Subject:
|
Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 2 Feb 2000 17:31:08 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
510 times
|
| |
|
|
"Scott E. Sanburn" wrote:
> Also, the first two years are basically regurgitation of what you took
> in high school. You don't use teamwork on most of these classes, and as
> far as I can remember, you don't take teamwork tests. Sometimes, the
> prof made us work in groups, and the people I got stuck with, I had to
> do their work in order to get the good grade, and sometimes, I could
> not, and I got a bad grade. I hate having my grade depend on slackers.
> That is stupid as well, because my loans were riding on my grades.
Absolutely... although, in practice, when you are stuck with a poor
team, it's really best to *NOT* do their work for them - at least my
experience has shown this. Although it's possible that you could end up
getting a lower grade for the project, it's the slacker's grades that
ultimately suffer the most. Especially when the next project comes
around and the slackers are teamed up with somebody else and then that
team gets a poor grade. A good prof is going to notice that sort of
pattern. It's their job to notice that sort of pattern, IMO. Further,
why bother putting additional effort into improving another person's
grade when that that person isn't even motivated to help themself?
Anyways, it's actually not that difficult for a prof to see who did what
work in a project when there are people of highly differing ability or
motivation working together (perhaps not specifically by name, but he or
she will be able to see where one person stopped working and another
person started). If you can catch it soon enough (you should be able to
catch it pretty quickly if you are paying attention), you can inform the
prof that nobody else in your group is working. You may not be able to
get into another group, but at least the professor can take that into
consideration when your final project is submitted, and then he or she
can grade individually based on what parts of the work were well done
and what parts were not. All you need to do is make sure you have lots
of documentation on who did what (or who was supposed to do what) and
submit that as part of the project (i.e. how the assorted tasks in the
project were broken down and delegated to each person in the group -
which should be part of *ANY* team project's paperwork, IMHO). If the
prof is not inclined to grade fairly, even when he or she knows that
some people did far more work than others, adequate documentation may
provide the evidence needed to challenge the grade, should push come to
shove. I've never personally seen it come to that though. In my
experience, good documentation has always done the trick.
> > Mark
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
| To All, OK, folks, since nobody got the ideas posting on this subject, especially from me, let's see if I can clear this up: 1) If this LEGO test to determine different skills was one of the factors to determine certain characteristics that the (...) (24 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
89 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
