group interactions. I like the suggestion earlier of
having a coach, a moral builder, a scribe, and a leader.
Any other suggestions for helping groups cope with disfunctional groups
and members who don't carry out their responsibilities would be greatly
appreciated. I hope to set up some sort of workshop on campus on
facilitation of group work.
***********************************
Janice M. Glime
Department of Biological Sciences
Michigan Technological University
Houghton, MI 49931-1295
jmglime@mtu.edu
906-487-2546
FAX 906-487-3167
***********************************
Janice-I work as a lab coordinator of the Bacteriology and Microbiology
Teaching Assistants here at Northern Illinois Univ. One of the problems
that we face in the labs is to have all students participate in the lab
exercises for a particular day. Many times, lab assignments are
performed by one or two students in a group, while the others in the
group just stand around and watch. UndoubtedIly, the students that do
the work are the ones, in the end that get the better grades in the
course itself. Inorder, to try to get more involvement by the students,
we
assign participation points. Students are not only encouraged to do the
work in class, they are encourage to also help maintain a clean and
sterile environment. Anyway, we usually assign 25 points of the total
lab grade. The TAs may assigned the points accordingly. In your case,
there may be an even more practicle approach. I am not sure that you
had mentioned the size of the groups the students will be working in but
if you can, maybe when the students break up into their groups, the
assignment itself can be broken up into parts to match the number of
students in each group. Then in the near the end of the semester, during
their recitation period, each group can give a 15 minute presentation on
their work. Then it will become apparent to the the TA, who did their
share of work and who didn't because each student will be presenting
their share or part of the project as a whole. I think if a student knows
that he or she is going to have to stand up infront of class to present
something, as an individual, the student inorder not to be embarressed
will want to be involved during the onset of the project. Ofcourse, you
will always have your so called "Slackers" which is almost always
impossible to avoid. Why penalize the group as a whole? Again, it will
become apparent to the TA, on who did the work and who didn't.
As far as students getting to know each other, one thing the students
can do is have a Biology picnic near the second or third week of the
semester. Each Lab section will be responsible for supplying something
and duties towards the picnic. The TAs will see who are the natural
leaders in the class by who volunteers first to help. Then when it comes
time to assign the class assignments, you will know who the natural
leaders are in the class and they can be divided up to head each group.
This is a great opportunity for all the students to meet one another,
especially if they are going to spend the next four years together.
Anyway, these are only suggestions. I hope they are of some use to
you. Good luck on your project.-PatMac
From: Patrick McCarthy <T80PWM1@WPO.CSO.NIU.EDU>
Dear Pat,
Your suggestion to have the sections plan a picnic is a great idea! We
planned a picnic last year (we meaning faculty and some selected
sophomores) and only 15 people out of 120 showed up. If the students plan
their own, attendance is likely to be much greater. We could have a wild
foods section and do all sorts of interesting things with the idea,
including having the students plan games and other activities. I'll run
this by my undergraduate assistants. Thank you!
Janice
***********************************
Janice M. Glime
Department of Biological Sciences
Michigan Technological University
Houghton, MI 49931-1295
jmglime@mtu.edu
906-487-2546
FAX 906-487-3167
Janice -- I attended a session at a conference this weekend that dealt with
exactly your problem -- how to assign and manage groups. The presenter
felt that assigning groups was better than letting students choose their
own -- it is more realistic in the sense that "in the real world"
one
seldom has much choice in picking your own team members. He uses a
survey such as you suggested, and found another important question to ask
is when they planned to work on the course. Picking teams with conflicting
schedules leads to problems. (For first year students, this may also get
across the idea that one should plan study time.) Resources was also
important -- who has a computer and who doesn't for example.
In order to keep all students participating, he reserves the right to
assign individuals between 50% and 150% of the team's project grade, based
on a combination of personal observation and team member evaluation. Have
team members rate each other periodically. Usually you will pick up on the
real slackers that way.
More of a problem is dealing with groups that simply do not get
along. One suggestion was to tell the team they have to work it out --
and perhaps facilitate that a bit. Another is to have a "divorce"
date,
after which teams will remain intact.
Good luck with this. It sounds great!
********************************************************************
Gail Schiffer gschiffe@kscmail.Kennesaw.Edu
Biology, Kennesaw State College 404-423-6167
P.O. Box 444, Marietta GA 30061 Fax: 404-423-6625
*********************************************************************
Janice,
Last quarter I had students in my non-major class do a group project and
write a report. I, too, was concerned about non-participants riding the
shirt-tails of those who really cared and causing hardship on others in
the
groups. I informed everyone from the beginning that one requirment of the
project was to evaluate the performance of all members of their group at
the end, and that I would adjust individual grades on the project based
on
this evaluation. I had them evaluate each other's participation in the
following areas: formulation of the project plan and its presentation to
the instructor, participation in doing the project, writing of the rough
draft of the report, and writing of the final draft of the report. Each
group member had to evaluate his/her own performance as well as that of
each other group member using a scale of 0-10 with 0 = "no involvement,"
5
= "about 1/2 the involvement of the most involved group member"
and 10 =
"the same level of involvement as the most involved group member."
One
thing I failed to include was a space for "comments" but several
students
wrote comments, often very revealing, anyway. I converted the numbers into
a percentage ranking scale and did adjust the score of individuals using
this ranking to reflect involvement, except with one group where most of
the members argued that even though everyone didn't put in the same effort
everyone should get the same grade because of the way they all worked
together (these were unsolicited comments!). A second group made the same
argument but when I assembled their numbers they were all close so I would
have given them all the same grade anyway. I was pleased with the outcome
(not necessarily the final reports but this means of assessing group
involvement). Would I do it again this way? Probably, with minor
alterations. Good luck!\
Sincerely,
Roger Christianson 503-488-0223 (home)
Department of Biology 503-552-6747 (office)
Southern Oregon State College 503-552-6415 (fax)
1250 Siskiyou Boulevard rchristi@max.sosc.osshe.edu
Ashland, OR 97520
Discussion 11/95
Hello to all! I'm beginning to think about my spring semester courses
(really!) and could use some advice. In my Human Environmental Biology course,
I plan to have my students work in groups of about 4 on a semester-long
project to do an environmental audit of our campus. Last year I also had
students do group projects on more library research-oriented topics and
found
that this didn't work too well. There was little group spirit developed;
they
were strangers at the beginning of the semester and merely acquaintances
at
the end. I realize I didn't provide much team-building activity to help
out,
either, and want a more positive experience for all this time around.
The students who take this course seem to be mostly rather uninterested
and
there only to fulfill some requirements for graduation. They are all
freshmen or sophomores (we're a 2-year transfer institution) and commute
(no
dorms) and of course have wildly varying schedules.
Can anyone come up with some suggestions of activities that might be
accomplished in a couple 2-hour labs that will help these folks feel
comfortable with each other and willing to participate and work together?
Any words of wisdom on the best ways to form groups that work well?
Thanks much.
Joy Perry
Univ. of Wisconsin - Fox Valley
P.O. Box 8002
Menasha, WI 54952
joyperry@uwcmail.uwc.edu
I'd like to respond to Joy Perry's request. I'm sure everyone is familiar
with the Johnson &
Johnson philosophy of Cooperative Learning, but fewer are familiar with
Spencer Kagan (although he is becoming more popular). He publishes a
wonderful book simply titled "Cooperative Learning." Your bookstore
probably has it if you have an elementary education program.ISBN:
1-879097-10-9. It's published by Resources for Teachers, Inc. 27128
Paseo Espada, Suite 622, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675. 1-800-Wee
Co-op. As you can guess from the last line, it is a book intended for
elementary and middle school (with some high school stuff, but not
much). However, the discussion of theory and the methods he uses are
wonderful. The book is packed with methods (what he calls "structurs")
that are just as effective with college students (well, most of them) as
with little folks. It is delightful and informative. AND IT HAS A BIG
SECTION ON TEAM BUILDING.
From: baxterl@CWU.EDU
Group Formation and Morale:
I had students work during the term on a research project in groups. They
were to research a scientific issue in genetics and present it as a poster.
Most groups worked well together, but I did see one or two groups that had
varying degrees of disfunctional group behavior.
The education research I have read debates creating homogeneous vs.
hetergeneous groups based on student skill. There is also debate on placing
students in groups or having them self-select groups. This research may
seem off the topic of group morale, but I think it is something to keep
in
mind when setting out group projects. Most students believe they would be
happier with students they feel comfortable with that are at their own
perceived skill level. They may change this attitude after doing a project
with their "friends" however.
I worked with small groups of students from the first day, having them do
an icebreaker (after a brief discussion with another student, introduce
them to the group - usually with something goofy thrown in like "what
did
they have for breakfast"). The group mentality is formed throughout
the
term even if students are not in the same group of students with which they
will finish a big project. They learn to rely on others to solve problems.
They learn to delegate tasks. Hopefully they also learn that other students
have answers (sometimes better ones than the instructor).
I formed project groups (2-3 students) from common interest topics (much
self-selection went on) and created time in class for groups to discuss
where they were in regards to research throughout the term. This time came
from one of my major goals of having students learn about real issues in
science. I went into less depth than other instructors on certain topics
and allowed students to meet in class because of this goal. The other
reason I allowed this is because this class is at a community college,
where most students are working and raising families besides going to
school. They had to do some research outside of class, but I took some
pressure off by recognizing they had hectic schedules and giving them time
in class to plan and delegate tasks.
The result? Most groups reported working well together. Two students
dropped the course mid term, but their respective group partners finished
the poster by themselves. I gave students a chance to report on their group
dynamics and am toying with the idea of having them delegate a percentage
of "group work" points to each student in their group after a
discussion.
This would hopefully take care of the slackers in any group.
Comments are especially welcome on the last idea, but I plan on doing this
activity again next term so I would welcome input on all of it.
Stacey
******************************************************************
@ Stacey Kiser
@ Research Assistant
@ Workshop Biology
@ Department of Biology
@ 1210 University of Oregon
@ Eugene, OR 97403-1210
@ phone (503) 346-5092
@ fax (503) 346-6056
Stacy- I have students work on term research projects in groups. I give
them group grades on the rough draft, final paper, and oral report of
their project. The first time I did this, I had several complaints on
slackers and that group grades aren't fair. The next time I did this
course, I let them decide how to divide up grades, and had no complaints.
This idea comes from Eric Mould at Yakima Valley Community College.
How it works: Multiply grade by number of people in group, then give
total points to group. They must agree on how to distribute points.
Example: oral report worth 10 points - if a group of three got an "8",
give them 24 points. They could each get 8, or assign 7,8,9, or 7, 7,
10. I don't allow any individual student to earn more than the
assignment was worth (e.g., this group could not assign 6,6,12).
Additional comments: I give students fairly detailed participation
accounts to fill out - these are sheets listing all of steps they have to
go through in putting together their projects, and ways group members can
contribute. Students write down how much each member contributed to each
part (totals for each step or component must add to 100%). This helps
them keep track of where they stand, and helps groups talk about problems
with participation (so I don't have to be a mediator).
I also spend some time at the beginning of the quarter talking with the
class about why I use group grades for some assignments (e.g., they will
be working in groups in the "real world", whether a paper is accepted
for
publication depends on the total group effort, etc.). This seems to
really help diffuse problems.
Kris
--------------------------------------------------------------
Kristina A. Ernest Phone: 509-963-2805
Department of Biological Sciences FAX: 509-963-2730
Central Washington University E-mail: ernestk@cwu.edu
Ellensburg, WA 98926
I've run several classes where they have either had to do lab work or a
library research project. For the lab work I get them to work in two's (32
students in the course) and give them the choice of a group of small
projects which are designed to make a whole. I teach them the basic
techniques required in the first two lab periods then let them get on with
thier projects. At two intervals during the semester I ask them to give
10
min verbal progress reports. The result? - enthusiastic students who come
into labs and start to work immediately, enjoy talking about what they are
doing and become "mini-experts" on their topic. They start to
see
connections and really help each other understand the material and most
started to design their own experiements. Evaluations? - the best I've
ever had and I hardly had to do any work - more strength to the thought
that the less I do the more the students learn!!!!!!!!
My library based class went along the same lines (22 students) where they
were asked to chose a topic from a list (or even devise their own project
with your help) and research it. I limited it to recent post 1993 papers
on
their subject. They presented their discoveries in three formal
presentations and wrote a grant proposal to gain funding for their work
(this worked really well and was a lot of fun), one individual paper and
a
joint paper with someone with a similar topic of interest. Result? Great
interaction in the group, explaining things helped them understand the
material.and again they become "mini-experts" and became quite
close
(during discussion time the topics could get quite interesting but they
had
developed such a closeness that even "touchy" subjects were openly
discussed). So much so that they had a party at the end of the course which
included a poster presentation of their data - their idea. Evaluations?
-
again great!
I think these types of courses are essential for the student to realise
that they must take responsibility for their own education. They love it,
learn a whole lot more than I could teach them in the same time and
interact in a way which will always help them in the future. AND I had fun
too and learned a lot about things that I don't have time to read
about!!!!!
Alison
=======================
Alison Morrison
Dept. of Biology
Georgia Southern University
Statesboro GA 30460
Hi, labbers:
I hope lots more of us write in with ideas on this topic -- among other
things, I'm supervising TA's next semester for the first time, and want
to
be able to give them ideas to try (any suggestions welcome!).
I tried group "research" projects a few semesters ago, based on
a model I
got from a teaching conference at Radford University. It ran over the
course of 3-4 lab periods (depending on where you draw the line between
preparation and doing). Students were investigating the difference in
aggressiveness between males and females. They started with very simple
(and simplistic) surveys. We discussed sampling design, then I turned them
loose for an hour to collect the data. They returned, collated, and shared
data, then we discussed it a bit (strenghts/weaknesses of the survey
questions; could we say differences in responses were meaningful, etc.).
Next, we did observations and experiments. First, students were to test
the
hypothesis that males were more aggressive than females by placing
themselves next to various doors around campus. They were to observe
whether entering/exiting students walked between or around them, noting
the
sexes of the entering/exiting students. I gave them virtually no
instruction here -- they were to do this however they wanted (they therefore
were free to make lots of mistakes!). Again, they had an hour to collect
data. Then each group presented their technique and results, and we had
group critiques of designs.
Based on those critiques, students then had to design an improved
experiment. This time, I checked their design before they conducted the
work. Again, I turned them loose to do their thing. The following lab
period, each group gave a "formal" presentation.
I was frankly amazed at the amount of enthusiasm this generated. For the
first time, I had students *actually working in lab for the whole period*
without any "tricks" on my part to keep them there. Most groups
produced
graphic representations of their data (we had done one lab on graphing).
Most presentations generated questions from the other students listening.
They loved it, I loved it.
Next semester, lab center around plant and animal diversity, with the usual
emphasis on identifying characteristics and taxonomy. I'd love suggestions
for how to turn these kinds of exercises into something more
inquiry-oriented that could use group work.
Thanks!
Kerry Kilburn
ODU Biological Sciences
Here's a "quickie" group activity; it's a "low investment"
exercise (i.e.,
doesn't take much preparation or time, not very ambitious) -- but it's
worked pretty well for me.
In my upper division mycology class, I started the semester with an
unlabeled life cycle diagram (this semester it was a cellular slime mold
--
not exactly a fungus, but what the heck). Instead of standing in front and
lecturing to them...I put them in groups of four and asked them to tell
me
what was going on in the life cycle (where's the "assimilation"
stage,
what's the "dispersal stage," where do you find "genetic
variation.," what
parts are diploid, which ones haploid, etc.).
At first they were baffled by the cycle. All of them had a semester of
animal biology and a semester of plant biology under their belts; as you
can imagine, there were life cycles galore in those courses. But they had
memorized the cycles and had never really looked at them from a strategic
point of view. Neither had they thought about life cycle patterns (it's
as
though each life cycle was an entirely independent entity -- no connections
to much of anything). I wandered around the room asking people what they
had figured out and where they were stuck. After about ten minutes we came
back together as a big group and groups reported. I set up a little
friendly "team competition" which broke the ice a bit and kept
things
lively. To prevent some folks from monopolizing the conversation -- and
others from sitting back and letting others do the work, I assigned each
person a role -- Recorder, task master (keeping the group on track),
host/hostess (the person who insures that everyone participates by inviting
those who are quiet to contribute their ideas), reporter.
But the exercise was useful in a couple of ways. First, students did learn
the specific life cycle -- but they learned it within the larger context
of
survival strategies and adaptations. Second, for the first time, many
seemed to understand that organisms don't appear in the environment all
neatly labeled with arrows pointing to the next stage of reproduction. They
began, I think, to appreciate how confusing an "unlabeled" world
can be and
to develop a new respect for all those scientists who did the often tedious
- but also creative - work of deciphering life cycles.
We've repeated the exercise several times over the semester and the students
have become more facile at deciphering the cycles. I conducted a
mid-semester evaluation this year to determine what the students liked and
didn't like about the course -- one of the comments: "I like it when
we
(the students) do the life-cycles. It's challenging and interesting. I get
bored if all I have to do is follow a labeled diagram." I guess that's
one
measure of success!
Debbie
From: dmlangsa@unccvm.uncc.edu (Dr. Deborah M. Langsam)
Debbie,
I liked your idea on group activities to work out a life cycle. I had
never tried looking at it from the perspective of assimilation, genetic
variation, dispersal, and to that I added survival during unfavorable
conditions. The haploid and diploid I have done for a long time. I tried
this with my plant morphology class in the first lab, working with
Oedogonium. They at least spent time thinking and talking about the
cycles, but they were not so successful at assigning tasks. Perhaps I
need to assign those. They seemed a little bashful at sharing what they
had decided, or perhaps they had not decided very much. It was a bit
overwelming for a first day of lab exercise on an unfamiliar group of
organisms, although we had developed a life cycle for Chlamydomonas the
day before. I intend to try it again before very long, probably with
liverworts, after they have seen a moss cycle.
Thanks for the idea!
Janice
***********************************
Janice M. Glime
Department of Biological Sciences
Michigan Technological University
Houghton, MI 49931-1295
jmglime@mtu.edu
906-487-2546
FAX 906-487-3167
***********************************
Joy and other biolabbers,
Last year my organismal biology course was taught in the winter and I
started with a winter field trip. The weather cooperated with something
close to a blizzard, but not so horribly cold as to be life threatening.
Only the roads were somewhat life-threatening. We went to a stream where
the students could see aquatic insects and a few other things, as well as
looking for things in and under logs, etc. Then, we returned to the lab
after 1.5 hours and spent another 1.5 hours looking at our live catches
under the microscope, figuring out what they were, whether they would wake
up when they got warm (terrestrial) or how they got oxygen (aquatic). The
field experience was a bonding experience - it was the first or second day
of the term and students had a story to tell their non-biology friends.
They really got into it and it broke down lots of barriers quickly because
of the informal nature of the lab. You are in a local where you might be
able to try this, if you have a woodlot or stream nearby.
Janice
***********************************
Janice M. Glime
Department of Biological Sciences
Michigan Technological University
Houghton, MI 49931-1295
jmglime@mtu.edu
906-487-2546
FAX 906-487-3167
***********************************
Janice:
I'm glad to hear that you gave the life-cycle activity a try. And, in fact,
the survival stage is a key one when I do the life cycles.
I do assign the tasks to the groups, at least initially. First I group them
- and then I have them count off (i.e., "one," "two,"
"three," "four); I'll
assign the tasks by number (e.g., "OK, all of the 'ones' will be recorders,
and all of the twos...." etc.). This saves a lot of time -- and gets
around
the "I don't want to be the first volunteer..." hangups (or the
"who died
and left you boss" attitudes that may develop if an assertive student
jumps
in to organize the group).
I try to assist them with the reporting part by moving around the room while
they're doing the exercise and asking the groups which parts they've worked
out, where they're stuck, etc. I'll tell them to "hang on to that thought"
when they've figured out a section -- and I give them some hints on the
stuck parts. Then when reporting time comes around I have a pretty good
handle on "who's gotten what" and can call on individual groups
to fill in
the blanks of the life cycle and get the discussion started. This way, I
can at least insure some initial success for all of the groups. If there's
a controversial section -- all the better. I'll ask for the two (or more)
views and we'll try as a class to figure it out.
I'd be interested in knowing whether they become more comfortable with
repeated attempts across the semester (my students did)
Debbie
Deborah M. Langsam
dmlangsa@email.uncc.edu
Department of Biology
UNC Charlotte
Charlotte, NC 28223
A group of instructors here at the University of Oregon have been working
on increasing group work in the classroom for 5 years or so (as a group
-
individual teachers have probably been working longer than that).
One problem we have is getting away from meddling with the group dynamics.
Given the right question or problem, I often wish the students struggled
with an answer or evaluation on their own without my intrusion. I think
I
affect group dynamics to the point that some students don't work within
their group, but wait for me to get to their group and ask a couple of
questions that probe for the answer instead of truly thinking about the
problem. As a result, I try some activities where I don't mingle and
instead divert my attention to something other than the groups (organizing
notes, etc.) for 5-10 minutes. Then I can answer questions that the groups
have formulated through discussion.
Who else out there ignores their groups for a while? Do you ever feel
uncomfortable, like you are the instructor with nothing to do?
Stacey
******************************************************************
@ Stacey Kiser
@ Research Assistant
@ Workshop Biology
@ Department of Biology
@ 1210 University of Oregon
@ Eugene, OR 97403-1210
@ phone (503) 346-5092
@ fax (503) 346-6056
Biolab Home Page