This is not the front page

Utilizing Small Group Projects in Higher Education  

Using small group projects helps students develop skills in the areas of communication, critical thinking, and collaboration, which are transferable socially and professionally. Small group work can also improve students’ understanding of course material and increase their confidence. Unfortunately, many students dread group projects because of past negative experiences with unclear expectations, unequal participation of group members, and/or lack of support and guidance. Assigning a group project without supporting students in navigating the group work is "not just to risk, but to guarantee some kind of disaster” (Ward, 2022). Positive small group experiences that effectively engage and educate students require thoughtfulness, planning, and ongoing student support.

Kristin Ziska-Strange (2024) identified six practical strategies to consider when developing group projects for the higher education classroom.

  1. Define Group Structure and Roles: Establish specific roles for each group member. Assign roles or identify the various roles and allow students to choose.
  2. Facilitate Effective Communication: Promote structured communication methods such as online discussion boards and shared documents.
  3.  Encourage Individual Accountability: Peer evaluations and progress check-ins can keep students accountable.
  4. Leverage Technology Tools: Provide collaboration tools like whiteboards and Zoom that will streamline collaboration.
  5. Prioritize Process Over Product: In addition to grading the final deliverable, also incorporate grading that considers communication and collaboration skills.
  6. Address Common Challenges: Take time to educate students about common group challenges and conflict resolution before they begin working in groups.

Creating interdependence is also a key to success in group projects (Carnegie Mellon University, 2019). To do this, the project must be designed so that students are dependent on one another to get the work done. For example, ensure the project is sufficiently complex to require a diverse range of knowledge and skills, allowing students to rely on each other's expertise and abilities.

4 students at a table talking and writing on paper

Credit: Group of Students Working Together by Andy Barbour is licensed under CC0. Accessed Feb. 28, 2025.

Related Topics

See it in Practice

A robotic hand and a human hand reaching towards the letters AI

Credit: "© ipopba/ Adobe Stock.” Accessed February 27, 2026.

The following assignment is a group assignment in a graduate level geospatial course.  

Details

This week your team will work through a structured approach to hypothesis refinement using human-centered methods, LLM-centered methods, and human-machine collaboration. By following these steps, you will critically engage with both human reasoning and AI-assisted insights to enhance your understanding of the capstone scenario.  

Step 1: Human-Centered Analysis

As a group, brainstorm responses to the following questions. Do not use AI/LLMs for this portion of the assignment.

  1. Identify your assumptions.
  2. Define your research question.
  3. Generate Hypotheses.
  4. Identify any limitations that your team faces in testing these hypotheses.  

Step 2: AAG-Centered Analysis

Now that your team has developed initial hypotheses, use a Large Language Model (LLM) (e.g., Copilot, ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini) to generate additional hypotheses to answer your research question.

In your response, include the prompts used and a summary of the hypotheses the LLM generated.  

Step 3: Human-Machine Collaboration and Evaluation

Compare the human-generated hypotheses from Step 1 with those generated by the LLM in Step 2.

  1. Critique the LLMs Results
    • Are the AI-generated hypotheses relevant and well-structured?
    • Do they introduce new perspectives your team hadn’t considered?
    • Are there any biases, inaccuracies, or overly generic statements in the LLMs responses?
  2. Compare & Evaluate Hypotheses
    • How do the human-generated hypotheses compare with those produced by the LLM?
    • Are there overlapping themes or significant differences?
  3. Refine Your Hypotheses
    • Based on your evaluation, refine your hypotheses by integrating the best elements from both human and AI-generated insights. 

Considerations

One of the primary goals of this assignment is to encourage students to utilize LLMs (AI) in a constructive way and to report critically about its output. The premise of this assignment can be adjusted for an infinite number of topics and assignment types.

Related Examples

active learning
Group Work
case study
discussion
Artificial Intelligence

Contributor(s)

Sample Memorandum of Understanding

Team Name:

Team Contacts:

Team member contact info
NameRoleEmailPhone Number
Student 1Roleemail 1phone number 1
Student 2Roleemail 2phone number 2
Student 3Roleemail 3phone number 3

Working Culture

Responsibilities

List each project role and outline/describe the associated responsibility for the individual serving in the role. Keep key tasks in mind such as scheduling meetings, setting and maintaining meeting agendas, record keeping, etc.

Communication Plan

  • Identify how the group will communicate (Canvas, Teams, phone, email, Zoom, other).
  • Identify when and how frequently the group will communicate while working on the project and how and where agendas and notes will be recorded.

Code of Conduct within the Group

  • Identify how the group should behave in communications and while work together. Keep in mind how the group will address:
  • Strategies to ensure cooperation and equal distribution of tasks
  • Strategies for encouraging/including ideas from all team members
  • Strategies for keeping on task
  • Preferences for leadership (informal, formal, individual, shared)

Open Issues, Assumptions, Risks, or Obstacles

  • Identify known issues that may impact the completion of the project on the part of the group. How will the group handle these?
  • Identify any known or potential risks or obstacles that may impact the completion of the project. How will the group handle these?

Strategies

Identify strategies to fulfill these standards and adhere to academic integrity and copyright.

Consequences

Effects of violation: Explain how the group will handle instances where a group member violates the academic integrity policy, commits copyright infringement, or violates the code of conduct. What actions will the group take? If the instructor discovers a violation, how will the team handle it?

Commitment to the Terms of This Agreement

By signing this document, I agree to participate in the course project in a manner that aligns with the specified terms of this document. I understand my responsibilities as they are outlined above, and I accept full responsibility for my conduct, which includes abiding by University course and team policies. Failure to comply with the standards specified will result in the appropriate repercussions for any violations. 

Team Member names, signatures, and date.

A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) requires group members to commit to the terms of the MOU and can help prevent conflicts among group members. A good MOU can help define individuals’ roles and expected responsibilities, and it can include a communication plan to identify a schedule and the ways in which group members will communicate (Canvas, Zoom, etc.). Additionally, an MOU can include a code of conduct for the group, which might include the following:  

  • Strategies to ensure cooperation and equal distribution of tasks
  • Strategies for encouraging/including ideas from all team members (team maintenance)
  • Strategies for keeping on task (task maintenance)
  • Preferences for leadership (informal, formal, individual, shared)

A well-developed MOU can help groups identify issues that might affect the completion of the project and spur conversation about how a group might handle these obstacles, should they arise.  

Finally, an MOU can lay out strategies for dealing with how the group plans to implement consequences should a member violate the code of conduct or class or school rules. What actions will the group take if a member violates the academic integrity policy? How will the team handle a situation where the instructor discovers a violation made by a group member?    

The development of an MOU can be used as a graded class assignment or simply as a required group activity. If grading MOUs, use a rubric and share it with students when the assignment is given. 

Considerations

  • Time allocation: plan for time spent helping groups develop their MOU, monitoring progress, and fielding questions.  
  • Grading: if you plan to grade the MOU, use a well-developed rubric.  

Related Examples

active learning
communication
problem solving
social learning
Group Work
discussion

Contributor(s)

CategoryExemplaryEmergingLackingAbsent 
ContributionsRoutinely provides useful ideas and is a leader who contributes a lot of effort.Occasionally provides useful ideas and is a satisfactory group member who does what is required.Rarely provides useful ideas and often does not participate.Has not contributed to the group work.
Problem-solvingRoutinely looks for and suggests solutions to problems.  Occasionally looks for and suggests solutions to problems.Rarely looks for and suggests solutions to problems.Has not engaged in problem-solving.
AttitudeIs never publicly critical of the project or the work of others. Always has a positive attitude and encourages others.Is rarely publicly critical of the project or the work of others. Usually has a positive attitude and encourages others.Is sometimes publicly critical of the project or the work of others. Sometimes has a negative attitude and rarely encourages others.Is often critical of the project or the work of others. Regularly has a negative attitude and is not encouraging to others.
Focus on the taskConsistently stays focused on tasks. Very self-directed.Usually stays focused on the tasks. Is a reliable team member.Rarely stays focused on tasks. Needs reminders and is not consistently reliable.Not focused on tasks. Not reliable.

 

Working with others		Almost always listens to, shares with, and supports the efforts of others. Tries to keep people working well together.Usually listens to, shares with, and supports the efforts of others. Does not disrupt the group’s work.Rarely listens to, shares with, and supports the efforts of others. Is sometimes disruptive to the group’s work.Does not work well with others.

This rubric is adapted from one of several teamwork rubrics at University of Texas at San Antonio, Core Curriculum: Rubrics and Resources. This rubric will be used by each member of a team to evaluate each teammate. It can also be used for self-evaluation.  

Peer evaluations are a crucial and often underutilized component of group work. They provide students with the opportunity to assess their peers' contributions, fostering a sense of accountability and encouraging active participation. Peer evaluations can also enhance critical thinking and self-reflection, as students must consider objectively the strengths and weaknesses of their peers' work. This process helps students develop valuable skills, such as teamwork, communication, and constructive feedback, that are applicable in professional settings.

To implement peer evaluations effectively, it's essential to establish clear guidelines for students.  

To implement peer evaluations:  

  • Create a transparent and accessible rubric for students to use, like the one above.
  • Review the rubric with students before the group work begins.
  • Discuss how to give constructive feedback, emphasizing the importance of being respectful and specific.
  • Share examples of and discuss the characteristics of strong and weak team members.
  • Make changes to the rubric based on student feedback and how well it works when used for grading.
  • If desired, develop the rubric with students; active involvement in this process can help students invest in the larger project (and can be enlightening for instructors). 

Related Examples

active learning
social learning
Group Work
Peer Evaluation
Rubric

Contributor(s)

References/Resources

Contributor(s)