The Embodiment of Unhelpfulness and Injustices of Great Stupidity

[same_difference]

I handed in my answers to a maths problem sheet this morning, on the end of which was a note which in summary said 'I don't understand, I'm merely copying the methods in the examples and guessing blindly when I can't. Please help, or recommend some sources of help or at least tell me what I'm doing wrong.' This is the answer I got back:

Ok. Please, continue to work, read Lecture Notes, and solutions provided, and solve problems by yourself. We will have enough revision to remember and recall everything.[Signature deleted]

Right. That helps. Keep doing what I'm doing and just learn it all in the revision period. Thanks a lot.

And the injustice:

P is doing group work in her computer science second year. If any group does not work well together, or shows any signs of having not worked well together, they will lose marks. This means that if theoretically someone doesn't do any work for the group, they will lose marks for not working well together unless everyone else does the work for that person and then states at the end that it was that persons work. They couldn't even ask for advice on how to get the person to work, let alone make a complaint about it without getting marked down. In effect it benefits anyone who does no work, as they are guaranteed to get given the credit for other people's work at the end (unless the whole group doesn't care or put any work into the coursework).

People in the lecture tried to explain this to the lecturer, he didn't understand. Does anyone know any way or anyone who I could talk to that could rectify the problem? Just in case there was any way I could help, though I'm not actually allowed to.

Disclaimer: This in no way suggests that anyone in P's group isn't working, or that they're group is working in anyway except as a perfect team. I have no evidence the previous line is anything other than the absolute truth.

Comments

[almosthonest.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I had a similar computing project. And you know what? It was fantastic experience in teaching me how to get other people's butts in gear. In fact, I suspect that's why they include it. Think of almost any computing career - it involves teamwork, and lots of it. I suspect, in this project, that being able to make a team function is the lesson, or at least what's being tested.

If it's any help, I believe that everyone at the end gets to do a confidential questionaire on the rest of the group. If anybody slacked, the rest can finger them. But, most likely, some of them will end up doing the work of others. I certainly did - good intro to real life. Injustice and all.... ;-)

[same-difference.livejournal.com]

I can kind of see you point, but how do your test if people can work as a team if you reward people for not doing so. The point is they do have to a questionnaire break down thing at the end, but if they actually say someone didn't do any work, then EVERYONE would get marked down. So it's in everyones best interest to lie and do the other persons share of the work.

[almosthonest.livejournal.com]

I don't know whether they're bluffing when they say they'll mark down a dyfunctional team or not. Though it occurs to me that that's the challenge - don't let someone get away with doing no work. Make them! Although, "make" in terms of persuation and gentle motivation, naturally.

Again, though, that strikes me as a strong nod towards reality. With real deadlines, no customer is impressed if you try telling them that you would have been on time if not for Fred...