Do Jigsaw Classrooms Improve Learning Outcomes? Five Experiments and an Internal Meta-Analysis
"Jigsaw" is a peer learning procedure derived from social interdependence theory, which suggests that individuals positively linked by a common goal can benefit from positive and promotive social interactions (Aronson & Patnoe, 2011). Although jigsaw has often been presented as an effi...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of educational psychology 2022-08, Vol.114 (6), p.1461-1476 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1476 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 1461 |
container_title | Journal of educational psychology |
container_volume | 114 |
creator | Stanczak, Arnaud Darnon, Céline Robert, Anaïs Demolliens, Marie Sanrey, Camille Bressoux, Pascal Huguet, Pascal Buchs, Céline Butera, Fabrizio |
description | "Jigsaw" is a peer learning procedure derived from social interdependence theory, which suggests that individuals positively linked by a common goal can benefit from positive and promotive social interactions (Aronson & Patnoe, 2011). Although jigsaw has often been presented as an efficient way to promote learning, empirical research testing its effect on learning remains relatively scarce. The goal of the present research is to test the hypothesis that a jigsaw intervention would yield a meaningful effect size (d = .40) on learning outcomes, in 5 randomized experiments conducted among sixth-graders. The jigsaw intervention was compared to an "individualistic" (NExp 1 = 252; NExp 2 = 313) or a "teaching as usual" (NExp 3A = 110; NExp 3B = 74; NExp 3C = 101) approach on the same pedagogical content. Across the 5 experiments, we did not find empirical support for this hypothesis. Internal meta-analytic estimates (ES = .00, 95% CI [−.10, .09]) showed that, overall, the jigsaw intervention did not produce the expected positive effects on learning. The reasons why jigsaw classrooms may not always prove beneficial for learning are discussed.
Educational Impact and Implications Statement
Although the "jigsaw classroom" is a relatively popular cooperative method (Aronson & Patnoe, 2011) which has often been presented as an efficient way to promote learning, empirical research testing its effect on learning remains relatively scarce and debated (Roseth et al., 2019). Poor evidence can be misleading for teachers. Across 5 randomized experiments conducted on French sixth-graders, the present research showed that the "jigsaw classroom" did not yield any significant gain in learning outcomes compared to "individualistic" or "teaching as usual" conditions of learning. The reasons why the jigsaw intervention did not produce the expected positive effects on learning are discussed. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1037/edu0000730 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_hal_p</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_03441734v1</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1372764</ericid><sourcerecordid>2640092640</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a417t-a0e115a043dcd1af2db4c7912270369976de787972309883f2cc27a3b90deb103</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kctP3DAQhy1EJRbaS--VLHEqUtrxA3t9QqtlgUVbcWmvtWYdLw3KJqmdQPe_70RB9FZLfs18mt88GPso4IsAZb_GcgBaVsERmwmnXCGFNcdsBiBlAcaoE3aa8xMxij4z9vO65ffVY8YXvqwx59S2-8zX-y61z5FvIqamah75w9CHdh_zFb-pyL7608VU7WPTZ45NSZuvmz6mBmv-LfZYLOh1yFV-z97tsM7xw-t9xn7crL4v74rNw-16udgUqIXtC4QoxCWCVmUoBe5kudXBOiGlpTyds6aMdm6dlQrcfK52MgRpUW0dlHFLlZ-xz1PcX1j7jlLDdPAtVv5usfGjDZQmJaWfBbHnE0s1_h5i7v1TO4ypZ09yoOagL81_KaMB3HgSdTFRIbXUvLh7Exfgx4n4fxMh-NMEU-_CG7i6F8pKazT5i8mPHfouHwKmvgp1zGFIiXo9xvJCaG-80Eaov5FylJc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2640092640</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Do Jigsaw Classrooms Improve Learning Outcomes? Five Experiments and an Internal Meta-Analysis</title><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>PsycArticles (EBSCO)</source><creator>Stanczak, Arnaud ; Darnon, Céline ; Robert, Anaïs ; Demolliens, Marie ; Sanrey, Camille ; Bressoux, Pascal ; Huguet, Pascal ; Buchs, Céline ; Butera, Fabrizio</creator><contributor>Kendeou, Panayiota</contributor><creatorcontrib>Stanczak, Arnaud ; Darnon, Céline ; Robert, Anaïs ; Demolliens, Marie ; Sanrey, Camille ; Bressoux, Pascal ; Huguet, Pascal ; Buchs, Céline ; Butera, Fabrizio ; PROFAN Consortium ; Kendeou, Panayiota</creatorcontrib><description>"Jigsaw" is a peer learning procedure derived from social interdependence theory, which suggests that individuals positively linked by a common goal can benefit from positive and promotive social interactions (Aronson & Patnoe, 2011). Although jigsaw has often been presented as an efficient way to promote learning, empirical research testing its effect on learning remains relatively scarce. The goal of the present research is to test the hypothesis that a jigsaw intervention would yield a meaningful effect size (d = .40) on learning outcomes, in 5 randomized experiments conducted among sixth-graders. The jigsaw intervention was compared to an "individualistic" (NExp 1 = 252; NExp 2 = 313) or a "teaching as usual" (NExp 3A = 110; NExp 3B = 74; NExp 3C = 101) approach on the same pedagogical content. Across the 5 experiments, we did not find empirical support for this hypothesis. Internal meta-analytic estimates (ES = .00, 95% CI [−.10, .09]) showed that, overall, the jigsaw intervention did not produce the expected positive effects on learning. The reasons why jigsaw classrooms may not always prove beneficial for learning are discussed.
Educational Impact and Implications Statement
Although the "jigsaw classroom" is a relatively popular cooperative method (Aronson & Patnoe, 2011) which has often been presented as an efficient way to promote learning, empirical research testing its effect on learning remains relatively scarce and debated (Roseth et al., 2019). Poor evidence can be misleading for teachers. Across 5 randomized experiments conducted on French sixth-graders, the present research showed that the "jigsaw classroom" did not yield any significant gain in learning outcomes compared to "individualistic" or "teaching as usual" conditions of learning. The reasons why the jigsaw intervention did not produce the expected positive effects on learning are discussed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-0663</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1939-2176</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1037/edu0000730</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington: American Psychological Association</publisher><subject>Classrooms ; Cooperative Learning ; Educational evaluation ; Educational objectives ; Educational psychology ; Experiments ; Female ; Foreign Countries ; Grade 6 ; Human ; Humanities and Social Sciences ; Individualism ; Instructional Effectiveness ; Instructional Improvement ; Interdependence ; Intervention ; Junior High School Students ; Male ; Meta Analysis ; Outcomes of Education ; Peer Teaching ; Peers ; Psychology ; Social interaction ; Student Learning Outcomes ; Teaching ; Teaching Methods</subject><ispartof>Journal of educational psychology, 2022-08, Vol.114 (6), p.1461-1476</ispartof><rights>2022 American Psychological Association</rights><rights>2022, American Psychological Association</rights><rights>Copyright American Psychological Association Aug 2022</rights><rights>Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a417t-a0e115a043dcd1af2db4c7912270369976de787972309883f2cc27a3b90deb103</citedby><orcidid>0000-0002-1767-4031 ; 0000-0003-3158-1306 ; 0000-0002-2596-1516 ; 0000-0003-2613-689X ; 0000-0002-8856-4374 ; 0000-0001-8018-5612 ; 0000-0002-0707-7655</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,315,782,786,887,27931,27932,33781</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1372764$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://hal.science/hal-03441734$$DView record in HAL$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Kendeou, Panayiota</contributor><creatorcontrib>Stanczak, Arnaud</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Darnon, Céline</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Robert, Anaïs</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Demolliens, Marie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sanrey, Camille</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bressoux, Pascal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huguet, Pascal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buchs, Céline</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Butera, Fabrizio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PROFAN Consortium</creatorcontrib><title>Do Jigsaw Classrooms Improve Learning Outcomes? Five Experiments and an Internal Meta-Analysis</title><title>Journal of educational psychology</title><description>"Jigsaw" is a peer learning procedure derived from social interdependence theory, which suggests that individuals positively linked by a common goal can benefit from positive and promotive social interactions (Aronson & Patnoe, 2011). Although jigsaw has often been presented as an efficient way to promote learning, empirical research testing its effect on learning remains relatively scarce. The goal of the present research is to test the hypothesis that a jigsaw intervention would yield a meaningful effect size (d = .40) on learning outcomes, in 5 randomized experiments conducted among sixth-graders. The jigsaw intervention was compared to an "individualistic" (NExp 1 = 252; NExp 2 = 313) or a "teaching as usual" (NExp 3A = 110; NExp 3B = 74; NExp 3C = 101) approach on the same pedagogical content. Across the 5 experiments, we did not find empirical support for this hypothesis. Internal meta-analytic estimates (ES = .00, 95% CI [−.10, .09]) showed that, overall, the jigsaw intervention did not produce the expected positive effects on learning. The reasons why jigsaw classrooms may not always prove beneficial for learning are discussed.
Educational Impact and Implications Statement
Although the "jigsaw classroom" is a relatively popular cooperative method (Aronson & Patnoe, 2011) which has often been presented as an efficient way to promote learning, empirical research testing its effect on learning remains relatively scarce and debated (Roseth et al., 2019). Poor evidence can be misleading for teachers. Across 5 randomized experiments conducted on French sixth-graders, the present research showed that the "jigsaw classroom" did not yield any significant gain in learning outcomes compared to "individualistic" or "teaching as usual" conditions of learning. The reasons why the jigsaw intervention did not produce the expected positive effects on learning are discussed.</description><subject>Classrooms</subject><subject>Cooperative Learning</subject><subject>Educational evaluation</subject><subject>Educational objectives</subject><subject>Educational psychology</subject><subject>Experiments</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Foreign Countries</subject><subject>Grade 6</subject><subject>Human</subject><subject>Humanities and Social Sciences</subject><subject>Individualism</subject><subject>Instructional Effectiveness</subject><subject>Instructional Improvement</subject><subject>Interdependence</subject><subject>Intervention</subject><subject>Junior High School Students</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Meta Analysis</subject><subject>Outcomes of Education</subject><subject>Peer Teaching</subject><subject>Peers</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Social interaction</subject><subject>Student Learning Outcomes</subject><subject>Teaching</subject><subject>Teaching Methods</subject><issn>0022-0663</issn><issn>1939-2176</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kctP3DAQhy1EJRbaS--VLHEqUtrxA3t9QqtlgUVbcWmvtWYdLw3KJqmdQPe_70RB9FZLfs18mt88GPso4IsAZb_GcgBaVsERmwmnXCGFNcdsBiBlAcaoE3aa8xMxij4z9vO65ffVY8YXvqwx59S2-8zX-y61z5FvIqamah75w9CHdh_zFb-pyL7608VU7WPTZ45NSZuvmz6mBmv-LfZYLOh1yFV-z97tsM7xw-t9xn7crL4v74rNw-16udgUqIXtC4QoxCWCVmUoBe5kudXBOiGlpTyds6aMdm6dlQrcfK52MgRpUW0dlHFLlZ-xz1PcX1j7jlLDdPAtVv5usfGjDZQmJaWfBbHnE0s1_h5i7v1TO4ypZ09yoOagL81_KaMB3HgSdTFRIbXUvLh7Exfgx4n4fxMh-NMEU-_CG7i6F8pKazT5i8mPHfouHwKmvgp1zGFIiXo9xvJCaG-80Eaov5FylJc</recordid><startdate>20220801</startdate><enddate>20220801</enddate><creator>Stanczak, Arnaud</creator><creator>Darnon, Céline</creator><creator>Robert, Anaïs</creator><creator>Demolliens, Marie</creator><creator>Sanrey, Camille</creator><creator>Bressoux, Pascal</creator><creator>Huguet, Pascal</creator><creator>Buchs, Céline</creator><creator>Butera, Fabrizio</creator><general>American Psychological Association</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7RZ</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>WZK</scope><scope>1XC</scope><scope>BXJBU</scope><scope>IHQJB</scope><scope>VOOES</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1767-4031</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3158-1306</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2596-1516</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2613-689X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8856-4374</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8018-5612</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0707-7655</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220801</creationdate><title>Do Jigsaw Classrooms Improve Learning Outcomes? Five Experiments and an Internal Meta-Analysis</title><author>Stanczak, Arnaud ; Darnon, Céline ; Robert, Anaïs ; Demolliens, Marie ; Sanrey, Camille ; Bressoux, Pascal ; Huguet, Pascal ; Buchs, Céline ; Butera, Fabrizio</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a417t-a0e115a043dcd1af2db4c7912270369976de787972309883f2cc27a3b90deb103</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Classrooms</topic><topic>Cooperative Learning</topic><topic>Educational evaluation</topic><topic>Educational objectives</topic><topic>Educational psychology</topic><topic>Experiments</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Foreign Countries</topic><topic>Grade 6</topic><topic>Human</topic><topic>Humanities and Social Sciences</topic><topic>Individualism</topic><topic>Instructional Effectiveness</topic><topic>Instructional Improvement</topic><topic>Interdependence</topic><topic>Intervention</topic><topic>Junior High School Students</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Meta Analysis</topic><topic>Outcomes of Education</topic><topic>Peer Teaching</topic><topic>Peers</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Social interaction</topic><topic>Student Learning Outcomes</topic><topic>Teaching</topic><topic>Teaching Methods</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Stanczak, Arnaud</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Darnon, Céline</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Robert, Anaïs</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Demolliens, Marie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sanrey, Camille</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bressoux, Pascal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huguet, Pascal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buchs, Céline</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Butera, Fabrizio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PROFAN Consortium</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>PsycArticles (via ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL)</collection><collection>HAL-SHS: Archive ouverte en Sciences de l'Homme et de la Société</collection><collection>HAL-SHS: Archive ouverte en Sciences de l'Homme et de la Société (Open Access)</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL) (Open Access)</collection><jtitle>Journal of educational psychology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Stanczak, Arnaud</au><au>Darnon, Céline</au><au>Robert, Anaïs</au><au>Demolliens, Marie</au><au>Sanrey, Camille</au><au>Bressoux, Pascal</au><au>Huguet, Pascal</au><au>Buchs, Céline</au><au>Butera, Fabrizio</au><au>Kendeou, Panayiota</au><aucorp>PROFAN Consortium</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1372764</ericid><atitle>Do Jigsaw Classrooms Improve Learning Outcomes? Five Experiments and an Internal Meta-Analysis</atitle><jtitle>Journal of educational psychology</jtitle><date>2022-08-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>114</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1461</spage><epage>1476</epage><pages>1461-1476</pages><issn>0022-0663</issn><eissn>1939-2176</eissn><abstract>"Jigsaw" is a peer learning procedure derived from social interdependence theory, which suggests that individuals positively linked by a common goal can benefit from positive and promotive social interactions (Aronson & Patnoe, 2011). Although jigsaw has often been presented as an efficient way to promote learning, empirical research testing its effect on learning remains relatively scarce. The goal of the present research is to test the hypothesis that a jigsaw intervention would yield a meaningful effect size (d = .40) on learning outcomes, in 5 randomized experiments conducted among sixth-graders. The jigsaw intervention was compared to an "individualistic" (NExp 1 = 252; NExp 2 = 313) or a "teaching as usual" (NExp 3A = 110; NExp 3B = 74; NExp 3C = 101) approach on the same pedagogical content. Across the 5 experiments, we did not find empirical support for this hypothesis. Internal meta-analytic estimates (ES = .00, 95% CI [−.10, .09]) showed that, overall, the jigsaw intervention did not produce the expected positive effects on learning. The reasons why jigsaw classrooms may not always prove beneficial for learning are discussed.
Educational Impact and Implications Statement
Although the "jigsaw classroom" is a relatively popular cooperative method (Aronson & Patnoe, 2011) which has often been presented as an efficient way to promote learning, empirical research testing its effect on learning remains relatively scarce and debated (Roseth et al., 2019). Poor evidence can be misleading for teachers. Across 5 randomized experiments conducted on French sixth-graders, the present research showed that the "jigsaw classroom" did not yield any significant gain in learning outcomes compared to "individualistic" or "teaching as usual" conditions of learning. The reasons why the jigsaw intervention did not produce the expected positive effects on learning are discussed.</abstract><cop>Washington</cop><pub>American Psychological Association</pub><doi>10.1037/edu0000730</doi><tpages>16</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1767-4031</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3158-1306</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2596-1516</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2613-689X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8856-4374</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8018-5612</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0707-7655</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0022-0663 |
ispartof | Journal of educational psychology, 2022-08, Vol.114 (6), p.1461-1476 |
issn | 0022-0663 1939-2176 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_03441734v1 |
source | Sociological Abstracts; PsycArticles (EBSCO) |
subjects | Classrooms Cooperative Learning Educational evaluation Educational objectives Educational psychology Experiments Female Foreign Countries Grade 6 Human Humanities and Social Sciences Individualism Instructional Effectiveness Instructional Improvement Interdependence Intervention Junior High School Students Male Meta Analysis Outcomes of Education Peer Teaching Peers Psychology Social interaction Student Learning Outcomes Teaching Teaching Methods |
title | Do Jigsaw Classrooms Improve Learning Outcomes? Five Experiments and an Internal Meta-Analysis |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-06T14%3A26%3A14IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_hal_p&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Do%20Jigsaw%20Classrooms%20Improve%20Learning%20Outcomes?%20Five%20Experiments%20and%20an%20Internal%20Meta-Analysis&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20educational%20psychology&rft.au=Stanczak,%20Arnaud&rft.aucorp=PROFAN%20Consortium&rft.date=2022-08-01&rft.volume=114&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1461&rft.epage=1476&rft.pages=1461-1476&rft.issn=0022-0663&rft.eissn=1939-2176&rft_id=info:doi/10.1037/edu0000730&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_hal_p%3E2640092640%3C/proquest_hal_p%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2640092640&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ1372764&rfr_iscdi=true |