Jigsaw (teaching technique)
Encyclopedia
In education, jigsaw is a teaching technique invented by social psychologist Elliot Aronson
in 1971. Students of an average sized class (26 to 33 students) are divided into competency groups of four to six students, each of which is given a list of subtopics to research. Individual members of each group then break off to work with the "experts" from other groups, researching a part of the material being studied, after which they return to their starting group in the role of instructor for their subcategory.
The jigsaw strategy is a cooperative learning technique appropriate for students from 3rd to 12th grade. It is also used extensively in adult English Second Language (or ESL) classes. The strategy is an efficient teaching method that also encourages listening, engagement, interaction, peer teaching, and cooperation by giving each member of the group an essential part to play in the academic activity. Both individual and group accountability are built into the process. In ESL classrooms jigsaws are a four-skills approach integrating reading, speaking, listening and writing.
For phase two of Jigsaw each group member will be reassigned to a different group with fellow students that collected information on a different task. As a new formation they will share and piece together information on World War Two. Each student will take time to share their collective data, and, as a whole, the group will discuss how each event contributed to making the war.
" by Edgar Allan Poe
must support a definition of the concept at hand.
For phase two the students will move into different groups with members who worked on different concepts of the poem. Each group member is responsible for teaching the others their definition and concept examples. Then, as a whole, the students will discuss each concept and how they relate to "The Raven" and its overall meaning.
The groups then discuss the following questions: Who are the characters in the story, where does the story take place, what are the major events of the story, are there supernatural or magical events that take place, and if so, what are they? The students will then read, discuss, and record their findings.
For phase two of Jigsaw, new groups will be assigned with students who analyzed different fairy tales. Each student will have about three minutes to discuss and share the information on their fairy tale. Finally the groups will create a poster board to share with the class that reflects on what the five fairy tales have in common and what their definitions of a fairy tale are.
For example: After learning the play to the right, the team is given several minutes where the right guard and left guard discuss their reversed roles, the right tackle and left tackle converse and teach each other their new mirrored responsibilities, and so on, leaving the coaching staff to only cover specific details and teach those players who do not have a mirroring teammate, such as the quarterback.
There can be some obstacles when using the jigsaw method. One common problem is a dominant student. In order to reduce this problem, each jigsaw group has an appointed leader. The leader is responsible for being fair and spreading participation evenly. Students realize that the group is more effective if each student is allowed to present his or her own material before questions and comments are made. Dominance is eventually reduced because students realize it is not in the best interest of the group.
Another problem is a slow student in the group. It is important that each group member present the best possible report to the group, as it is important that individuals with poor study skills do not present inferior reports to their jigsaw group. In order to reduce this problem, the jigsaw technique relies on "expert" groups. Students work with other individuals from other groups working on the same segment of the report. In this "expert" group they are given a chance to discuss their reports and gather suggestions from other students to modify their reports as needed. Another issue is that of bright students becoming bored. Research suggests that there is less boredom of bright students in the jigsaw classroom than in the traditional classroom. Bright students should be encouraged to develop the mind set of a teacher. By being a teacher a boring task can be changed into an exciting challenge.
Dealing with students that have been trained to compete can also cause difficulties. A goal of the jigsaw classroom is to decrease competition and increase cooperation and so competitive students can create difficulties. Research on the jigsaw classroom suggests that it is has its strongest effect when introduced in elementary school. If there is exposure to the jigsaw classroom at an early age, only an hour per a day is needed to maintain the impact of cooperative learning in later schooling. If Jigsaw is first introduced in the later years of school it can often be an uphill battle. Old habits can be hard to break but, over time, students participating in the jigsaw classroom in high school can benefit from the cooperative structure.
by a graduate professor named Elliot Aronson
. Recent desegregation had forced a racial mix on the students of Austin, and many teachers were unable to cope with the turmoil and hostility of the situation.
After studying the problem at the request of the school superintendent
, Aronson decided that inter-school competition was leading students to study too much on their own, and was interfering with the idea of a cooperative classroom.
By arranging the students in culturally and racially diverse groups, Aronson and his team of graduate students were able to reduce the divisions between students. In fact, when one Hispanic
boy named Carlos was tormented by his peers for his difficulty with the language, the bullying students were not admonished for their behavior. Instead, they were reminded that the exam was in fifteen minutes, and their sole source of information on the subject was Carlos, the boy they had been harassing. Behavior improved notably and immediately.
The jigsaw technique was randomly introduced into some classrooms and not introduced into other classrooms. This allowed for comparisons between students in jigsaw classes and those not in jigsaw classes. Students in the jigsaw classes expressed significantly less prejudice and negative stereotyping, more self-confident, and liked school better when tested objectively. Behavioral data supported these self-report measures. Students in jigsaw classes were absent less frequently, intermingled more in the cafeteria and in the school yard, and performed better on objective exams of curricular material—this was especially true for minority students.
Geffner, in his dissertation for his Ph.D., investigated the attitudes 5th graders had about themselves, school, and other students. He worked in the Santa Cruz County, California, school district which had a ratio of 50% Caucasian students to 50% Hispanic students. He looked at classes that were taught in the traditional manner, those that used the jigsaw technique, and those that used a cooperative technique that did not rely on interdependence. He used a modified version of the questionnaire used by Blaney et al. (1977) and a modified version of the Pictorial Concept Scale for Children. This modified self-concept scale uses cartoon stick figures in various situations, including five dimensions of self-esteem: athletic abilities, scholastic abilities, physical appearance, family interactions, and social interactions. These measures were used as pre-intervention and post-intervention measures. Interventions lasted 8 weeks. Students in the cooperative and jigsaw classes improved or maintained their positive attitudes about themselves, school, peers, and academic abilities. Students in the traditional classroom demonstrated a decline in their attitudes about peers, themselves, and academic abilities. Those in the interdependent or jigsaw technique improved or maintained levels of self-esteem.
The first experiment done with the jigsaw classroom was by Blaney, Stephan, Rosenfield, Aronson, and Sikes in 1977. This was done after the superintendent of schools in Austin, Texas, called for help due to the problems desegregation caused. After some systematic observations, it was decided a large part of the problem was the competitive nature of the classroom. From that, they decided a more cooperative approach needed to be taken. The jigsaw technique was first introduced in ten fifth grade classes across seven different elementary schools. There were three fifth grade classes from the same schools acting as a control. The teachers in the control classes using the traditional methods were rated as good teachers by their peers. The experimental classes worked in jigsaw groups for 45 minutes a day, three days a week, for six weeks. The curriculum between the control and experimental groups were similar. The jigsaw groups were balanced so that the groups contained members from all groups. Questionnaires were designed to assess student’s attitudes about themselves, their attitude toward school, and their attitude toward peer teaching and cooperation in the classroom. A sociometric instrument was used in order to assess students’ liking of group members and their liking of other students in the class. These measures were used as a baseline measure and a post-intervention. For self-esteem, there was significant increase seen in levels of self-esteem and a decrease in the traditional classroom.
Caucasians in the jigsaw classroom increased their liking of school while those in the control class saw a decrease in their liking of school. A slight decrease was seen in the African-Americans students’ liking of school in the jigsaw classes, but there was a significant decrease in liking of school for African American students in the traditional classrooms. Mexican-American students in the jigsaw classroom indicated that there was a slight increase in their liking of school, but students in the traditional classroom a significant increase in liking of school. The authors contribute this to the fact that Mexican-American students in the jigsaw classroom may have felt forced to participate in peer teaching. Two other questions produced significant results between the jigsaw classroom and the traditional classroom. A decrease was seen in competitiveness for students in the jigsaw classroom while there was an increase for students in the traditional classroom. An increase was also seen in the feeling they could learn from other students for students in the jigsaw classroom while there was a decrease for this for students in the traditional classroom. There were also significant findings in the sociometric instrument. Students reported increase liking of their group members, but they also increased their liking of other students in the class.
Hanze and Berger compared use of the jigsaw classroom technique with traditional direct instruction in a 12th grade physics class in 2007. They took eight 12th grade classes and randomly assigned them to either the jigsaw technique or direct instruction. Students were given a test of academic performance and a questionnaire looking at personality variables (goal orientation, self-concept, and uncertainty orientation). The topics (motion of electrons and electromagnetic oscillations and waves) were introduced through direct instruction in both conditions. Students were then given the learning experience questionnaire as a pretest measures. In the second part of the lesson the experimental group worked in the jigsaw classroom and those in the control group continued to work in traditional direct instruction. Individuals in the jigsaw class were given the learning experience questionnaire after working in the expert group and when the finished working in the jigsaw group. In the traditional classroom group, they were given the learning experience questionnaire at the end of the lesson.
A post-test of academic performance was given a few days after the learning unit. The independent variable was the method of instruction (jigsaw vs. direct) and the study topic (scanning electron microscope vs. functioning of the microwave). The dependent variables were the personality questionnaire, learning experience questionnaire, and academic performance. When comparing traditional instruction and the jigsaw classroom, there were clear difference in the learning experience, but there were not difference in academic performances as measured by a test of physics knowledge. Students in the jigsaw classroom did show higher achievement scores in areas that they had been assigned the expert for, but students in the traditional classroom scored better on areas that individuals in the jigsaw class had been taught by others in their group. The jigsaw classroom students had a more favorable view of the learning experience than those in the traditional instruction condition. Students in the jigsaw classroom reported stronger intrinsic motivation, greater interest in the topic, and more cognitive activation and involvement. Students were more involved and more interested in the material when in the cooperative learning setting of the jigsaw classroom. Students in the jigsaw classroom were seen are more competent, more socially related to other students, and more autonomous. There was an indirect effect on performance because students viewed themselves as more competent, but no direct impact on actual achievement.
Perkins and Saris
Perkins and Saris demonstrated the use of the jigsaw classroom technique in an undergraduate statistics course in 2001. They noted that a part of class instruction was doing worksheets as part of an instruction. Worksheets are effective because they give immediate feedback on applying statistical ideas to sample, allow for repeated practice, make students active over passive learners, and they can ask for help from the instructor as needed. The problem with worksheets though. One is uneven ability or readiness to complete the worksheet. One student may not have any problems while another becomes frustrated by the process. Another issue is that in statistics the worksheets require a lot of time to complete because of the many separate steps.
In order to overcome these problems and still benefit students, the authors adapted Aronson’s jigsaw classroom to fit undergraduate students. Students worked in groups on two separate occasions. In the first, there were four sheets given out. Pairs of students were given the same worksheet and worked together to compute sample size, the sum of the raw scores, the sum of the squared raw scores, and the sum of squares for one of the four groups. Each of the handouts included a blank ANOVA table with formulas and instructions on how to complete it collaboratively with three other students. The other set of worksheets was on a two-way, chi-square test of independence for three different studies. For the first study there was an example of the computation and interpretation of chi-square. After a discussion of the first example, students received one of two worksheets that directed them through the steps for completing the chi-square procedures for one of the remaining designs with partial solution for each step.
The handout also contained the next-to-last step for the other remaining design. It was designed that one group of students received step-by-step instruction and partial solutions for the second and a nearly complete solution for the third design and the other group received step-by-step information for the third design and the almost complete solution for the second design. Students were instructed to seek out a classmate with a complementary handout. Students were then asked to rate the benefits of the exercise using a 5-point Likert rating the exercise as 1 being not at all useful and 5 being very useful. They were asked to rate the exercise on usefulness of getting help, giving help, working with classmates, providing an alternative to a lecture, saving time, and understanding the statistical procedures. Students perceived the jigsaw procedure as being very positive especially as an alternative learning experience. Students saw using the jigsaw technique as more useful for practical purposes then for interpersonal purposes such as working with others, giving help, or getting help. Students appreciated the technique as a time-saver and viewed it is a change of pace from lectures.
Walker and Crogan
Walker and Crogan, in 1988, looked at the effects of a cooperative learning environement and a Jigsaw classroom on academic performance, self-esteem, liking of school, liking of peers, and racial prejudice. They look at 103 students in grades 4–6 at two separate schools. Cooperative learning was used as a baseline measure for the effects of cooperation. It was compared to the effects of the Jigsaw method that involved cooperation and interdependence. The first school examined private school. The school was fairly distant so consultation occurred over the phone. It was determined that the program would be implemented in the sixth-grade class and the fifth-grade class would serve as a control. There were some issues at the private school including changes in the procedure done by the sixth grade classroom and the fifth grade teacher leaving subsequent restructuring of the school which led to termination of the project after 4 weeks at the private school. Walker and Crogan decided to let this class represent traditional cooperation, thereby being able to contrast it with a Jigsaw class at a second school. The choice to designate the class as traditional cooperation rather than failed Jigsaw has later been criticized (Bratt, 2008). The second school was a public school. In the public school, a fourth grade class served as the experimental class and an authentic, complete, intensive, three-week Jigsaw program was implemented. The control class was a split fourth/fifth-grade class.
At the end of the study, there was data from four classes across two schools. At the private school, there was a cooperative learning program in one class with another class serving as a control group. The public school there was a genuine Jigsaw program in one class and another class serving as a control. Henceforth, there were two programs one at each school and each had a same-school control. For the private school, there were 31 students in the experimental group and 29 students in the control group. At the public school, there were 20 students and two teachers in the experimental group, there were 23 students and only one teacher in the control group. Teachers were given and description of the Jigsaw program and the key facts were discussed with them. In the experimental classes, students were divided into Jigsaw groups by their teacher in a way that ethnicity, academic ability and sex were distributed evenly within and across group. Groups did not include best friends or worse enemies.
Prior to implementation, students in the experimental classes familiarized themselves with their group peers, practiced their roles as peer tutors, and practiced relevant skills like discussing main ideas, reading for meaning, listening, and quizzing peers on important information. At the private school, students in the experimental class received the cooperative learning program for 90 minutes each day, twice a week, for four weeks. At the public school, students in the experimental class received the Jigsaw program for an hour a day, five days a week, for three weeks. The jigsaw technique was implemented following standard protocol. Measures were take pre and post intervention. Academic performance data was available only from the public school and not the private school although it had been promised from both. Students were given the Piers-Harris Children’s Self-concept Scale (CSCS) in order to measure self-esteem. Sociometric class survey data was taken by asking students to rate their classmates according to how much they would like to work them and play with them. Racial prejudice measures were also taken in order to assess students’ attitudes to Asians, Aborigines, and European-Australians.
There was a measure of social distance and one of stereotypes. There was an improvement seen in academic performance for those in the Jigsaw group. This is interesting because some research has implied that the Jigsaw technique may not be appropriate for learning needs as English as a second language students. There were increase in self-esteem in the experimental groups at both schools as compared to the control groups, but the gains were not significant. This may have to do with a ceiling effect. Significant results were not seen for liking of school. Students in the Jigsaw group increased their ratings in working with peers when compared to their relative control group. When looking at individuals in the cooperative learning group, they were not motivated at the prospect of working cooperatively. There were not significant differences seen in playing with peers ratings in either experimental group.
For the Jigsaw students there was an increase in work with ratings of the ethnic groups indicating that Jigsaw technique enhanced liking of ingroup and outgroup peers in work-orientated relationships. This was not seen for the cooperative learning students. Social distance ratings for Asian and European-Australian children decreased across the program, but European-Australian children ratings increase. In the Jigsaw group there was a decrease in negative traits attributed to Asians and European-Australians. For the private school, there was an increase in stereotyping for the cooperative learning experimental group. The study demonstrated that the Jigsaw method is effective in Australian social conditions in producing positive change in academic performance, attitudes to peers, and prejudice. Cooperative learning on the other hand produced generally negative results. Interdependence seemed to be more important than cooperation.
Bratt (“No effect on intergroup relations evident”)
Bratt (2008) presented two studies on Jigsaw, one with children in grade 6 (Study 1), one with adolescents in grades 8 to 10 (Study 2), both using pre- and post-measurements. Bratt focused on the claimed effectiveness of Jigsaw to reduce prejudice, assuming that his research would support Jigsaw. The first study gave similar findings as Walker and Crogan’s study (1998), but contrary to Walker and Crogan, Bratt stressed that data could not be interpreted as giving support to positive effects by the Jigsaw classroom.
Bratt’s Study 1 included two schools, with one Jigsaw class and one control class at each school. The Jigsaw technique was used over seven weeks, the analysis focused on ethnic Norwegian children (n = 34 in Jigsaw classes, n = 34 in control classes). Only at one school did the Jigsaw class show a different development than its control class, with more favourable developments in outgroup attitudes. However, the Jigsaw class at this school had two teachers whereas the control class had only one teacher (similar to Walker and Crogan’s Jigsaw study). Bratt pointed out that different number of teachers in the Jigsaw class and its control class made any conclusion about effects from Jigsaw impossible.
Study 2 increased the number of participating school classes to 11 Jigsaw classes and 11 matched control classes. Jigsaw teachers were well trained and repeatedly had meetings during the eight weeks of using the Jigsaw technique. The analysis focused on the 264 ethnic Norwegian students in the 22 classes.
Study 2 failed to indicate effects of Jigsaw on investigated variables: intergroup attitudes, cross-group friendship, common ingroup identity, empathy, and attitudes toward school. These variables were measured before using Jigsaw, right after the eight weeks of Jigsaw use and finally six months after the first measure. Bratt concluded that his two studies were not able to support his initial optimism on behalf of Jigsaw. Bratt also pointed out methodological limitations in previous studies on Jigsaw.
Elliot Aronson
Elliot Aronson is an American psychologist. He is listed among the 100 most eminent psychologists of the 20th Century, best known for the invention of the Jigsaw Classroom as a method of reducing interethnic hostility and prejudice; cognitive dissonance research, and influential social psychology...
in 1971. Students of an average sized class (26 to 33 students) are divided into competency groups of four to six students, each of which is given a list of subtopics to research. Individual members of each group then break off to work with the "experts" from other groups, researching a part of the material being studied, after which they return to their starting group in the role of instructor for their subcategory.
The jigsaw strategy is a cooperative learning technique appropriate for students from 3rd to 12th grade. It is also used extensively in adult English Second Language (or ESL) classes. The strategy is an efficient teaching method that also encourages listening, engagement, interaction, peer teaching, and cooperation by giving each member of the group an essential part to play in the academic activity. Both individual and group accountability are built into the process. In ESL classrooms jigsaws are a four-skills approach integrating reading, speaking, listening and writing.
Benefits
- Teacher is not the sole provider of knowledge
- Efficient way to learn
- Students take ownership in the work and achievement
- Students are held accountable among their peers
- Learning revolves around interaction with peers
- Students are active participants in the learning process
- Builds interpersonal and interactive skills
Steps in implementation
According to Aronson (2008) there are ten steps considered important in the implementation of the jigsaw classroom:- Students are divided into a 5 or 6 person jigsaw group. The group should be diverse in terms of ethnicity, gender, ability, and race.
- One student should be appointed as the group leader. This person should initially be the most mature student in the group.
- The day’s lesson is divided into 5–6 segments (one for each member)
- Each student is assigned one segment to learn. Each student should only have direct access to their own segment.
- Students should be given time to read over their segment at least twice to become familiar with it. Students do not need to memorize it.
- Temporary experts groups should be formed in which one student from each jigsaw group joins other students assigned to the same segment. Students in this expert group should be given time to discuss the main points of their segment and rehearse the presentation they are going to make to their jigsaw group.
- Students come back to their jigsaw group.
- Students present their segment to the group. Other members are encouraged to ask question for clarification.
- The teacher needs to float from group to group in order to observe the process. Intervene if any group is having trouble such as a member being dominating or disruptive. There will come a point that the group leader should handle this task. Teachers can whisper to the group leader as to how to intervene until the group leader can effectively do it themselves.
- A quiz on the material should be given at the end so students realize that the sessions are not just for fun and games, but that they really count.
World War Two
First divide the class into equal groups of five. Each group will be responsible for a different task. Group one will research Hitler's rise to power. Group two will uncover the devastation of concentration camps. Group three will cover Britain's role in the war. Group four will uncover the contribution of the Soviet Union to World War Two. Group five will research Japan's entry into the war. Collectively each group will gather and discuss information on their task.For phase two of Jigsaw each group member will be reassigned to a different group with fellow students that collected information on a different task. As a new formation they will share and piece together information on World War Two. Each student will take time to share their collective data, and, as a whole, the group will discuss how each event contributed to making the war.
The Raven
First, the class will be divided into five concept groups. The concepts include alliteration, consonance, rhyme, symbolism and repetition. Each concept group will read the poem together and collect information regarding their concept. Three specific examples from "The RavenThe Raven
"The Raven" is a narrative poem by American writer Edgar Allan Poe, first published in January 1845. It is often noted for its musicality, stylized language, and supernatural atmosphere. It tells of a talking raven's mysterious visit to a distraught lover, tracing the man's slow descent into madness...
" by Edgar Allan Poe
Edgar Allan Poe
Edgar Allan Poe was an American author, poet, editor and literary critic, considered part of the American Romantic Movement. Best known for his tales of mystery and the macabre, Poe was one of the earliest American practitioners of the short story and is considered the inventor of the detective...
must support a definition of the concept at hand.
For phase two the students will move into different groups with members who worked on different concepts of the poem. Each group member is responsible for teaching the others their definition and concept examples. Then, as a whole, the students will discuss each concept and how they relate to "The Raven" and its overall meaning.
Definition of a fairy tale
First, students are to be divided into equal groups of five. Each group will be assigned a specific fairy tale to read such as "The Ugly Duckling", "Snow White", "Hansel and Gretel", "Jack and the Bean Stalk" or "The Three Little Pigs" etc.The groups then discuss the following questions: Who are the characters in the story, where does the story take place, what are the major events of the story, are there supernatural or magical events that take place, and if so, what are they? The students will then read, discuss, and record their findings.
For phase two of Jigsaw, new groups will be assigned with students who analyzed different fairy tales. Each student will have about three minutes to discuss and share the information on their fairy tale. Finally the groups will create a poster board to share with the class that reflects on what the five fairy tales have in common and what their definitions of a fairy tale are.
Use outside the classroom
The jigsaw method lends itself to other methods of small- and part-group instruction. Notable football coach, historian, and blogger Hugh Wyatt uses a form of Jigsaw teaching method in his football coaching. Wyatt, after teaching and practicing the responsibilities of a play in one direction, has each member of his team carefully instruct their opposite in the responsibilities for the reversed play.For example: After learning the play to the right, the team is given several minutes where the right guard and left guard discuss their reversed roles, the right tackle and left tackle converse and teach each other their new mirrored responsibilities, and so on, leaving the coaching staff to only cover specific details and teach those players who do not have a mirroring teammate, such as the quarterback.
Pros and cons
There are several advantages of the jigsaw method. Teachers find it easy to learn, enjoy working with it, it can be used in conjunction with other teaching strategies and it can be effective even if it used for just an hour per day.There can be some obstacles when using the jigsaw method. One common problem is a dominant student. In order to reduce this problem, each jigsaw group has an appointed leader. The leader is responsible for being fair and spreading participation evenly. Students realize that the group is more effective if each student is allowed to present his or her own material before questions and comments are made. Dominance is eventually reduced because students realize it is not in the best interest of the group.
Another problem is a slow student in the group. It is important that each group member present the best possible report to the group, as it is important that individuals with poor study skills do not present inferior reports to their jigsaw group. In order to reduce this problem, the jigsaw technique relies on "expert" groups. Students work with other individuals from other groups working on the same segment of the report. In this "expert" group they are given a chance to discuss their reports and gather suggestions from other students to modify their reports as needed. Another issue is that of bright students becoming bored. Research suggests that there is less boredom of bright students in the jigsaw classroom than in the traditional classroom. Bright students should be encouraged to develop the mind set of a teacher. By being a teacher a boring task can be changed into an exciting challenge.
Dealing with students that have been trained to compete can also cause difficulties. A goal of the jigsaw classroom is to decrease competition and increase cooperation and so competitive students can create difficulties. Research on the jigsaw classroom suggests that it is has its strongest effect when introduced in elementary school. If there is exposure to the jigsaw classroom at an early age, only an hour per a day is needed to maintain the impact of cooperative learning in later schooling. If Jigsaw is first introduced in the later years of school it can often be an uphill battle. Old habits can be hard to break but, over time, students participating in the jigsaw classroom in high school can benefit from the cooperative structure.
History of Jigsaw
The jigsaw teaching technique was invented and named in 1971 in Austin, TexasAustin, Texas
Austin is the capital city of the U.S. state of :Texas and the seat of Travis County. Located in Central Texas on the eastern edge of the American Southwest, it is the fourth-largest city in Texas and the 14th most populous city in the United States. It was the third-fastest-growing large city in...
by a graduate professor named Elliot Aronson
Elliot Aronson
Elliot Aronson is an American psychologist. He is listed among the 100 most eminent psychologists of the 20th Century, best known for the invention of the Jigsaw Classroom as a method of reducing interethnic hostility and prejudice; cognitive dissonance research, and influential social psychology...
. Recent desegregation had forced a racial mix on the students of Austin, and many teachers were unable to cope with the turmoil and hostility of the situation.
After studying the problem at the request of the school superintendent
Superintendent (education)
In education in the United States, a superintendent is an individual who has executive oversight and administration rights, usually within an educational entity or organization....
, Aronson decided that inter-school competition was leading students to study too much on their own, and was interfering with the idea of a cooperative classroom.
By arranging the students in culturally and racially diverse groups, Aronson and his team of graduate students were able to reduce the divisions between students. In fact, when one Hispanic
Hispanic
Hispanic is a term that originally denoted a relationship to Hispania, which is to say the Iberian Peninsula: Andorra, Gibraltar, Portugal and Spain. During the Modern Era, Hispanic sometimes takes on a more limited meaning, particularly in the United States, where the term means a person of ...
boy named Carlos was tormented by his peers for his difficulty with the language, the bullying students were not admonished for their behavior. Instead, they were reminded that the exam was in fifteen minutes, and their sole source of information on the subject was Carlos, the boy they had been harassing. Behavior improved notably and immediately.
The jigsaw technique was randomly introduced into some classrooms and not introduced into other classrooms. This allowed for comparisons between students in jigsaw classes and those not in jigsaw classes. Students in the jigsaw classes expressed significantly less prejudice and negative stereotyping, more self-confident, and liked school better when tested objectively. Behavioral data supported these self-report measures. Students in jigsaw classes were absent less frequently, intermingled more in the cafeteria and in the school yard, and performed better on objective exams of curricular material—this was especially true for minority students.
Overview of research findings
When compared to students in the traditional classroom students in jigsaw classrooms showed a decrease in prejudice and stereotyping, an increase in liking of their group mates both in-group and out-group members, higher levels of self-esteem, they performed better on standardized exams, had a greater liking of school, showed lower levels of absenteeism, and showed true integration in areas other than the classroom.Classic research of the jigsaw classroom
One by-product of using the jigsaw classroom technique is a sharpening of children’s empathy. Diane Bridgeman demonstrated that children in the jigsaw classroom were better able to put themselves in others' shoe as compared to children in a traditional classroom. To do this she conducted an experiment with 10-year old children. Prior to the research half of the children had spent two months in a jigsaw classroom while the other half were in a traditional classroom. The children were shown a series of cartoons with the aim of testing their ability to empathize. In one cartoon a boy is shown at the airport looking sad as he waves good-bye to his father. In the next frame of the cartoon a postman is delivering a package to the boy. In the third frame the boy opens the package containing a toy airplane and then he bursts into tears. The children were all asked why the boy was crying to which they nearly all answered because he missed his dad and the toy plane reminded him of that. The differences were seen when asked what the postman was thinking when the boy opened the package and started to cry. Children in the traditional classroom thought that the postman knew the boy was sad because his dad was gone and it reminded him that his dad was gone. The children made the error of assuming that others felt what they did. Children in the jigsaw classroom took the perspective of the postman and realized that he was confused as to why the boy was crying after receiving a present.Geffner, in his dissertation for his Ph.D., investigated the attitudes 5th graders had about themselves, school, and other students. He worked in the Santa Cruz County, California, school district which had a ratio of 50% Caucasian students to 50% Hispanic students. He looked at classes that were taught in the traditional manner, those that used the jigsaw technique, and those that used a cooperative technique that did not rely on interdependence. He used a modified version of the questionnaire used by Blaney et al. (1977) and a modified version of the Pictorial Concept Scale for Children. This modified self-concept scale uses cartoon stick figures in various situations, including five dimensions of self-esteem: athletic abilities, scholastic abilities, physical appearance, family interactions, and social interactions. These measures were used as pre-intervention and post-intervention measures. Interventions lasted 8 weeks. Students in the cooperative and jigsaw classes improved or maintained their positive attitudes about themselves, school, peers, and academic abilities. Students in the traditional classroom demonstrated a decline in their attitudes about peers, themselves, and academic abilities. Those in the interdependent or jigsaw technique improved or maintained levels of self-esteem.
The first experiment done with the jigsaw classroom was by Blaney, Stephan, Rosenfield, Aronson, and Sikes in 1977. This was done after the superintendent of schools in Austin, Texas, called for help due to the problems desegregation caused. After some systematic observations, it was decided a large part of the problem was the competitive nature of the classroom. From that, they decided a more cooperative approach needed to be taken. The jigsaw technique was first introduced in ten fifth grade classes across seven different elementary schools. There were three fifth grade classes from the same schools acting as a control. The teachers in the control classes using the traditional methods were rated as good teachers by their peers. The experimental classes worked in jigsaw groups for 45 minutes a day, three days a week, for six weeks. The curriculum between the control and experimental groups were similar. The jigsaw groups were balanced so that the groups contained members from all groups. Questionnaires were designed to assess student’s attitudes about themselves, their attitude toward school, and their attitude toward peer teaching and cooperation in the classroom. A sociometric instrument was used in order to assess students’ liking of group members and their liking of other students in the class. These measures were used as a baseline measure and a post-intervention. For self-esteem, there was significant increase seen in levels of self-esteem and a decrease in the traditional classroom.
Caucasians in the jigsaw classroom increased their liking of school while those in the control class saw a decrease in their liking of school. A slight decrease was seen in the African-Americans students’ liking of school in the jigsaw classes, but there was a significant decrease in liking of school for African American students in the traditional classrooms. Mexican-American students in the jigsaw classroom indicated that there was a slight increase in their liking of school, but students in the traditional classroom a significant increase in liking of school. The authors contribute this to the fact that Mexican-American students in the jigsaw classroom may have felt forced to participate in peer teaching. Two other questions produced significant results between the jigsaw classroom and the traditional classroom. A decrease was seen in competitiveness for students in the jigsaw classroom while there was an increase for students in the traditional classroom. An increase was also seen in the feeling they could learn from other students for students in the jigsaw classroom while there was a decrease for this for students in the traditional classroom. There were also significant findings in the sociometric instrument. Students reported increase liking of their group members, but they also increased their liking of other students in the class.
Contemporary research on the jigsaw classroom
Hanze and BergerHanze and Berger compared use of the jigsaw classroom technique with traditional direct instruction in a 12th grade physics class in 2007. They took eight 12th grade classes and randomly assigned them to either the jigsaw technique or direct instruction. Students were given a test of academic performance and a questionnaire looking at personality variables (goal orientation, self-concept, and uncertainty orientation). The topics (motion of electrons and electromagnetic oscillations and waves) were introduced through direct instruction in both conditions. Students were then given the learning experience questionnaire as a pretest measures. In the second part of the lesson the experimental group worked in the jigsaw classroom and those in the control group continued to work in traditional direct instruction. Individuals in the jigsaw class were given the learning experience questionnaire after working in the expert group and when the finished working in the jigsaw group. In the traditional classroom group, they were given the learning experience questionnaire at the end of the lesson.
A post-test of academic performance was given a few days after the learning unit. The independent variable was the method of instruction (jigsaw vs. direct) and the study topic (scanning electron microscope vs. functioning of the microwave). The dependent variables were the personality questionnaire, learning experience questionnaire, and academic performance. When comparing traditional instruction and the jigsaw classroom, there were clear difference in the learning experience, but there were not difference in academic performances as measured by a test of physics knowledge. Students in the jigsaw classroom did show higher achievement scores in areas that they had been assigned the expert for, but students in the traditional classroom scored better on areas that individuals in the jigsaw class had been taught by others in their group. The jigsaw classroom students had a more favorable view of the learning experience than those in the traditional instruction condition. Students in the jigsaw classroom reported stronger intrinsic motivation, greater interest in the topic, and more cognitive activation and involvement. Students were more involved and more interested in the material when in the cooperative learning setting of the jigsaw classroom. Students in the jigsaw classroom were seen are more competent, more socially related to other students, and more autonomous. There was an indirect effect on performance because students viewed themselves as more competent, but no direct impact on actual achievement.
Perkins and Saris
Perkins and Saris demonstrated the use of the jigsaw classroom technique in an undergraduate statistics course in 2001. They noted that a part of class instruction was doing worksheets as part of an instruction. Worksheets are effective because they give immediate feedback on applying statistical ideas to sample, allow for repeated practice, make students active over passive learners, and they can ask for help from the instructor as needed. The problem with worksheets though. One is uneven ability or readiness to complete the worksheet. One student may not have any problems while another becomes frustrated by the process. Another issue is that in statistics the worksheets require a lot of time to complete because of the many separate steps.
In order to overcome these problems and still benefit students, the authors adapted Aronson’s jigsaw classroom to fit undergraduate students. Students worked in groups on two separate occasions. In the first, there were four sheets given out. Pairs of students were given the same worksheet and worked together to compute sample size, the sum of the raw scores, the sum of the squared raw scores, and the sum of squares for one of the four groups. Each of the handouts included a blank ANOVA table with formulas and instructions on how to complete it collaboratively with three other students. The other set of worksheets was on a two-way, chi-square test of independence for three different studies. For the first study there was an example of the computation and interpretation of chi-square. After a discussion of the first example, students received one of two worksheets that directed them through the steps for completing the chi-square procedures for one of the remaining designs with partial solution for each step.
The handout also contained the next-to-last step for the other remaining design. It was designed that one group of students received step-by-step instruction and partial solutions for the second and a nearly complete solution for the third design and the other group received step-by-step information for the third design and the almost complete solution for the second design. Students were instructed to seek out a classmate with a complementary handout. Students were then asked to rate the benefits of the exercise using a 5-point Likert rating the exercise as 1 being not at all useful and 5 being very useful. They were asked to rate the exercise on usefulness of getting help, giving help, working with classmates, providing an alternative to a lecture, saving time, and understanding the statistical procedures. Students perceived the jigsaw procedure as being very positive especially as an alternative learning experience. Students saw using the jigsaw technique as more useful for practical purposes then for interpersonal purposes such as working with others, giving help, or getting help. Students appreciated the technique as a time-saver and viewed it is a change of pace from lectures.
Walker and Crogan
Walker and Crogan, in 1988, looked at the effects of a cooperative learning environement and a Jigsaw classroom on academic performance, self-esteem, liking of school, liking of peers, and racial prejudice. They look at 103 students in grades 4–6 at two separate schools. Cooperative learning was used as a baseline measure for the effects of cooperation. It was compared to the effects of the Jigsaw method that involved cooperation and interdependence. The first school examined private school. The school was fairly distant so consultation occurred over the phone. It was determined that the program would be implemented in the sixth-grade class and the fifth-grade class would serve as a control. There were some issues at the private school including changes in the procedure done by the sixth grade classroom and the fifth grade teacher leaving subsequent restructuring of the school which led to termination of the project after 4 weeks at the private school. Walker and Crogan decided to let this class represent traditional cooperation, thereby being able to contrast it with a Jigsaw class at a second school. The choice to designate the class as traditional cooperation rather than failed Jigsaw has later been criticized (Bratt, 2008). The second school was a public school. In the public school, a fourth grade class served as the experimental class and an authentic, complete, intensive, three-week Jigsaw program was implemented. The control class was a split fourth/fifth-grade class.
At the end of the study, there was data from four classes across two schools. At the private school, there was a cooperative learning program in one class with another class serving as a control group. The public school there was a genuine Jigsaw program in one class and another class serving as a control. Henceforth, there were two programs one at each school and each had a same-school control. For the private school, there were 31 students in the experimental group and 29 students in the control group. At the public school, there were 20 students and two teachers in the experimental group, there were 23 students and only one teacher in the control group. Teachers were given and description of the Jigsaw program and the key facts were discussed with them. In the experimental classes, students were divided into Jigsaw groups by their teacher in a way that ethnicity, academic ability and sex were distributed evenly within and across group. Groups did not include best friends or worse enemies.
Prior to implementation, students in the experimental classes familiarized themselves with their group peers, practiced their roles as peer tutors, and practiced relevant skills like discussing main ideas, reading for meaning, listening, and quizzing peers on important information. At the private school, students in the experimental class received the cooperative learning program for 90 minutes each day, twice a week, for four weeks. At the public school, students in the experimental class received the Jigsaw program for an hour a day, five days a week, for three weeks. The jigsaw technique was implemented following standard protocol. Measures were take pre and post intervention. Academic performance data was available only from the public school and not the private school although it had been promised from both. Students were given the Piers-Harris Children’s Self-concept Scale (CSCS) in order to measure self-esteem. Sociometric class survey data was taken by asking students to rate their classmates according to how much they would like to work them and play with them. Racial prejudice measures were also taken in order to assess students’ attitudes to Asians, Aborigines, and European-Australians.
There was a measure of social distance and one of stereotypes. There was an improvement seen in academic performance for those in the Jigsaw group. This is interesting because some research has implied that the Jigsaw technique may not be appropriate for learning needs as English as a second language students. There were increase in self-esteem in the experimental groups at both schools as compared to the control groups, but the gains were not significant. This may have to do with a ceiling effect. Significant results were not seen for liking of school. Students in the Jigsaw group increased their ratings in working with peers when compared to their relative control group. When looking at individuals in the cooperative learning group, they were not motivated at the prospect of working cooperatively. There were not significant differences seen in playing with peers ratings in either experimental group.
For the Jigsaw students there was an increase in work with ratings of the ethnic groups indicating that Jigsaw technique enhanced liking of ingroup and outgroup peers in work-orientated relationships. This was not seen for the cooperative learning students. Social distance ratings for Asian and European-Australian children decreased across the program, but European-Australian children ratings increase. In the Jigsaw group there was a decrease in negative traits attributed to Asians and European-Australians. For the private school, there was an increase in stereotyping for the cooperative learning experimental group. The study demonstrated that the Jigsaw method is effective in Australian social conditions in producing positive change in academic performance, attitudes to peers, and prejudice. Cooperative learning on the other hand produced generally negative results. Interdependence seemed to be more important than cooperation.
Bratt (“No effect on intergroup relations evident”)
Bratt (2008) presented two studies on Jigsaw, one with children in grade 6 (Study 1), one with adolescents in grades 8 to 10 (Study 2), both using pre- and post-measurements. Bratt focused on the claimed effectiveness of Jigsaw to reduce prejudice, assuming that his research would support Jigsaw. The first study gave similar findings as Walker and Crogan’s study (1998), but contrary to Walker and Crogan, Bratt stressed that data could not be interpreted as giving support to positive effects by the Jigsaw classroom.
Bratt’s Study 1 included two schools, with one Jigsaw class and one control class at each school. The Jigsaw technique was used over seven weeks, the analysis focused on ethnic Norwegian children (n = 34 in Jigsaw classes, n = 34 in control classes). Only at one school did the Jigsaw class show a different development than its control class, with more favourable developments in outgroup attitudes. However, the Jigsaw class at this school had two teachers whereas the control class had only one teacher (similar to Walker and Crogan’s Jigsaw study). Bratt pointed out that different number of teachers in the Jigsaw class and its control class made any conclusion about effects from Jigsaw impossible.
Study 2 increased the number of participating school classes to 11 Jigsaw classes and 11 matched control classes. Jigsaw teachers were well trained and repeatedly had meetings during the eight weeks of using the Jigsaw technique. The analysis focused on the 264 ethnic Norwegian students in the 22 classes.
Study 2 failed to indicate effects of Jigsaw on investigated variables: intergroup attitudes, cross-group friendship, common ingroup identity, empathy, and attitudes toward school. These variables were measured before using Jigsaw, right after the eight weeks of Jigsaw use and finally six months after the first measure. Bratt concluded that his two studies were not able to support his initial optimism on behalf of Jigsaw. Bratt also pointed out methodological limitations in previous studies on Jigsaw.
See also
- Cooperative learningCooperative learningCooperative learning is an approach to organizing classroom activities into academic and social learning experiences. Students must work in groups to complete tasks collectively...
- Collaborative learningCollaborative learningCollaborative learning is a situation in which two or more people learn or attempt to learn something together. Unlike individual learning, people engaged in collaborative learning capitalize on one another’s resources and skills...
- Student Team Achievement DivisionStudent Team Achievement DivisionStudent Team Achievement Division is a Cooperative learning strategy in which small groups of learners with different levels of ability work together to accomplish a shared learning goal. It was devised by Slavin and his associates at Johns Hopkins University.In STAD, students are assigned to 4 or...
STAD is another cooperative learning technique