Making Groups Work Well
Strategies for Effective Team Assignments
Written by Maria Widmer and edited by Laura Schmidli
Total reading time:
Many instructors have a renewed interest in fostering uniquely human skills like teamwork. The ability to work effectively with others is often cited as a key “real-world” competency that benefits students in several ways. By working with peers, students can find social and cognitive support (Chang & Brickman, 2018), develop greater self-efficacy (Aikens & Kulacki, 2023), and grow important skills that connect their university education to life after graduation (Tumpa et al., 2022).
At the same time, students cite persistent challenges with group work: interpersonal conflicts, unequal contributions among team members, and unfairness in assessment strategies, among other factors (Francis et al., 2024; Wilson et al., 2018). How, then, can instructors most effectively prepare students to build trust, collaborate across differences, navigate conflict, and work together to solve complex challenges? Educational research points to several instructional strategies that can improve the experiences and outcomes associated with participation in collaborative assignments.
What’s effective?
Instructors play an active role in shaping what and how students learn in team-based projects. Designing effective group work requires careful planning and facilitation, including helping students begin working productively with their groups, checking in with groups throughout the semester, and designing assessment strategies that reflect the holistic learning outcomes for the group assignment.
Actively Support Group Formation
Professor Ankur Desai teaches Meteorological Measurements, a course that gives students practical experience in planning, conducting, and presenting meteorological and climatological observations in a team setting.
Schedule Regular Check-ins with Groups
Professors Jason Delborne and Manuel Teodoro teach a graduate-level course, Workshop in Public Affairs, where students work in teams throughout the semester to address real problems for public agencies and organizations.
Build a Holistic Assessment Strategy
Professor Anna Bierbrauer teaches Plants and Ecology in Design. This course asks students to create designs that integrate ecological principles with plants’ aesthetic and functional qualities and that adhere to professional disciplinary standards.
1. Actively Support Group Formation
After designing assignments that require collaboration, instructors play an important role early in a course: helping students to form their groups and determine their plan of action (Postlethwait, 2016). In this initial phase, instructors make decisions about group composition, connect students with their collaborators, and support groups as they begin working together. Research literature suggests that students demonstrate better learning outcomes when instructors intentionally compose group membership, instead of using randomized groupings or allowing students to self-select (Monson, 2017).
As students begin their collaborations, providing structured roles for all group members can help to support effective interaction (de Hei et al., 2016). Potential roles to consider include facilitator, project manager, communicator, devil’s advocate, editor, designer, researcher, or recorder. Instructors can also look to real-world disciplinary contexts to find professional roles that align with the objectives of the group assignment.
Finally, instructors can support students with getting started by providing explicit training in collaboration skills (Bacon et al., 2019; Tucker & Abbasi, 2016). One common practice involves having students submit a group contract or Memorandum of Understanding at the beginning of the semester. This document, which group members complete together, outlines project requirements, timelines, shared expectations, team roles and responsibilities, communication norms, and plans for navigating challenges. Research on inclusive teaching recommends helping students to understand that everyone works differently and has varying needs—and that talking openly about individual needs should be a normal part of setting group expectations (Salvatore et al., 2024).
Another common practice is to introduce students to models of team development and group dynamics that they might expect to see over the course of their collaboration (Bacon et al., 2019; Hansen, 2006). For example, Tuckman’s (1965) Stages of Group Development—in which teams move through Forming, Storming, Norming, and Performing phases—is a well-known framework that normalizes and provides guidance about group conflict. Offering direction about how to work effectively in teams can have a considerable influence on students’ satisfaction with their group work experience (Oakley et al., 2007).
L&S Instructor Example: Scaffolding Student Autonomy Using Group Roles
Ankur Desai
Vilas Distinguished Professor and Department Chair, Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences
Professor Ankur Desai teaches Meteorological Measurements, a course that gives students practical experience in planning, conducting, and presenting meteorological and climatological observations in a team setting.
What do I do?
ATM OCN 404 Meteorological Measurements is a course I co-developed that exposes students to atmospheric science experimental design and instrumentation through an experiential learning field setting and whole class group project. It is a fast paced class with a lot of components, mimicking the real-life experience of field researchers. After we started the course, we learned that presenting all the components that go into the final project at once was overwhelming. We also wanted to provide student agency in selection of project design and instruments. So instead of a “mega-prompt” with all this information, students first review and present to each other previous year final reports and presentations. Then we work backwards to assess how those students got to that in 14 weeks and what must have been needed to do so. Even though the primary instrument of assessment for this class is a single group presentation and paper, each step is separated out with shorter assignments that may be as simple as a reflection, to contributing to a group safety plan, to sharing a single figure or paragraph.
Why do I do it?
In several iterations of the course, another instructor and I conducted a pre- and post-class survey to assess in which elements of the course students gained the most skills and what areas needed more support. What we found was that there is no single unifying moment where every student “gets it” or where every student shines. Our alumni also frequently note “collaboration,” “teamwork,” “communication,” and “analysis” as the most needed skills for new job entrants. To make sure every student had an opportunity to engage in those skills, we scaffolded the group project and assigned different student leaders to each component or instrument. During the actual field component, we use a “gradual release of responsibility” (GRR) framework (Fisher & Frey, 2021) or an “actuating hands-on autonomy” (AHA) model (Desai et al., in review), to allow students to gain more independence and confidence with time. Each day has a “mission scientist” in charge of the day, a “forecaster” who leads the morning discussion of plans and makes the “go/no go” decision, and a “debriefer” who gathers everyone at end of day and reflects on successes, challenges, and goals for next day. Each scientific instrument being used is assigned an “instrument mentor” whose job it is to ensure that instrument is prepared, calibrated, and packed with all the necessary components. The mentor trains others in its use and helps with archiving the data collected. In this way, everyone in the group feels like they have something for which they are “in charge” and different moments from which to gain autonomy. As students get more skilled in these roles and better at teaching each other, I give less direct guidance.
What impact does it have on students?
Having taught this course regularly for over a decade, what I see every time is how much students gain by learning from each other, especially when things don’t go right, which they inevitably do. I often say my “secret learning outcome” for this course is that “everything that could go wrong, should go wrong, and students will learn to resolve problems together.” Students frequently come back saying how much they appreciated “learning from failure” and seeing how the “real-world” often challenges the theories they learned in class about how weather is “supposed” to work. Being able to deal with the unexpected and setbacks is an important life and career skill. It’s something all group projects could incorporate in some fashion.
What might I change in the future?
Our survey results identified a few weak points, especially on providing enough time, space, and training on data analysis and group report writing. It might make sense for those components to be an entire separate semester, given the large amount of time and logistics it takes to pull off a field-trip based class. I also have a tendency to select leaders for various roles instead of asking for student input. Students are more likely to trust a group lead of their choice.
Guiding Questions for Instructors
- What roles might you use for your group projects? Consider the functional needs of the assignment as well as any professional or disciplinary roles that may be relevant.
- What would it look like to use a “gradual release of responsibility”(Fisher & Frey, 2021) approach in your course, where students complete more independent work gradually throughout the project? What are key moments in the group work process when you could give students opportunities to be “in charge”?
2. Schedule Regular Check-Ins with Groups
Even after groups are successfully up and running, instructors should play an active role in monitoring, guiding, and evaluating group progress (de Hei et al., 2016). Checking in with individual groups proactively throughout the semester can help to mitigate issues before they emerge (Aikens & Kulacki, 2023). Check-ins can take the form of team meetings, individual reflections, and group progress reports. One or more of these check-in formats may work for your students, depending on class size and staffing. In addition to allowing instructors to address emerging issues and conflicts, check-ins can also serve as critical opportunities for group members to engage in reflection about their progress and processes. Francis and colleagues (2024) suggest that even one or two brief (15-minute) meetings between instructors and groups can be effective.
When meeting with student groups, instructors can offer a number of supportive interventions: facilitating difficult conversations among group members, clarifying aspects of tasks if needed, and leading students to reflect on how they are developing collaborative skills (Salvatore et al., 2024; Tumpa et al., 2022).
L&S Instructor Example: Shifting the Role of the Instructor
Jason Delborne
Associate Professor of Public Affairs, and Manuel Teodoro, Robert F. & Sylvia T. Wagner Distinguished Professor, La Follette School of Public Affairs
Manuel Teodoro
Robert F. & Sylvia T. Wagner Distinguished Professor, La Follette School of Public Affairs
Professors Delborne and Teodoro teach PA 869: Workshop in Public Affairs. In this graduate-level course, students work in teams throughout the semester to address real problems for public agencies and organizations. Working effectively in groups is a critical skill; students must adhere to high levels of professionalism when interacting with their clients. Professors Delborne and Teodoro emphasize to students that the course is “fundamentally different from traditional courses that involve a series of assignments, exams, etc., motivated by the carrot-and-stick of grades.” Rather, “students’ own sense of responsibility and service ethic” should drive their performance. Acknowledging that this approach can be “disorienting” for students who are accustomed to a more traditional “assignment-work/study-grade-repeat model,” Professors Delborne and Teodoro position themselves as facilitators and coaches when engaging with student groups.
What do we do?
We meet with each team for 15-25 minutes every class period. Student teams prepare an agenda for the meeting in advance, which focuses less on comprehensive updates and more on the questions/challenges they are struggling with.
Why do we do it?
We want to inhabit the role of coaches rather than managers. As faculty, we want to distance ourselves from leading the projects, which could get in the way of leadership emerging in the team. We foster independence by having students communicate directly with their external clients rather than us serving as a go-between.
What impact does it have on students?
Students struggle a bit as they realize that we do not “tell them what to do” or how to organize themselves. Groups respond differently – sometimes someone takes on the traditional role of team leader, and sometimes teams find ways to distribute leadership responsibilities more evenly. If severe problems or dynamics emerge, we offer to facilitate difficult conversations with them or communicate directly with their client. By the end of the semester, almost every team demonstrates a strong sense of ownership, with motivation for high quality coming more intrinsically than through aiming for a high grade.
What might we change in the future?
We may explore a peer feedback process that encourages more direct communication among team members. While the current system of 3 rounds of anonymous peer review helps us faculty identify team problems and take action, students do not always learn how to communicate within the team in productive and constructive ways.
Guiding Questions for Instructors
- How do you currently frame your role as an instructor when working with student groups: facilitator, manager, coach, observer, or something else?
- Considering the size and staffing of your course, how could you introduce regular opportunities to check in with individual students or groups throughout the semester? What would you like these check-ins to focus on (e.g., progress on task, group dynamics, individual reflections on learning)?
3. Build a Holistic Assessment Strategy
Assessment of group work can take place throughout the semester, not just when assigning final grades. Research literature indicates that effective evaluations of group work involve multiple instruments that assess different aspects of the collaborative effort. When developing an assessment strategy for a group assignment, instructors may consider how to balance evaluation of both individual and group contributions (Davies, 2009). Assessment of individual effort can involve asking students to identify and reflect on their personal contributions to the group’s work (Tucker & Abbasi, 2016). It can also involve peer evaluation, where students are asked to identify and rate the contributions of their groupmates (Oakley, 2004). When using peer ratings as part of an assessment strategy, it is important to provide students with clear criteria (Chang & Brickman, 2018; Tomcho & Foels, 2012).
Effective approaches to assessing group work also balance evaluation of process and product—that is, student behaviors or practices as well as the quality of the summative artifact (e.g., paper, presentation, etc.). Assessing group processes demonstrates to students that the teamwork skills they have developed are recognized and valued. Group processes might include factors such as preparation, communication, and attendance at team meetings (Benning, 2024).
Salvatore and colleagues (2024) note that inclusive approaches to assessment account for variation in what “purposeful and motivated,” “resourceful and knowledgeable,” and “strategic and goal-directed” students look like and do (p. 22). Holistic assessment strategies that evaluate multiple aspects of the collaborative effort offer a range of ways for students to demonstrate their contributions.
L&S Instructor Example: Balancing Individual and Group Evaluation
Anna Bierbrauer
Assistant Professor of Landscape Architecture, Planning and Landscape Architecture
Professor Bierbrauer teaches LAND ARC 560: Plants and Ecology in Design. This course asks students to create designs that integrate ecological principles with plants’ aesthetic and functional qualities and that adhere to professional disciplinary standards.
What do I do?
I structure group work by building in weekly, guided check-ins where students meet with each other and the instructor. These sessions focus on reflecting on the past week’s work, exchanging feedback, and planning next steps. I also require both group deliverables and individual components to balance collaboration with personal accountability.
Why do I do it?
In design disciplines like architecture and landscape architecture, collaboration is central to professional practice, often within interdisciplinary teams. Students cannot be expected to inherently know how to work effectively in groups, especially in a post-COVID context. These structured activities provide a clear framework and support system for developing successful collaborative skills.
What impact does it have on students?
These practices help students develop the ability to give and receive constructive, thoughtful feedback rather than relying on vague or overly critical responses. They learn to reflect on their own work, engage with others’ processes, and articulate what is working, what remains unclear, and what should happen next. Additionally, structured peer evaluation and reflection—such as allocating shared “funds” to assess individual contributions—encourage metacognition about collaboration and individual impact within the group.
What might I change in the future?
I plan to further develop tools to help students navigate group dynamics, including managing disagreements and improving communication during check-ins. I am also continuing to evaluate whether student-selected or instructor-assigned groups lead to stronger collaboration. Refining how I guide and assess group processes will help ensure these experiences remain equitable and effective.
Guiding Questions for Instructors
- What instruments and approaches do you currently use to evaluate both individual and group components of group projects?
- Overall how do you balance evaluation of process and product?
Opportunities for the Future
The ability to work successfully in teams is often cited as an important professional competency (Tumpa et al., 2022). Group work assignments can provide a powerful opportunity for students to practice a range of transferable skills: critical thinking, communication, professional and ethical conduct, problem solving, intercultural humility, and more. Students are most able to develop these skills when they are provided explicit training, opportunities to practice, and structured reflection as part of the group work experience (Bacon et al., 2019).
One way to offer both training and opportunities for reflection on the transferable skills associated with group work comes from SuccessWorks, the student career counseling office with the College of Letters & Science at the University of Wisconsin–Madison. Among the many services and resources offered by SuccessWorks are instructional materials that can be quickly added to courses. These include assignments and reflection questions that help students to identify the transferable skills and knowledge that they gain through a group project or assignment. Instructors can also find Canvas module templates, including one on the National Association of Colleges and Employers career readiness competencies. To request access to these course materials, visit SuccessWorks Resources for Faculty & Staff.
Connect with Us
Would you like help getting started on scaffolding a major assignment? Do you want to discuss your ideas? Our team is happy to meet with you, brainstorm solutions that meet your needs, and help implement your ideas. Our work typically starts with one 45-minute virtual meeting. To get started, request a meeting.
Suggest a Topic or Colleague
We want to hear your ideas! What teaching topic or trend would you like to know more about? Which of your colleagues are doing great work in the classroom? Share your ideas for our next article in the Design for Learning Series.
Browse All Articles by Topic
Aikens, M. L., & Kulacki, A. R. (2023). Identifying group work experiences that increase students’ self-efficacy for quantitative biology tasks. CBE–Life Sciences Education, 22(2), 19. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.22-04-0076
Bacon, D. R., Stewart, K. A., & Silver, W. S. (2019). Republication of “Lessons from the best and worst student team experiences: How a teacher can make a difference.” Journal of Management Education, 43(5), 550–572. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562919838523
Benning, T. M. (2024). Reducing free-riding in group projects in line with students’ preferences: Does it matter if there is more at stake? Active Learning in Higher Education, 25(2), 242–257. https://doi.org/10.1177/14697874221118864
Chang, Y., & Brickman, P. (2018). When group work doesn’t work: Insights from students. CBE–Life Sciences Education, 17(3), 52. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.17-09-0199
Davies, W. M. (2009). Groupwork as a form of assessment: Common problems and recommended solutions. Higher Education, 58(4), 563–584. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-009-9216-y
de Hei, M., Strijbos, J., Sjoer, E., & Admiraal, W. (2016). Thematic review of approaches to design group learning activities in higher education: The development of a comprehensive framework. Educational Research Review, 18, 33–45. https:dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2016.01.001
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2021). Better learning through structured teaching: A framework for the gradual release of responsibility (3rd ed.). ASCD.
Francis, N., Pritchard, C., Prytherch, Z., & Rutherford, S. (2024). Making teamwork work: Enhancing teamwork and assessment in higher education. FEBS Open Bio, 15, 35–47. https://doi.org/10.1002/2211-5463.13936
Hansen, R. S. (2006). Benefits and problems with student teams: Suggestions for improving team projects. Journal of Education for Business, 82(1), 11–19. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.82.1.11-19
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (2014). Cooperative learning: Improving university instruction by basing practice on validated theory. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25(3&4), 85-118.
Monson, R. (2017). Groups that work: Student achievement in group research projects and effects on individual learning. Teaching Sociology, 45(3), 240–251. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055X1769777
Oakley, B., Felder, R. M., Brent, R., & Elhajj, I. (2004). Turning student groups into effective teams. Journal of Student Centered Learning, 2(1), 9–34.
Oakley, B. A., Hanna, D. M., Kuzmyn, Z., & Felder, R. M. (2007). Best practices involving teamwork in the classroom: Results from a survey of 6,435 engineering student respondents. IEEE Transactions on Education, 50(3), 266–272. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2007.901982
Postlethwait, A. E. (2016). Group projects in social work education: The influence of group characteristics and moderators on undergraduate student outcomes. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 36(3), 256–274. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841233.2016.1182610
Roberson, B., & Franchini, B. (2014). Effective task design for the TBL classroom. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25(3&4), 275–302.
Salvatore, S., White, C., & Podowitz-Thomas, S. (2024). “Not a cookie cutter situation”: How neurodivergent students experience group work in their STEM courses. International Journal of STEM Education, 11:47, 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-024-00508-0
Tomcho, T. J., & Foels, R. (2012). Meta-analysis of group learning activities: Empirically based teaching recommendations. Teaching of Psychology, 39(3), 159–169. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628312450414
Tucker, R., & Abbasi, N. (2016). Bad attitudes: Why design students dislike teamwork. Journal of Learning Design, 9(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.5204/jld.v9i1.227
Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63(6), 384–399. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0022100
Tumpa, R. J., Skaik, S., Ham, M., & Chaudhry, G. (2022). A holistic overview of studies to improve group-based assessments in higher education: A systematic literature review. Sustainability, 14(15), 9638. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159638
Wilson, L., Ho, S., & Brookes, R. H. (2018). Student perceptions of teamwork within assessment tasks in undergraduate science degrees. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(5), 786–799. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1409334
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. This means that you are welcome to share this content in its original form, but we ask that you provide attribution to the L&S Instructional Design Collaborative, link to this original source for context, and not use the material for commercial purposes.
Example attribution: From Making Groups Work Well by the L&S Instructional Design Collaborative, licensed under the BY-NC 4.0 license.