HS teachers that give group projects

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Holy crap, English teachers. Your standards are so jumbly and illogically organized. I'm sorry VDOE gives you such a trash document.

By contrast, look how clear and concise the math ones I am given are: https://www.doe.virginia.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/48957/638315045918730000

Yes the standards are very different and “literacy” encompasses four very broad spheres of reading, writing, listening, speaking. But some schmuck arguing with us that collaborative work is not in the standards when it is, in black and white, actually explicitly saying they are applying communication skills that we teach in “small group activities” is somehow just icing on the cake. I’m supposed to assess their ability to communicate, cooperatively build understanding of content, divide roles to share work, and reflect on their contribution to the group while also… never assigning any group work?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Holy crap, English teachers. Your standards are so jumbly and illogically organized. I'm sorry VDOE gives you such a trash document.

By contrast, look how clear and concise the math ones I am given are: https://www.doe.virginia.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/48957/638315045918730000

Yes the standards are very different and “literacy” encompasses four very broad spheres of reading, writing, listening, speaking. But some schmuck arguing with us that collaborative work is not in the standards when it is, in black and white, actually explicitly saying they are applying communication skills that we teach in “small group activities” is somehow just icing on the cake. I’m supposed to assess their ability to communicate, cooperatively build understanding of content, divide roles to share work, and reflect on their contribution to the group while also… never assigning any group work?

DP. I’m an English teacher, but not in VA. That post confused me, so maybe you can help me out.

I popped into your standards (and I agree they are disorganized). I saw exactly what I expected to see: lists of skills. That PP was arguing that there are “content” standards, too? I didn’t see those.

To me, standards are the list of skills teachers teach and assess. Content is the vehicle used to deliver them. So I may teach plot structure while reading “The Most Dangerous Game.” Do you actually have a list of texts you must teach somewhere in those standards?

[Anonymous]

The group projects are always terrible: in elementary, middle, high, and college. There inevitably is 1 team member that doesn’t pull their weight and others have to complete and re-do their section. The group meetings are tough to coordinate outside of class and one person must take on the lion’s share to unify the ‘look’ and ‘voice’ of the project. They are inherently unequal in work distribution and stress level. That’s just what happens across group projects. Rinse and repeat. It’s rare that the group is all at the same level of hard-working. Many are disasters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Holy crap, English teachers. Your standards are so jumbly and illogically organized. I'm sorry VDOE gives you such a trash document.

By contrast, look how clear and concise the math ones I am given are: https://www.doe.virginia.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/48957/638315045918730000

Yes the standards are very different and “literacy” encompasses four very broad spheres of reading, writing, listening, speaking. But some schmuck arguing with us that collaborative work is not in the standards when it is, in black and white, actually explicitly saying they are applying communication skills that we teach in “small group activities” is somehow just icing on the cake. I’m supposed to assess their ability to communicate, cooperatively build understanding of content, divide roles to share work, and reflect on their contribution to the group while also… never assigning any group work?

DP. I’m an English teacher, but not in VA. That post confused me, so maybe you can help me out.

I popped into your standards (and I agree they are disorganized). I saw exactly what I expected to see: lists of skills. That PP was arguing that there are “content” standards, too? I didn’t see those.

To me, standards are the list of skills teachers teach and assess. Content is the vehicle used to deliver them. So I may teach plot structure while reading “The Most Dangerous Game.” Do you actually have a list of texts you must teach somewhere in those standards?

No. The PP does not understand that something can be a content standard (ie skills that the students must learn and demonstrate mastery of- in this case, the standard 10.C.1 refers to communication skills and about 10 different skills students must demonstrate in order to show mastery of this standard) and an assessment method (ie a small group project is what you assign to assess the students’ ability to demonstrate the skills learned in the communication standard). Even when the actual standards are posted here showing all the skills that are named in this standard, including specifically “work collaboratively on small group assignments,” they argue that a) that is not a standard and b) somehow group work isn’t a valid assessment format to measure those skills.

You can teach plot with any fictional or narrative text. You can teach communication skills with any topic. But you assess the students’ ability to demonstrate collaborative communication skills via the assigned group work that requires them to apply those skills. Content is not the same as curriculum is not the same as skills is not the same as standards is not the same as assessment, but they all work together in the learning process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any smart kids reading this, do what I did:

Divide the work into four sections, do your part well. There will probably be another kid who will do his part moderately well. Then just let the dumb kids turn in terrible work.

The dumb kids will panic about this at the last minute when they realize you aren't doing their work for them. That might motivate them. Or not.

You will get a B. It will bring your overall grade down very slightly. It is what it is, the self respect is more important.

In an iterative game, other kids will know they can't just rely on you to do it.

Absolutely terrible advice.
- what about 2 person groups
- how is this helpful in how to handle it as an adult
- how is turning in a crappy overall project maintaining your self esteem

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So teachers that love these - which of you are explicitly teaching skills for succeeding in these projects? There seems to be zero scaffolding to help kids succeed. Teachers also seem not to admit that they don’t have the skills to properly grade or monitor the projects/participants.

What on earth? Are you routinely grilled by people not in your field of work and told to justify how you do everything within the scope of your job and prove you do it well? No teacher has to come in here and beg you to approve of us TEACHING A CONTENT STANDARD in our curriculum.

Honestly, it doesn’t matter how parents feel about projects. There’s not much they can do about it. They can complain on this form, but as a teacher we are still going to do what we need to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any smart kids reading this, do what I did:

Divide the work into four sections, do your part well. There will probably be another kid who will do his part moderately well. Then just let the dumb kids turn in terrible work.

The dumb kids will panic about this at the last minute when they realize you aren't doing their work for them. That might motivate them. Or not.

You will get a B. It will bring your overall grade down very slightly. It is what it is, the self respect is more important.

In an iterative game, other kids will know they can't just rely on you to do it.

Absolutely terrible advice.
- what about 2 person groups
- how is this helpful in how to handle it as an adult
- how is turning in a crappy overall project maintaining your self esteem

+1. DD is an overachiever and gets stressed about grades. This would never work for her. She's made her peace with the slackers. In fact, she would much rather work with a slacker than a pushy student with an inflated sense of intelligence.

Group projects are all about equity grading. It's a tool for raising up the grades of the slackers. The slackers are almost always paired with the worker bees. Shout out to the teacher who groups all of the slackers together! FWIW, I'm 55 years old and can't ever recall having to work on group projects. My husband reports the same and he has three degrees.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any smart kids reading this, do what I did:

Divide the work into four sections, do your part well. There will probably be another kid who will do his part moderately well. Then just let the dumb kids turn in terrible work.

The dumb kids will panic about this at the last minute when they realize you aren't doing their work for them. That might motivate them. Or not.

You will get a B. It will bring your overall grade down very slightly. It is what it is, the self respect is more important.

In an iterative game, other kids will know they can't just rely on you to do it.

I suggest you head over to the college forum where many folks feel otherwise.