Play nice

In nearly all my uni subjects, the main form of assessment is group projects. We form groups of about four and take on the roles of consulting engineers. The greatest fun is inventing a company name – “Hydrogreen Consulting”, “GDJK” and “Steel-framed Carparks R Us” are typical.

When I did work experience, the environment felt familiar because engineers do work in teams. I didn’t understand why people complained that what they had learned at uni was useless in the real world of work because I was using everything I had learned in lectures!

Working in teams on psuedo-projects seems like the way to go for the teaching of engineering practice. It feels natural now, so natural that on the rare occasions we are given individual projects to do, it’s a shock to our system. “Whoa! We have to do this ourselves?”

That’s not to say that I enjoy working in a team. I like working in good teams, where everyone pulls his or her own weight. I actually find it easier to work by myself because I can work to my own schedule. But I also recognise that our most creative works have come from group projects.

After four years, we have become well-trained team players… Actually, I should qualify this statement. The environmental engineers now make excellent teams amongst themselves. Because we have worked so often with each other, we recognise each other’s strengths, respect and like each other. It’s comfortable.

This semester, though, I have a number of major projects that I must do with *gasp* new people. In my final year design project, there are five of us in a group. Each person represents a different discipline of the civil engineering course — transport, structures, geotechnical and water engineering, plus the enviro. Together, we have to design a conference centre for our university from the bottom up.

I’m working in an all-girl group. This could be a first! 85% of all engineering students are male. The odds of an all female group are (let’s see, 0.15^5=) less than 0.008%. I have lucked out. These girls seem hard-working, intelligent and they are more than happy for us to design a “green” building. In another sense, it’s bad because I am not challenged. The purpose of throwing us into unfamiliar groups is to teach us to overcome group conflict. No conflict yet…darn!

Don’t worry, there’s another project in which I am working with a loud, careless, obsessed-with-concrete-and-weapons male so maybe he can be my challenge for this semester 🙂

3 comments

  1. Anonymous says:

    The figure of 0.15^5 is only accurate if the group was chosen 100% randomly, AND if the average ratio of males to females for engineering are equal to the average you quoted (which you might think is probably true, but it quite possibly isn’t). If a human (whether it be the people in the group itself, a course co-ordinator at the uni or someone else) picked the group, then the probability would be significantly skewed, most likely making it more probable.
    (sorry, you probably knew this, I’m bored, about to leave for uni, have to write something! 🙂

    rohan

  2. joanium says:

    Yes, I know, I was just trying to impress people with a really small number — who says big is better? :p

    There is a greater proportion of girls in civil engineering. The proportions in mech and electrical are much smaller so I’m sure that upped the odds.

    Finally, I think the lecturers probably thought it might be amusing to put a bunch of girls together. I very much doubt it was random! 🙂

  3. Anonymous says:

    If they wanted conflict, they should’ve thrown in some architects — ALL engineers hate architects! 🙂

    vera

Leave a Reply to joanium Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *