Lecia J. Barker
ABSTRACT
This paper presents a case study as a "cautionary tale" to faculty, demonstrating how students and instructors often perceive pressure to finish projects for clients. As a result of this pressure, and because students generally lacked any understanding of how to work well in groups, students selected their roles based on expediency or familiarity. This worked against the benefits of collaborative learning and learning new skills or concepts, widening the experience gap between males and females and across disciplines. Faculty should carefully consider the learning outcomes expected for students and find ways of ensuring they are achieved.
- Cooper, C.R., Ayers-Lopez, S., & Marquis, A. (1982). Children's discourse during peer learning in experimental and naturalistic situations. Discourse Processes, 5, 177--191.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Agogino, A.M. & Linn, M. (1992). Retaining female engineering students: Will design experiences Help? NSF Directions, 5 (2), 8--9.Google Scholar
- Borgo, S. L. (1992). Ideology and science: An interpretive analysis of research on gender, computers, and education. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Virginia. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Brown, A., Bransford, J., & Cocking, R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and School. Washington D.C.: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
- Busch, T. (1995). Gender differences in self-efficacy and attitudes toward computers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 12, 147--158.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Cohoon, J. M. (2002). Recruiting and retaining women in undergraduate computing majors. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 34(2). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Computer Society of the Institute for Electrical and Electronic Engineers and the Association for Computing Machinery Joint Task Force. Computing Curricula 2001. URL: http://www.computer.org/education/cc2001/final/index.htm.Google Scholar
- Felder, R.M., Felder, G.N., Mauney, M., Hamrin Jr., C.E., & Dietz, E.J. (1995). A longitudinal study of engineering student performance and retention. III. Gender differences in student performance and attitudes. Journal of Engineering Education, 84, 151--174.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Fisher, A. J., Margolis, J., & Miller, F. (1997).Undergraduate women in computer science: experience, motivation and culture. Proceedings of the 28th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, San Jose, CA, Google ScholarDigital Library
- Forman, E. A., & Cazden, C. B. (1985). Exploring Vygotskian perspectives in education: the cognitive value of peer interaction. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), Culture, communication, and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Forsyth, D. R. An introduction to group dynamics. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole, 1983.Google Scholar
- Goodness, J. M. (1990). Factors which influence women's decision to major in computer science in college. Unpublished Ed.d. Thesis, Nashville, TN, Peabody College for Teachers of Vanderbilt University. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Graesser, A. C., Person, N. K., & Magliano, J. P. (1995). Collaborative dialogue patterns in naturalistic one-to-one tutoring. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 495--522.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hake, R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six thousand student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics students. American Journal of Physics, 66 (1), 64--73.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Haller, C.R., Gallagher, V.J. Weldon, T. L. & Felder, R. M. (2000) .Dynamics of peer education in cooperative learning workgroups. Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 89, pp. 285--293.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Johnson D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (1994). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive and individualistic learning. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
- Margolis, J. & Fisher, A. (2002). Unlocking the clubhouse: Women in computing, MIT Press.Google Scholar
- McDowell, C., Werner, L., Bullock, H., & Fernald, J. (2002). The effects of pair-programming on performance in an introductory programming class, Proceedings of the 33rd SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Northern Kentucky, KY. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Poulis, J., & Massen, C. (1997). Physics lecturing with audience feedback. American Journal of Physics, 66, 75--81.Google Scholar
- Roberts, E. (2000). Strategies for encouraging individual achievement in introductory computer science classes, Proceedings of the 31st SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Austin, TX, Google ScholarDigital Library
- Slavin, R. E. (1989). Cooperative learning and student achievement: Six theoretical perspectives. In M. L. Maehr and C. Ames (Eds.) Advances in motivation and achievement: Motivation enhancing environments, 6, 161--177. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, Inc.Google Scholar
- Strenta, A. C., Rogers, E., Russell, A., Matier, M., & Scott. J. (1994). Choosing and leaving science in highly selective institutions. Research in Higher Education, 35(5), 513--547.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Tinzmann, M. B., Jones, B. F., Fennimore, T. F., Bakker, J., Fine, C., & Pierce J. (1990). What is the collaborative classroom? North Central Regional Educational Laboratory, URL: http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/rpl_esys/collab.htmGoogle Scholar
- Tracy, K. (2002). Everyday talk: Building and reflecting identities. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Webb, N. M., & Palincsar, A. S. (1996). Group processes in the classroom. In D. C. Berliner and R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology (841--873).Google Scholar
- Weston, T. J. & L. J. Barker, (2002). Student computing in higher education: A profile of student use, training, and proficiency. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 14(1), 107--127.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Williams, L. A. (2000). Strengthening the case for pair programming. IEEE Software, 17(4), 17--25. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- When do group projects widen the student experience gap?
Recommendations
When do group projects widen the student experience gap?
This paper presents a case study as a "cautionary tale" to faculty, demonstrating how students and instructors often perceive pressure to finish projects for clients. As a result of this pressure, and because students generally lacked any understanding ...
Why project courses sometimes widen the experience gap among students
Proceedings of the 8th annual conference on Innovation and technology in computer science educationChoices by students and faculty about their roles in group learning activities can result in students not learning new skills/knowledge. Faculty must be cautious about how students are grouped and should educate students about group roles to avoid ...
Student and Faculty Perceptions of Undergraduate Research Experiences in Computing
Undergraduate research experiences are promoted and funded for their potential in increasing students’ likelihood of pursuing graduate degrees, increasing their confidence, and expanding their awareness of their discipline and career opportunities. ...
Comments