A response to such a proposition entails contemplating types of studies students are pursuing. Some would claim that collaboration-based assignments should replace lecture-based instruction. Admittedly, it is important for students to have experience about cooperating with peers. However, no university should replace traditional instruction into group activity because theoretical ground sometime is more important than the social skill.

Granted, group assignments help nurturing university student's communication skills. Communication during the process to achieve a common goal would lead students to articulate their claim, consider and respect other's opinion, and think critically. These experience during the collaboration is important because most of the work after university is consist of cooperation. In this manner, some people's assertion seems plausible.

However, universities should not replace lectures to group assignments. Although communication skills are important for students whose major is social science or other humanistic studies, students who are majoring in engineering or natural science need more time to learn about theoretical studies. This is because characteristics of fields of study are different. For example, if a senior student in mechanical engineering has an assignment about strengthening the chair. Surely, having conversation with his peers would be helpful to solve the assignment. Nevertheless, without theoretical knowledge, for example, the knowledge about the stiffness coefficient of materials, the debate would not be helpful as the knowledge. Therefore, universities should not change the portion of present studying methods.

Though group assignments seem to make better effort and be crucial for students, the lack of theoretical knowledge might be more detrimental than lack of experience of collaborating with others.