INTRODUCTION



[pic]

Focus Group Study: MECE 2361

Spring Semester 2006

Part 1:

Assessing Student Attitudes of Group Work

Prepared for Dr. Rick Bannerot, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering

By the University of Houston Writing Center

March 30, 2006

[pic]

writing is thinking

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION………………………………………...3

Background and Theory……………………………3

MECE 2361 Course Objectives………………….....4

Methodology……………………………………......4

Analysis………………………………………….....5

KEY FINDINGS…………………………………………..6

RECOMMENDATIONS………………………………….8

DETAILED FINDINGS…………………………………..9

Question 1: Types of anxieties and concerns……….9

Question 2: Problems encountered in past………….10

Question 3: Criteria for choosing members………...11

Question 4: Chosen or assigned groups……..……...11

Question 5: Working with people you dislike……...13

Question 6: Managing conflict……………………..13

Question 7: Group experience and career……….....13

Question 8: Hypothetical choice: working alone…..14

Question 9: Opinions on MBTI………..…………...14

APPENDIX A: Student Responses……………………..16

Question 1………………………………………....16

Question 2………………………………………....19

Question 3………………………………………....19

Question 4…………………………………………20

Questions 5, 6, 7…………………………………...22

Question 8………………………………………….26

Question 9………………………………………….27

Student suggestions and recommendations………..29

Final words………………………………………...30

INTRODUCTION

Background and Theory

Four exploratory beginning-of-semester focus groups were conducted with students of MECE 2361 as part-one of a two-part (entrance and exit) study. The study was intended to acquire data to implement Dr. Bannerot’s overall initiative of “improving the ‘group experience’ for students in MECE 2361.”

The study had the following basic objectives:

• Assess student beliefs/attitudes concerning group work for class “team project.”

• Collect qualitative data from the student’s perspective--described in the students’ own voice.

• Provide recommendations concerning the method of forming groups (i.e. students’ choice, proximity, time scheduling, random).

As part two of this study, end-of-semester focus groups will also be conducted to elaborate the overall experience of group work in MECE 2361, as well as to document specific instances of conflict and how they may (or may not) have been resolved.

From the perspective of course assessment, focus groups are useful to the extent that they can yield qualitative data that supplement quantitative methods of data collection. Whereas traditional methods of assessment (such as exams) can test students on their knowledge or performance, they are not suitable for documenting students’ reflection--that is to say, they do little to describe or explain students’ attitudes and beliefs about their own knowledge or performance. Similarly, quantitative assessment methods (e.g. surveys and statistical analyses of demographics, test scores, project grades, etc.) tend to concentrate on the question of “what,” “how many,” and “to what degree.” This emphasis on identifying and counting particular constructs can provide an incomplete picture at times. In contrast, qualitative methods (such as focus group discussions, interviews, and participant observation) aim to serve a more explanatory function. Questions are set up to find out the “how” and “why.” In service of this explanatory function, focus group studies strive to provide a more-or-less open-ended arena in which students can conceive of topics in a flexible way that is more relevant to their understanding.

It is worth noting that an ‘observer effect’ can emerge from this type of study: the method of study (focus group discussions) affected the outcome (student beliefs/attitudes). It was not unusual for students’ beliefs and attitudes to shift—sometimes reverse--through participation in open-ended discussions during the focus groups. This led to two immediate consequences with opposing implications. One, focus groups cannot purport to be a value-neutral study that is completely separate from the subject it studies. Two, in this way, focus groups are not only useful as a means to supplement quantitative data, but also as a way to supplement the pedagogical objectives of the class.

MECE 2361 Course Objectives

MECE 2361 is an introduction to engineering design which, as the syllabus states, “is about dealing with open-ended problems, the evaluation of work effort (both quantitative and qualitative), working effectively in a group, and learning to dig deep within your creative self.” Students will be assigned the group task of building simple machines such as a “ball sorter” or “ball launcher” using various materials. For many students, this class will be the first exposure to a group design project in mechanical engineering. This initial focus group study will concentrate mainly on “evaluation of work effort” and “working effectively in a group.”

As part of the course, students will be taking the Myers-Briggs Temperament Index (MBTI). The MBTI is a series of questions that helps students to identify their own temperaments according to a combination of the following dichotomies: Introverted vs. extroverted, sensing vs. intuiting, thinking vs. feeling, and judging vs. perceiving. Within the context of this course, the MBTI is utilized to encourage students to have better self-knowledge and become more effective in a group environment. In addition to the MBTI, students will be asked to evaluate themselves as well as other team members at the end of the semester. This evaluation will be used by Dr. Bannerot to consider student grades. It may also functions as a way to engender a sense of responsibility/accountability and a way to alleviate student concerns about fair grading.

Methodology

Four focus groups were conducted with students of MECE 2361: Design I. Groups were composed of five to six participants and were selected by Dr. Bannerot. Actual participation was five, six, three, and five students per group. The first two groups were conducted prior to the formation of in-class project teams, while the third and fourth focus groups were conducted after the teams were made. An effort was made not to group together two students from the same team to encourage students to freely voice their opinions. Only the last focus group grouped together two members of the same team due to scheduling conflicts.

All group interviews were conducted at the UH Writing Center. Students participated in these focus groups on a volunteer basis as requested by Dr. Bannerot. The groups were recorded using a digital voice recorder for transcribing purposes. Students were insured of their anonymity in this study. Groups lasted approximately thirty to forty-five minutes.

The entire project (drafting questions, moderation of focus groups, transcription, analysis, and reporting) was executed by the author of this report. Focus group questions were drafted with initial input from Dr. Bannerot. Special care was taken by the moderator to remain a neutral listener and encourage students to freely voice their opinions and elaborate vague statements. Although students were asked to speak one at a time, dialogue was also encouraged.

Analysis

Focus group voice recordings were transcribed and labeled by topic. Students often voiced topics beyond the specific questions asked. These out-of-sequence answers were arranged under the proper question[1]. As outlined in Krueger and Casey’s (2000) Focus Groups: A practical guide for applied research, the frequency, extensiveness, emotion, and specificity of comments were considered in determining their importance in the analysis. Relevant quotes were culled from the transcripts to provide a “thick description” of key- as well as detailed findings.

KEY FINDINGS

Key findings were derived by carefully analyzing the frequency, extensiveness, emotion, and specificity of comments made during the focus group[2].

• Students are aware that working in groups is an important aspect of their education as engineers. They understand that a career in mechanical engineering will require them to work effectively in groups not of their choosing (assigned groups). Thus, regardless of whether they could choose their own teams, all of the students believed that working in groups would be a valuable experience.

• Only one of the nineteen students elected the hypothetical choice of working alone to avoid the problems of working in groups. All others agreed that working in groups would increase the quality of the product. Reported benefits of working in groups included the following: development of team-attitude, communication, negotiation, and planning skills. The student who preferred to work alone was skilled with machine tools and had access to a shop.

• Participant opinion was largely split on the hypothetical choice of being able to choose their group members. Regardless of the preference to choose, all participants agreed that a lot could be learned by working with assigned groups. Those who preferred to choose their own group believed that being able to choose would increase the chance that “slackers” would be avoided, resulting in a higher group grade. One group in particular showed a dramatic reversal in attitude over whether groups should be assigned or chosen. Some of the members were surprised to see themselves contradict earlier statements they made by arguing for assigned groups. This change occurred after discussing the potential gain in “real world” experience by resolving group conflicts.

• All but two participants believed that they would not be able to work with someone that they disliked. All others agreed that they would be able to “put aside” personal differences and work towards a common goal.

• Lack of familiarity with other classmates comprised a great portion of the anxiety or concern related to group work. Many students wanted more opportunities for classmates to interact in class, before the formation of groups. Most groups showed positive interest in the MBTI and questioned why it was not administered in the beginning of the semester. Many students felt that the self-introduction in class made them feel “on the spot.” They questioned how much one could gain familiarity with others through such a brief and “forced” exercise.

• Through dialog in the focus group, participants acquired a more balanced sense of the difficulties involved in both assigning groups and choosing groups. The discussion often progressed with students offering contradictory points to consider the pros and cons of both ways.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The following recommendations are based mainly on a meta-analysis of the key- and detailed findings sections. Student recommendations were also considered and informed these recommendations.

Recommendation 1: Assign groups.

Through active dialogue in the focus groups, students were encouraged to consider the various pros and cons between “chosen” and “assigned” teams. As mentioned in the key findings, at times, student opinions about member-choice swayed dramatically when students engaged in constructive dialogue and considered “real world” applications of assigned group work. Although not always changing their minds, initial opponents of “assigned” groups—at the very least—came to appreciate the fact that “assigned” groups more closely simulated conditions they would likely face in the workforce. Students realized that as professionals, they would have to communicate effectively, manage conflict, and “put aside” any differences to complete the product. When discussed in this light, students’ interest in assigned groups seemed to increase.

General consensus was that obstacles of time and distance (within reason) could be overcome. Distribution of resources (e.g. access to tools or machine shop)should be the main factor in determining groups.

Recommendation 2: Administer the MBTI earlier in the semester.

Many students also expressed interest in the MBTI as a means of learning about oneself, as well as learning how to deal with others. Suggestions were made to offer the test earlier in the semester so that students could apply this knowledge to their team efforts. For many, this may provide a more coherent framework in which to appreciate assigned group work.

Recommendation 3: Offer opportunities for students to interact with each other early in the semester.

The self-introduction was brought up as one of the most unpopular elements of MECE 2361. Beyond the anxiety felt over getting up in front of the class, many students felt that this exercise was ineffective as a means of getting to know other students. Suggestions were made to have other, more natural means of interacting and having dialogue with classmates. For instance, this may be accomplished by structuring some of the lectures to allow more class participation, or by setting up a week in which students work in small, rotating groups. Having such an opportunity would initiate a rapport between students, alleviate anxiety, and prepare them to work with members not of their own choosing.

DETAILED FINDINGS

These detailed findings offer synopses of responses and a selection of quotes to each question asked in the focus group. For a more complete account of responses quoted by students, see Appendix A: Relevant student responses.

1. What types of anxieties or concerns do you have about working in groups?

“I guess depending on the group, your scheduling and location would vary in importance. I think if you have a serious attitude about the project then…location/schedule wouldn’t be as much of a problem.”

“About equal responsibility, I know for a fact that—I can’t say this for all the girls but—I am not accustomed to doing well with cutting stuff (cutting materials in a machine shop)…I have not experienced that. Some guys, I have heard that, have worked in shops all their lives. And so, the problem might arise that somebody might not be able to do that, and just because they can’t do that it might seem that they’re not contributing. Even though they can contribute some other way. It might not seem as worthy as actually making it. [Instead] they’re making sure that everything is written correctly or…that could be a problem.”

Location/time/schedules

Participants generally agreed that the distance each member had to travel to meet and time-schedules are important factors which should be taken into consideration for group selection. However, most participants also agreed that group compatibility, the attitude of each individual member, and access to tools are factors that could override the importance of distance and time. One participant revealed that she chose a less convenient group (location-wise) over another group, based on the fact that the former seemed to have members whom she would work with better.

Work ethic (slackers)

One common source of anxiety felt by participants seemed to be their unfamiliarity with their classmates. There was a general fear of being placed in a group with a “slacker.” It is believed that the inclusion of a slacker would dampen the productivity or efficiency of the group, possibly leading to a lower grade.

Incompatibility and group dynamics (see also #2. Problems encountered in past. )

Participants offered various explanations and scenarios of incompatibility and less-than-ideal group dynamics which ranged from a personal dislike of “difficult” individuals, to the battle of “alpha” (domineering) people, as well as lack of engagement from shy people. “Difficult individuals” are those that take issue or offense with every suggestion or detail and delay progress. “Alpha individuals” are concerned with having power in the group and being in control.

Responsibility and Dependence on Others

Some participants explained their dislike of having to rely on others to “come through” with their portion of the work. They were worried about people “pulling their own weight.”

Unequal distribution of resources

A common concern was that “resources” would be distributed unequally among teams. These “resources” included access to tools/machine shop, an individual’s ability, and disposition/funds to purchase high quality materials.

Not worried

Although many voiced their concerns of potential problems with working as a team, others were quick to relate that such problems would not be something that could not be overcome.

2. What kind of problems have you encountered in the past with group work?

“I think a big issue is when you have two alpha personalities, going after the same thing…they decide to clash and then everyone just sits there eating popcorn enjoying the show. And they won’t step in and say, ‘hey, let’s do this diplomatically. Let’s just talk about that, we don’t need a leader, let’s all lead each other and getting things done.’”

“Difference of opinion. Especially with this kind of project, whose idea are we gonna take? It has to comprise of everybody’s idea, but whose main idea are we gonna take? Is there gonna be someone that’s gonna feel hurt if their idea or concept is not considered, is not used?”

Students attributed past problems in group work to conflict of design, conflict of personality, lack of a team mentality, and time management to name a few. Many of these reasons were interrelated. Conflict of design and personality often resulted from a power struggle or lack of compatibility in personality. Related also was the lack of team mentality: a lack of cooperation, clear communication, and not fulfilling individual responsibilities. Finally, time was wasted through arguments, not developing clear interim goals, and getting off topic.

3. If you were able to choose your own group members, what criteria would you use?

“Same personalities, same work ethics. Going back to the whole leadership thing. Some personalities are better at being led or helped than to let them be on their own and do their own responsibilities—sometimes they need a little encouragement. Others don’t need that, they’re self-motivated essentially.”

“We have to try to select people with different abilities like, drawing…Auto CAD, etc.”

“This may be kinda stupid but maybe mix the males and females, because the girls have different ideas than the guys.”

Aside from the obvious criteria of time and distance, participants favored “compatibility” and “diversity.” Compatibility was expressed using different criteria depending on the participant: similar work ethics, similar personalities, and complimentary personalities. Similarly, diversity in groups was expressed variously as mixing different types of people: males and females, a “smart person,” those with different technical abilities, etc. Compatibility seemed to be something that students wished to gain through selecting members they could work with comfortably and productively. On the other hand, diversity was conceived as a result of assigning the groups fairly, so that there would be an equal distribution of resources.

4. Should you be able to choose the groups, or should they be assigned to you?

“I think it’s better for the professor to choose the teams, because he is more objective, he doesn’t know anybody and he will give an equal opportunity to all. If you have been grouped together in the past, then you can say, “you’re on my team, etc” and it’s kind of not fair for everybody else. The shy people would be left, and would have to be grouped together.”

“I think that [if some shy people didn’t take initiative to ask to be in a group, it] would be their own problem. In my view, if you want to be in a good group, you would go out there and get it…it’s not going to come to you.

“There’s advantages and disadvantages to both. If you don’t know anybody in the class, it’s probably better to have the professor assign you, but if you get the chance to know the people, then you can pick who you work best with. I guess in this type of situation, either one would be perfectly fine. There wouldn’t be anything wrong with either one of them.”

Participants were largely split into two camps on this topic (“choose” and “assigned”), although a few participants modified the dichotomy by introducing a third possibility of “assigned with a choice of switching”. Those of the “choose” camp felt that choosing their own groups would enhance the possibility that “slackers” and/or “difficult” people could be avoided. They liked the sense that they were more in control of their academic outcome, and considered this as “fair.” These students tended to view the choosing of teams as laissez-faire: the spoils going to those with initiative to meet and ask desirable members to join their group. On the other hand, those in the “assigned” camp felt that groups would likely be more “fair” if assigned, distributing individuals with access to machine shops.

Another concern was that shy students would have to form groups among themselves after extroverted students formed their groups. This implied that a group of shy students would create a less-than-ideal group dynamic (would not be able to communicate effectively with each other). Yet, a self-proclaimed introvert later contradicted himself when debunking the validity of personality tests by claiming that he is capable of effectively communicating within a group work setting. Finally, a third group suggested that it would be most fair with “assigned” groups as the norm with options to switch groups. All camps seemed to agree that a group in which all members already knew each other would have a competitive edge over other groups.

5. Could you work with someone even if you didn’t like them?

6. How do you manage conflict within the group?

7. Do you feel that the group work experience in this class will help you in your career?[3]

“To qualify that question, I can work better with someone that I do like—better, but I don’t think that should be a problem. I think you have to put that stuff aside. Well unless you just have the two personalities that totally conflict…you might have a problem.”

“It depends on what kind of ‘dislike’ and how strong it is. Because if it’s personal you can put that aside to work on something but if it’s dealing with work ethic, I don’t think it would work really well in a team environment.”

“I think it’s very beneficial because…even though I’d rather work by myself on this project but—it’s beneficial because as an engineer, you’re probably going to be working in teams most of the time. And it’s good to learn how to get along with people, and how to deal with them. Even to compromise your design if you have to—it’s good to learn how to do that because that’s probably what you’re going to be doing as an engineer.”

Students are aware that working in groups is an important aspect of their education as engineers. They understand that a career in mechanical engineering will require them to work effectively in groups not of their choosing (assigned groups). Thus, regardless of whether they could choose their own teams, all of the students believed that working in groups would be a valuable experience. All but two participants believed that they would be able to work with someone that they disliked. All others agreed that they would be able to resolve (or as many students stated, “put aside”) personal differences or compromise design differences and work towards a common goal. Many participants believed that communication is important in managing conflict. One participant suggested assigning separate tasks to two quarrelling individuals to keep them isolated from each other.

8. If you had a choice would you work alone on this project?

“You can still get the project done yourself, but you’re gonna spend more time, more money, or more resources, more research…more everything on that. The point is, that it’s always better to do it in a group so that you get the most efficient device out of the four, eight, ten you pick.”

“Getting in a group, each person has a design so it might bring something new than what you just had by yourself, but….for me, I think I’d rather do it by myself. Just because…it’s not like I don’t like my group at all or anything, because I get along just fine. It’s just going through every process where you have to go with your team, and make a group decision where it’d be easier to do it yourself—I mean I’m not saying that it’s not bad or anything, but it just probably would be easier [to do it alone]. Because, I have the most resource in my group—I could just do it myself anyway.”

When given the hypothetical choice of working alone to avoid the problems of working in groups, only one of the students elected this choice. All others agreed that working in groups would increase the quality of the product as opposed to a product made by one person. Reported benefits of working in groups included the following: development of communication, negotiation, and planning skills.

9. You will be taking the MBTI later this semester—How do you feel about that?

“I think that part of the introduction to mechanical engineering should be, taking a personality test and this is the people that think together, and maybe have somebody from the psych department or another area to say that, ‘we know that these personalities blend in together, there might be some conflict here but, together if they work things out, everybody will be balanced out and help out each other.’”

“What your strong points are…you can focus on that, or, on maybe even what your weak points are—to try to strengthen those. So, it’s sometimes like how he was saying, ‘I didn’t know I was like that,’ and you actually become aware, how you act, after taking that personality test.”

“I don’t think you can tell a person’s personality until you work with them. You can’t tell off a test. Once you just start working with them you know how they—from a couple days—first few days, they might be a little shy or whatever, but after getting to work with them, they might open up to you”

General opinions seemed to favor the MBTI as an interesting if not effective tool for understanding one’s own character traits as well as the dynamic of interaction with others. Others felt that human character and social dynamics are too complex to be predicted by such a test. A common response was to wonder why it was not given in the beginning of the semester.

APPENDIX A:

Student Responses:

Relevant student responses were culled from the focus group transcripts. Note that there are two additional questions which detail student recommendations and final comments.

1. What types of anxieties or concerns do you have about working in groups?

Location/time-schedules

“I guess the participation of everyone. In high school, you can do group projects easily, because everyone lives within three or four miles of each other. Now everyone is as much as forty miles away. I know our teacher is trying to put us into groups that are close together but even then, I don’t know how well it’s going to work out—everyone having jobs, family, obligations, far away…stuff like that.”

“If you have to drive an hour away to get to someone’s house, and you have to drive another hour back home to go to sleep or whatever, or to do homework or study…It’s kind of inconvenient for you. But he (Prof. Bannerot) got [together] a grid where everyone lives close to each other. And that would be good to group them that way too. Although my group, one guy was pretty close to me—fifteen minutes away—the other guy lives up north so… That’s convenient for me, but not for the guy up north, but he chose to…If he groups them that way it’d probably be convenient too. You can meet and go home and not have to worry about traffic.”

“I guess depending on the group, your scheduling and location would vary in importance. I think if you have a serious attitude about the project then…location/schedule wouldn’t be as much of a problem.”

“Yeah if they’re very motivated, then factors like that wouldn’t really affect it, but…”

“Time is important and distance is important, but you can always work around these two. But compatibility and tools are the major points.”

“Generally speaking, where there’s a will there’s a way. There might be a couple of times where not everybody can show up, but, maybe not everybody needs to—maybe they’re working on something else—but I think people will make an effort to try to be there. But then, another problem is that this is UH, it’s a commuter school, many of the students here have families, jobs—so it might really be hard. So you have to factor that in but I don’t think that that’s a major problem. I think that everyone realizes what they need to do to make it happen.”

Work ethic (slackers)

“I wouldn’t call it anxiety, but I didn’t know anybody in the class when I started—you kind of have to pick a group of people you don’t know. So that’s kind of scary, you don’t know what…kind of…their work ethic is, whether it will match with yours or not.”

“I guess you really have to question everybody else’s motivation too, that’s in your group. Because you don’t want the slackers in your group.”

“Nobody wants the slackers. I think everybody tries to work hard, but it doesn’t work out: you don’t have enough time, or maybe you don’t have enough knowledge, or you don’t want to participate that much, or maybe you don’t like members in your group…”

“…you’re worried about that happening, and they’re also worried about it, because you wanna get a good grade (…) There’s always that one person that doesn’t want to contribute that much. I’m not really worried about it, but it happens.

“It’s just that you don’t know everyone’s work ethic. I mean if you knew, it’d be easy to pick the people that you would…hopefully…that you’re more similar to. There’s people that work way too much, and there’s other people that slack off. You want the people in the middle.”

Incompatibility and group dynamics

“Some people in your group might be a little shy or whatever to begin with, but once you get to know them, just talk to them like you’re their friend and stuff. Once you get to know them, they’ll probably open up to you, but some people, they’re enclosed I guess. They don’t wanna open up—initially—but, after you talk to them, usually they start talking to you and telling you their ideas.”

“You say concerns and I’m thinking that some people just don’t get along for whatever reason, it could be for something bogus, or they just don’t mean well. That could be an issue.”

Responsibility and Dependence on Others

“I don’t like depending on other people, like for them to come through on their part of the project. You can assign someone something, and then you have to depend on them to make sure that they finish it. If they don’t finish it, they don’t get the work done.”

“Working in groups is not a problem, as long as everyone pulls their own weight, it’s no big deal.”

“About equal responsibility, I know for a fact that—I can’t say this for all the girls but—I am not accustomed to doing well with cutting stuff…I have not experienced that. Some guys, I have heard that, have worked in shops all their lives. And so, the problem might arise that somebody might not be able to do that, and just because they can’t do that it might seem that they’re not contributing. Even though they can contribute some other way. It might not seem as worthy as actually making it. [instead] they’re making sure that everything is written correctly or…that could be a problem.”

Unequal distribution of resources

“It’s not just work ethic. I think it’s like the skills of everyone. Everyone has (has something they can offer)…like…for me, I think my strong point is designing something that is practical…and I have experience with doing that. But then, you meet those people who have the resources like…there’s always some guys who’s introducing himself to the class, he has access to a machine shop, and the first thing I thought was, “oh my god, I want him in my group.” Because that would be perfect you know, because you’d have a lot of resources to do your project. You could have all the brains in the world, but if you don’t have resources, you don’t have anything.”

“He should provide us with some of the more important resources, like the machine shop. Just the smallest amount of time would help.”

“Maybe we could like, get it [access to the machine shop] for like two hours or something…like once a week, in a time slot.”

“I think that there should be like a set limit that you can spend. Because some people can’t spend more than a hundred, and some people can.

Not worried

“I wouldn’t say [that I’m] worried…I’d say that, it’s like you expect from the people that, [in] this class in this kind of program in engineering, you expect people to be ready to do whatever they need to…”

“I’ve worked with groups before, for work, so all of those initial apprehensions and concerns that I had, I guess, are gone. I can, somewhat deal with them whenever certain issues arise.”

“we’re not anticipating problems. Everyone knows that we all have differing schedules. Everyone has to give up their schedules so that we can manage…I think that it will be an important factor. What kind of activities are we sacrificing …maybe I work out at the gym, but maybe I can reduce, or not go on some days so we can work…that kind of thing. And I think everybody has to do that.”

“Well now that I met my group…I’m not so concerned about it because they’re probably gonna work just as hard as I am, to get it done.”

2. What kind of problems have you encountered in the past with group work?

“Difference of opinion. Especially with this kind of project, whose idea are we gonna take? It has to comprise of everybody’s idea, but whose main idea are we gonna take? Is there gonna be someone that’s gonna feel hurt if their idea or concept is not considered, is not used?”

“I think a big issue is when you have two alpha personalities, going after the same thing…they decide to clash and then everyone just sits there eating popcorn enjoying the show. And they won’t step in and say, ‘hey, let’s do this diplomatically. Let’s just talk about that, we don’t need a leader, let’s all lead each other and getting things done.’”

“There can be other problems. One can be an extrovert while another [is] an introvert and nothing really gets done because the other doesn’t really want to listen. And when someone keeps to themselves and doesn’t bring any good to the group, sharing ideas or thoughts. They can be looking at a design, everybody on the team could be working on it saying, ‘ok, what’s our problem, what can we do?’ Well, one person on the side sits there quietly, not saying much because they…maybe out of fear, about sharing their thoughts—‘maybe I’m wrong? I don’t want to feel bad for pursuing that but what if it’s good?’ Then they just kind of debate back and forth, not really getting anywhere from it.”

“Getting off subject really. I mean, you get a group together and it’s so much easier to talk about other things—you just waste time.”

“To get a good team, sometimes you shouldn’t work with your friends because you do get off subject a lot. It’s really difficult to get a good team together, because if you don’t really like the person you can’t work very well with them, and if you really do like the person you can’t work very well with them you know. You just have to be with the person you get along with but you really don’t click as friends you know. I don’t know.”

3. If you were able to choose your own group members, what criteria would you use?

“Main one would just be location, just because everybody is so spread out.”

“I would also consider the work timing and how the schedules are. [Hard to decipher] some of the people come to the meeting, but others don’t show up”

“Like if you know somebody in your class, you can um…kinda pick the ones that you know are hard workers and that are making good grades—because you know that they are committed to school. Probably to the goals of the team too.”

“with having people having access to machine shops or other tools in the garage. I mean if you get a whole group together and nobody has any resources, then that’d be a lot harder to do as well a job as a team that has three people with this many resources.”

“People that are dependable, that are serious—they care about their [work], they take pride for their work.”

“People that are easy to deal with.”

“compatibility”

“Same personalities, same work ethics. Going back to the whole leadership thing. Some personalities are better at being lead or helped than to let them be on their own and do their own responsibilities—sometimes they need a little encouragement. Others don’t need that, they’re self-motivated essentially.”

“We have to try to select people with different abilities like, drawing…Auto CAD, etc.”

“This may be kinda stupid but maybe mix the males and females, because the girls have different ideas than the guys.”

“I think we should also try to have a, like, smart person on every team. There’s always that one team that has all the smart people in there. And it’s not fair for the rest of the class…I don’t know… I mean, kind of balance it out.”

To that, another student questions:

“you do that by grade? How could that be specified? Some have good personalities, some are hardworking, some are smart but not that hardworking…”

The student replies,

“So if you have like a smart person and a hard worker, I think that balances it out.

4. Should you be able to choose the groups, or should they be assigned to you?

“I think it’s better for the professor to choose the teams, because he is more objective, he doesn’t know anybody and he will give an equal opportunity to all. If you have been grouped together in the past, then you can say, “you’re on my team, etc” and it’s kind of not fair for everybody else. The shy people would be left, and would have to be grouped together.”

“I think that [if some shy people didn’t take initiative to ask to be in a group, it] would be their own problem. In my view, if you want to be in a good group, you would go out there and get it…it’s not going to come to you.

“Personally, I would prefer to pick my own group because I know some people in the class.”

I wouldn’t have any problem if he assigned groups…I would be OK with that.”

“When we finish our degree and we start working for a company, we aren’t gonna know the people that are there. We’re gonna have to start knowing those people, and have to start knowing how to work with those people. We might have some problems with them, we have to also learn how to fix those problems. I think the activity of working with people we don’t know will help us in life.”

“You know what, I just thought about it also. When you asked the question, and we started talking, it was just like ‘maybe we do want him to tell us the group…’”

“[In the workplace], we’re gonna have to deal with not being able to pick who we work with, but, probably in the light of this course, and this grade—because we are working towards getting a good grade—even though we might say, ‘we just want to learn from this experience.’ That is kind of the goal, which is to be able to work with your team members, work together effectively, efficiently, produce this product, and get a grade for it.”

“There’s advantages and disadvantages to both. If you don’t know anybody in the class, it’s probably better to have the professor assign you, but if you get the chance to know the people, then you can pick who you work best with. I guess in this type of situation, either one would be perfectly fine. There wouldn’t be anything wrong with either one of them.”

“I guess another advantage to the professor picking the groups is that, I think the groups will be more balanced. You won’t have one group that has a whole lot of expertise in one area and none in another area—be more balanced. Whereas, if people get together because they’re friends, maybe you’ll have a bunch of groups that are in that particular area.”

Student 1: “I would prefer the prof. to pick the group. Which is what I thought at first. Because he handed out a sheet with all the names and it had like icons on it. And I thought that the together icons were the people who were on [same] teams. But I don’t know what that list ended up being for. Did y’all know what that was for?”

Student 2: “That was to help us see where people lived…yeah location…like ‘suggested’ groups.”

Student 1: “Ok, I thought we were gonna go ahead and get together by location, because that would be easiest. And then, we got to pick our groups—so that was kind of hard, there was some of four and some of three—like I wanted to be with girls. And there actually is an all girls team. And there’s two girls in my group, and two guys.”

“I think it’d actually be better if he assigned them because people get their group together that know each other, or, I mean you can mix people…different personalities, whatever. Not all female, not all male…mix them together and see how it goes. Because I mean, some people are shy. They don’t want to go into a group. They don’t want to initialize like, ‘oh, do you want to be in my group?’ They just sit there and like, waiting there for someone to come up to them. And sometimes that doesn’t happen. They just get…put in a group. So if you actually put them in a group, they won’t have that anxiety—‘oh, I have to find a group,’ you know. So it’s actually good, I think, to put you in a group and it will relieve that. And actually, it will probably put you in a group that has some slackers and some good workers. You can’t, you know, avoid that, but it should work better.”

“I agree with ‘assigned’ also. Just on the basis that, people that know each other or experience you have, they might have a better advantage to the project to begin with because of their past experience. …someone that has a shop and someone that’s clueless, making our group like that, than that is not as competitive…if a bunch of people [that] don’t know each other form a group, there’s a disadvantage.”

“Well I think you should have a little bit of both. Because there are tendencies for people to…you know…it’s beneficial at least to an individual if you know that other person in advance, you know what you’re getting yourself into. So there’s not that—you know—factor… that…uncertainty. Well if you can’t have that, then I think it’s a good thing that you are able to choose your group…if you also have people added to a group, that’s ok too. Because not everyone’s gonna know other people in the class.”

5. Could you work with someone even if you didn’t like them?

6. How do you manage conflict within the group?

7. Do you feel that the group work experience in this class will help you in your career?

“I think it’s really a matter of having a good team manager. For example, if X and Y don’t get along, a member of the team can divide up the work so that the two people with conflict don’t have to work too much together. We’re still gonna be a group, but I consider this a more effective way to achieving oneness.”

“It depends on what kind of ‘dislike’ and how strong it is. Because if it’s personal you can put that aside to work on something but if it’s dealing with work ethic, I don’t think it would work really well in a team environment.”

“It’s just like a work environment. If there’s somebody you don’t like, you still have to deal with it. You need to put it aside.”

Student 1: I think it’s one of those things we ought to discuss because when you work in a professional world, you might not like your boss, but you’re working every minute with him.

Student 2: it’s just like a practice right now.

“I think I have a lot of patience, and I can talk to people and try to figure it out. I’m very calm person myself…”

“To qualify that question, I can work better with someone that I do like—better, but I don’t think that should be a problem. I think you have to put that stuff aside. Well unless you just have the two personalities that totally conflict…you might have a problem.”

Student 1: “I think it’s important that if you’re in a group, and you don’t like the way people are treating you, or something…”

Student 2: “yeah, then you communicate that.”

Student 3: “Don’t let the issue fester”

“Um, I think I could. I think working with someone should be uh… The attitude you have when you’re working with them should be set apart from the attitude you have when you’re socializing with them or talking to them. When you’re working with someone, you’re working towards a goal and it shouldn’t matter whether you like it or not.”

“I’ve worked with someone, he was a boss—and he was African—um and I could not work for him. I ended up quitting. And other than that, I’ve been able to work for other people. So um you sort of start classifying…you try to make sure that the person is not going to be like that one boss, you know…and so, that you know that it’s gonna work, or not work. (…) I don’t know if it was cultural or, age, or if it was gender. The way I was learning, and the way he was teaching didn’t mix with…well…with my learning. Like the way that he taught wasn’t good for my learning. And so we kind of butted heads. Which he probably didn’t even know…but I knew. That I didn’t want to learn from him.”

“I was just going to say that since we’re going to school to be engineers, we’re supposed to be professionals so, ideally, whenever we get into the work place, we’re gonna have to put aside personality issues and things like that, and just you know, focus on the project at hand, so that’s what we’re trying to do now.”

“I’ve had work situations where um…the people I’m working with, we don’t agree on anything, we don’t get along, but we still just focus on finishing the job, put it aside. And in most of the situations I’ve been in academically, where people don’t get along, they end up just not working together. They try to do it separately and then just come together at the end and be like, ‘here’s our project.’ And act like they worked together, but they never did.”

“Well, Bannerot had said that if there are problems, that he has had in the past, students decide to work by themselves. So that was an option that we heard about or some of us knew about. If things get bad, er you know, that’s the best decision to do. But other than that, I think everybody was willing to resolve any sort of conflict and very hopeful in not thinking that there would not be any conflict with personality, and the biggest conflict was expected to be with the design.”

“I really don’t know how I’d deal with conflict in the group. I really don’t…I know that finishing the project is like the ultimate, and so I guess I would just put it aside and uh, just kind of compromise to finish no matter what.”

“It’d be hard…I mean. If they always slacked off with stuff you could probably get around that but…but if they always disagreed with you or always caused trouble or you know within the group or got into fights or arguments or whatever. I mean, you don’t really want to work around that all the time. I’d just probably tell them not to come and just…if he wants to come, come, but don’t argue and waste time with stupid stuff. Yeah, if they’re really, really difficult. I couldn’t work with them. I, myself couldn’t.”

“I feel the same, but if it’s just small things…I mean, I’m in this class and I’m not droppin’ [the class] I gotta get it done so I’m gonna do whatever I need to do to get it done and work with you. I’m not going to try to put up a fight. Just go with the flow.”

“I think I’ve worked with difficult people before, but like I said before, if both of you have the right kind of attitude, then it should…you might not like the way whatever, they do things, but if you both have the understanding that you have a goal to accomplish, and you may have different styles of accomplishing it but you have the same understanding, then it shouldn’t come up too often.”

“If you’re stuck with that person you have to just deal with it. Like she says, you’re not gonna just drop the class because of someone that you don’t like…well I wouldn’t.”

“I think you hopefully just have the same goal of coming up with the final product and have that, you know, more than your particular…you know how you don’t like someone.”

“I only had one person in the class I didn’t want to work with, and I’m not with him, so I’m happy. Like I said, I just want to get done, I’m not going to let someone else get in my way. You know if there’s some type of disagreement we’ll figure it out and go along with because, it’s gotta get done.”

“Well, if it’s not you, you should talk to them both individually, and just tell them ‘this team has the same goal in mind, we have to do this. Even though you don’t like this person, you know, try to put it aside.’ But if it’s with you, then you yourself have to realize that that situation that we both have…the same goal in mind and we should try to get along, and then talk to that person, if they still want to hold a grudge, then let them…but you yourself try not to push it to whatever…you know like, when you get into an argument with someone, usually you push it also. You push their buttons to get them mad or angry or whatever. So just try not to do that. And you should be able to work together. I mean, not well, but at least get something done.”

“I agree with him. I mean, when it’s you, sometimes you do recognize, and sometimes you don’t…it’s like you’re so headstrong, and so stubborn, you don’t recognize it. In that case, somebody probably needs to give you a wake up call and tell you. You know, take you aside. I’d hopefully, they’d do that to me—‘you need to get with it,’ you know?”

“Yes, definitely. Of course.”

“Oh yeah, definitely.”

“No doubt this is how it’s going to be in the future. When you work in a company, you don’t work by yourself.”

“Yes, most definitely. You get to work as a team as well as learning design.”

“Yes, I think it’s good. The only thing I think is lacking, is the part that (another classmate) was talking about: that working in the machine shop gives you hands-on experience with the materials that we are going to be using—you know--that real engineers are using. You know, because there’s only a limited number of materials and you need to know their strengths and what their uses are—common uses—and things like that so I think that’s where it’s lacking for working with teams.”

“I think it’s very beneficial because…even though I’d rather work by myself on this project but—it’s beneficial because as an engineer, you’re probably going to be working in teams most of the time. And it’s good to learn how to get along with people, and how to deal with them. Even to compromise your design if you have to—it’s good to learn how to do that because that’s probably what you’re going to be doing as an engineer.”

“Well, it should…you meet all these conflicts so if people don’t get along, you should get along with them, especially if it’s in your career. You have to. You can’t just say you don’t want to work with this person. You’ll get fired. You’ve got to get along with everyone…I mean…have an open mind with their opinions and hopefully they will respect your opinion also.”

“I think it’s very beneficial working in a group. In engineering, you’re not just by yourself, mostly gonna have to work with people so.”

“ I think it’s a good thing too.”

8. If you had a choice would you work alone on this project?

“No!”

“It just makes things a lot easier, knowing that you can depend on other people to help get the finished product.”

“Two heads better than one.”

“More productive.”

“More ideas together--probably turn out to be a better work than your own.”

“You could probably get the project done, but it wouldn’t be up to the level of what you can accomplish with a group.”

“You can still get the project done yourself, but you’re gonna spend more time, more money, or more resources, more research…more everything on that. The point is, that it’s always better to do it in a group so that you get the most efficient device out of the four, eight, ten you pick.”

“For me, if I was to work on my own, I’m more of a procrastinator. So, seeing someone else, that they wanna get something done, I’m more apt to go out an do it rather than watch another half an hour of TV, or go find something else to do. So other people help motivate me to work harder”

“It’s always good to work as a team. I mean, with this project…you can’t really do it alone. I mean, you can, but it’s going to be a lot of work on you. Because [as] a team, you can have different [types of] knowledge, different ideas, that you would never have thought of. And it’s just bad. And in industry, you work in teams, so you have to get used to it. You can’t just work alone all the time. This isn’t a business to work alone. You just have to get along with people.”

“I’m very independent, but considering this project, there’s no way I would want to do it by myself. I know that I don’t have all the knowledge and resources to figure everything out. It would just collapse on me. So. I’d like to work in the group.”

“I think it brings more challenge to work in a group. Part of the challenge in this class is also, to get along, and if you don’t get along, still manage to get things done.”

“Getting in a group, each person has a design so it might bring something new than what you just had by yourself, but…for me, I think I’d rather do it by myself. Just because…it’s not like I don’t like my group at all or anything, because I get along just fine. It’s just going through every process where you have to go with your team, and make a group decision where it’d be easier to do it yourself—I mean I’m not saying that it’s not bad or anything, but it just probably would be easier [to do it alone]. Because, I have the most resource in my group—I could just do it myself anyway.”

“I think I have a bad habit of kind of taking things on to do them myself…just because I don’t want to bother other people or something. But in the last couple of years, I’ve found out that it’s a lot more beneficial to work as a group because you can get a lot more accomplished and come up with a better product.”

9. You will be taking the MBTI later this semester—How do you feel about that?

“They’re good. The last group that I worked in, part of the hiring process was to take the Myer’s Briggs. (…) And it was pretty interesting to see because you don’t know, what each answer is when you are answering something. You don’t know what score it’s going to affect. So you’re just answering based on your own thoughts and experiences and when you do get the results and you add all the numbers up. You go, ‘oh, I guess I am…I guess I am like that. I didn’t know that.’ So I thought it was really interesting. And it actually helps a lot, not just in working in a group, but working individually. It helps you realize other things about yourself that didn’t know before, or emphasizes things that you already knew, but it gives you a better explanation as to why you’re that type of person.”

“What your strong points are…you can focus on that, or, on maybe even what your weak points are—to try to strengthen those. So, it’s sometimes like how he was saying, ‘I didn’t know I was like that,’ and you actually become aware, how you act, after taking that personality test.”

“I think I’m pretty open. I think I can be pretty objective about myself. I can read it and I won’t argue with that and say yeah, you’re right. Or, I doubt I can learn about myself but, everything [inaudible] as I said objective.”

“I think that part of the introduction to mechanical engineering should be, taking a personality test and this is the people that think together, and maybe have somebody from the psych department or another area to say that, ‘we know that these personalities blend in together, there might be some conflict here but, together if they work things out, everybody will be balanced out and help out each other.’”

“I think they’re interesting. Kind of fun. I didn’t know that we were going to do one at the end or what. I didn’t know when we’d do it. And so that was going to be important—like how it was going to play into maybe our project. Like what we might have to write about it, or we’d be graded on it. But they’re good, I guess, personally. And the one that we did, that was when we had teams. Most of the time you do it so that you make sure that everybody doesn’t have conflicts. (…) we did it real quick and didn’t spend a lot of time on it, so I didn’t like it. (laughs). So I don’t know, I think the second time around, you’re just like ‘whatever.’”

“I guess if um, if we used it before teams were ever chosen, to kind of ensure that you didn’t have too many of the same personality in each team, it could be useful just to kind of prevent conflict, but other than that…it’s …”

“I’ve never really taken one before, but like he said, If you took it before, I guess it would be to your benefit. Just to check and make sure everything’s gonna work.”

“well yeah, also to realize what your strengths are, what your weaknesses are, what you can work on…how you should…what you should portray when you’re in the group. How you should work.”

“It’s multiple choice right? I don’t think that those are very helpful, because you always get questions like, ‘I’m some of that, and some of that. So I can’t answer it’ So I’m like, ‘skip this whole test because I’m like trying to be fair, but I’m like, “those are pointless, and I don’t care.’ I don’t [inaudible] the outcome [inaudible] I know how I am, but I mean, I understand it’s for Bannerot’s purposes to figure out with these tests how people react to them, but there’s always an in-between and certain circumstances so I can’t answer the question.”

“It can be helpful for Bannerot, but it may not always tell me exactly what’s people’s feelings whereas the group project…things like that.”

“I don’t know if they take it that seriously in the company. I know I’m an introvert—very much so. So I’m not going to talk to people like, regular conversation or whatever but, if I get put in a group, I’m still going to do good group work—I can communicate. I don’t think it matters at all.”

“I don’t think you can tell a person’s personality until you work with them. You can’t tell off a test. Once you just start working with them you know how they—from a couple days—first few days, they might be a little shy or whatever, but after getting to work with them, they might open up to you”

“Well, pretty much, I don’t like these types of tests either. If he was going to try to figure out what someone was like, why don’t you just try to spend the time to talk to them—it’s probably a better gauge anyway.”

10. Do you have any recommendations or suggestions for Dr. Bannerot?

“This maybe kinda stupid but maybe mix the males and females, ‘cause the girls have different ideas than the guys.”

“There’s always that one team that has all the smart people in there. And it’s not fair for the rest of the class. I dunno. I mean, kind of balance it out.”

“I don’t have any problem with the way he has the class set up, but the way he has it set up—the time that is allotted as class times, we’re all sitting in our seats, but we don’t get to communicate with each other. We listen to him, and he talks to us, the whole time. The most you guys know of me is (…) what I told you guys (in the introduction) and you don’t really know anything else. For all you know, I could be a big slacker or some smart genius. To be in groups and communicate with each other, he should let us communicate. Right now (in this focus group discussion) it’s good, because we’re singled out, and we could find out more about each other…I’m not saying like let’s make a team right here to take advantage of it, but …he’s not making it very easy.”

“Maybe instead of talking all…I mean, what he says is important, but I think he should still get input on whatever he’s saying. And that way, we’ll know who are the people that speak out, or always constantly talking and those who aren’t so that we can kind of cancel the two out.”

“I think that the personal evaluation should happen first, and I think that it would be a pretty good idea to not let students pick their own groups because, you have a tendency to pick your friends no matter what. Whether you want to be objective about yourself or not. You’re always gonna pick people who you already know you’re gonna work well with, or your friends basically. This should be…this should be…the design courses are preparing us for the real world. In the real world, we’re not going to be given Myers-Briggs personality tests, oh well, we can’t hire you…wait, it did happen to me but…but mainly you’re just going to be hired as an engineer—and it depends on what group you’re applying to whether you’re management or, with the operators, or on a rig somewhere. And you need to be able to fit in, or just be thrown in to anything. Basically be thrown into the lion’s den and let you grow professionally and deal with those issues. So first, I think they should have a short semester or maybe art of introduction to mechanical engineering…since—see that’s the difficulty with Universities here in the US. I know Israel, Mexico, and Spain are the same thing: where you start in a class in your degree—that’s it, those are the same people that you work with throughout the four years of your entire career. You don’t change. In fact, in Mexico City, you don’t change class rooms, your teachers come to you, you don’t go to your teachers. You work with the same people, go to the same labs, do everything together. I think it kind of helps build better individuals and team members. Unfortunately here, the curriculum is open to—which is a good thing and a bad thing I guess. It’s good that the curriculum’s here are allowed to be open to the students’ needs. But at the same time, in order to deal with things professionally, it’s better to do things as a group together and not be separated and put with different people all the time. Because then there’s no single direction…you’re like a tree branching in different areas and there’s no true scope to the thing…everybody’s going for the same degree, but we’re all mixed in together like a bag of m&m’s.”

“I think that part of the introduction to mechanical engineering should be, taking a personality test and this is the people that think together, and maybe have somebody from the psych department or another area to say that, ‘we know that these personalities blend in together, there might be some conflict here but, together if they work things out, everybody will be balanced out and help out each other.’”

“I really think that you get more experience from that. Mixing people with all kinds of different personalities, different back grounds.”

“I think it’s hard to put us into groups because he doesn’t know us either. So he can’t really put a good group together unless he’s been with us for a while. It’s pretty hard for him. There’s really nothing he can really do about it, except you know like, put us together, but maybe gauge it a little differently. Like with that thing that puts us in front of the group…[instead he should] put us in groups, and then he could have individual groups talk to each other about how they are, what they think, and then, just switch people around.”

“I think that the questionnaire that he gave us, should have been made public.”

“I still think you could, you know, just working with people before you make the groups, you can see, if there’s somebody you don’t like, might get along with another group.”

11. Any final words?

“I just think that we’re all gonna learn something. You’re either gonna learn what to do, or what not to do—who to work with and who not to work with.”

“I guess it also helps you learn what you can do in a group. You can rate yourself also.”

“I’m excited about the fact that we will actually build something from our own ideas.”

“I think it would be nice if more of the points were on objective type of credit like the actual testing rather than subjective—whether he likes it and whether he likes the report and stuff like that. So it’s more quantitative instead of qualitative.”

“Some of them (the rubrics) are very vague and the only thing that really is that way is just for the final testing and that’s not actually that large of the grades. There’s an equal amount of grade just for whether he thinks it looks nice and he thinks it’s reliable and things like that.”

“I don’t know if this is a good suggestion or not, but. I really don’t like to write. Especially ten page reports, fifteen page reports. I’d much rather be building than writing. Um, I think a little bit more of the grade should be for the project itself and not [for] reports or progress reports.”

“Yeah, it’s not a natural situation [to introduce yourself in front of the class]. You’re not really going to be yourself when you’re up there. I was like shocked…not shocked, but like…I didn’t really want to go up there. It just puts you on the spot.”

-----------------------

[1] Questions 5, 6, 7 elicited similar student responses. For this reason they are grouped together in Detailed Findings and Appendix A: Student Responses.

[2] Frequency refers to how many times something was said. Extensiveness refers to how many different people reported the same thing. Emotion refers to the intensity, passion, and enthusiasm with which something was reported. Specificity refers to comments that provide detail—especially referring to personal experience. Direct student responses indicating what they believed to be most important was also considered in conjunction with the analysis.

[3] Questions 5, 6, 7 elicited similar student responses. For this reason they are grouped together in Detailed Findings and Appendix A: Student Responses.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download