The mirage of group work at university: learning together or carrying the others?

PalmaAt university, group work has consolidated as a key learning tool, in line with the principles of the Bologna Process. But behind the idea of cooperation and preparation for the professional world, tensions lurk, such as inequalities between classmates, diverse evaluation systems, and a question that divides students and teachers: is it really fair how collective work is evaluated?

The dean of the Faculty of Education at the UIB, Carme Pinya, argues that this methodology is structural. “In many study plans, group work is a transversal competence. Learning to work in a team is an outstanding subject, and therefore, a lot of work is done on it”, she explains. Nevertheless, she acknowledges a common reality in classrooms: “In group work, there is always someone who leans on others”. To illustrate this, Pinya often refers to an article that talks about “jetas y mantas”, a distinction between those who get involved and those who avoid the work. A metaphor that, she says, helps students identify recurring dynamics and denounce them.

Those who endure and those who enable

According to the testimony of some students, this inequality is the main problem of the system. Laura (fictitious name), a third-year History student, summarizes it with resignation: “There is always someone who does nothing and then benefits equally. You end up doing the work to avoid failing. This is not teamwork, it is putting up with the group. It generates friction and there are professors who neglect it. They give a grade and ‘you’ll sort it out”.

Along the same lines, Marc (fictional name), a third-year Economics student, expresses: “There are groups where one person disappears completely. The problem is that the grade is shared. It’s unfair to everyone, both to those who work and to those who do nothing.” This perception is accentuated when evaluation systems do not sufficiently distinguish individual contributions, which, according to some students, generates impunity and discourages effort.

But not all voices are critical. Julia (fictional name), a second-year Psychology student, defends group work as an essential tool: “At first, I found them tedious, but I’ve learned a lot. It forces you to coordinate, to listen to other ways of doing things, to organize yourself better, and to get to know your classmates.” According to her, the key is not to eliminate it, but to learn to manage it: “In professional life, you don’t work alone. Even if there are people who get less involved, you also learn to adapt and to lead and take the initiative.”

This vision aligns with institutional discourse. At the Faculty of Law, the dean, Aina Salom, emphasizes that "group work has both positive and negative connotations." Among the positives, she highlights that "it allows students to see how real life works: many goals are only achieved by working as a team." "Furthermore, it's a way to make them look each other in the eye, to interact, which otherwise they don't do," she adds.

Along the same lines, UIB professor Ivan Solivellas argues that the value of group work depends, in large part, on individual involvement. "Any work benefits those who take it seriously and take advantage of the task as a learning opportunity," he states. Nevertheless, he admits differences among students: "There can be students who contribute more or less; there are those with more ability who, with less time, can do more work."

A bag of points

One of the most controversial points is evaluation. At the Faculty of Education, Pinya explains that there are mechanisms to try to correct imbalances. One is the well-known "points bag", a system in which the group can distribute the grade according to the actual work of each member. "In a group of four people, for example, 20 points are given (five per person), which are distributed according to the work done, so that someone can get an eight and another a three. Then it is signed and handed in," he details. This system, however, is not widespread: "It is not mandatory. It is used when there are problems within the group," he points out.

Solivellas emphasizes shared responsibility and the active role of students. "A piece of work, whether individual or group, must be submitted and has a grade. If it is a group, the grade is for all members," he explains. And he adds: "In case of possible problems, it is the group itself that must inform the professor so that measures can be taken. If a person does not do their work, the professor warns them, but these are unusual situations."

Beyond evaluation tools, both students and professors agree on one idea: group work is not simply dividing tasks. "Good group work is not about everyone doing the same thing at the same time, but about each person enhancing their strengths," explains Salom. Pinya adds that the goal is to avoid fragmentation: "It's not about each student doing a part and then joining fragments."

In this regard, Solivellas also relativizes the debate on evaluation: “All evaluation systems have positive and negative aspects. There is no perfect system”. According to him, the weight of group work varies depending on the subject: “They can have a decisive weight in the final grade. In my case, they represent approximately 20%”. Nevertheless, the reality in the classroom often deviates from the ideal model. Differences in dedication, the perception of unfairness in grades, and internal group management still generate conflicts. “You learn to get by, but you also learn that it doesn't always depend on you”, summarizes Laura.

Solivellas also points to a recurring factor: group configuration. “Sometimes, students get together with friends and then disagreements and problems arise”, he points out. Despite everything, he defends the usefulness of the model: “For professors, it is easier to do individual work, because they save hours of management. But, if the effort is made to promote group work, it is because it is necessary. When the group functions as it should, the result is much better than the sum of the parts”.

From the faculties, the message is clear. “The goal is not only to acquire knowledge, but also to develop skills such as leadership, reaching consensus, and managing discrepancies”, recalls Salom. Pinya, however, adds a nuance that synthesizes the dilemma: “You can't bet everything on teamwork”. Between the ideal cooperation and the imperfect reality, group work is one of the most powerful and most discussed tools at university.