New Pieces of the Jigsaw Classroom: Increasing Accountability to Reduce Social Loafing in Student Group Projects

Elora C. Voyles, Sarah F. Bailey, Amanda M. Durik


Generally, college student group projects can be problematic due to students perceiving low accountability and withdrawing their efforts when working within a group. This paper presents an adapted jigsaw classroom method to improve learning for college students during group work. Although the original jigsaw classroom model is an effective approach for improving cohesion and collaboration, it lacks the structure that could improve college students’ collaborative learning and promote accountability. This paper extends the original jigsaw classroom approach to increase personal accountability and facilitate group processes. This paper introduces a modified jigsaw classroom, in which each group member submits research notes to the instructor, thereby increasing individual accountability, and presents to the class, thereby increasing public accountability.

Full Text:



Aggarwal, P., & O’Brien, C. L. (2008). Social loafing on group projects: Structural antecedent sand effect on student satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Education, 30(3), 255-264. doi:10.1177/0273475308322283

Aronson, E. (2000). The jigsaw classroom. Retrieved from:

Aronson, E. (2002). Building empathy, compassion, and achievement in the jigsaw classroom. In J. Aronson (Ed.), Improving academic achievement (pp. 209-225). New York, NY: Academic Press. doi:10.1016/B978-012064455-1/50013-0

Aronson, E., Blaney, N., Stephin, C. Sikes, J., & Snapp, M. (1978). The jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publishing Company.

Artut, P. D., & Tarim, K. (2007). The effectiveness of jigsaw II on prospective elementary school teachers. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 35(2), 129-141. doi:10.1080/13598660701268551

Bailey, S. F., Barber, L. K., & Ferguson, A. J. (2015). Promoting perceived benefits of group projects: The role of instructor contributions and intragroup processes. Teaching of Psychology, 42, 179-183. doi:10.1177/0098628315573147

Burdett, J., & Hastie, B. (2009). Predicting satisfaction with group work assignments. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 6(1), 62-71. Retrieved from

Carpenter, J. M. (2006). Effective teaching methods for large classes. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences Education, 24(2), 13-23. Retrieved from

Casner-Lotto, J., & Barrington, L. (2006). Are they really ready to work? Employers’ perspectives on the basic knowledge and applied skills of new entrants to the 21st century US workforce. Retrieved from

Chapman, K. J., Meuter, M. L., Toy, D., & Wright, L. K. (2010). Are student groups dysfunctional? Perspectives from both sides of the classroom. Journal of Marketing Education, 32(1), 39-49. doi:10.1177/0273475309335575

Chapman, K. J., & Van Auken, S. (2001). Creating positive group project experiences: An examination of the role of the instructor on students’ perceptions of group projects. Journal of Marketing Education, 23(2), 117-127. doi:10.1177/0273475301232005

Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of educational research, 64(1), 1-35. doi:10.3102/00346543064001001

Colbeck, C. L., Campbell, S. E., & Bjorklund, S. A. (2000). Grouping in the dark: What college students learn from group projects. Journal of Higher Education, 71(1), 60-83. doi:10.2307/2649282

Deeter-Schmelz, D. R., Kennedy, K. N., & Ramsey, R. P. (2002). Enriching our understanding of student team effectiveness. Journal of Marketing Education, 24(2), 114-124. doi:10.1177/0273475302242004

Freeman, L., & Greenacre, L. (2011). An examination of socially destructive behaviors in group work. Journal of

Marketing Education, 33(1), 5-17. doi:10.1177/0273475310389150

Foos, P. W., Mora, J. J., & Tkacz, S. (1994). Student study techniques and the generation effect. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(4), 567. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.86.4.567

Hansen, R. S. (2006). Benefits and problems with student teams: Suggestions for improving team projects. Journal of Education for Business, 82(1), 11-19. doi:10.3200/JOEB.82.1.11-19

Hänze, M., & Berger, R. (2007). Cooperative learning, motivational effects, and student characteristics: An experimental study comparing cooperative learning and direct instruction in 12th grade physics classes. Learning and Instruction, 17(1), 29-41. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.11.004

Hertel, G., Konradt, U., Orlikowski, B. (2004). Managing distance by interdependence: Goal setting, task interdependence, and team-based rewards in virtual teams. European Journal of work and organizational psychology, 13(1). 1-28. doi:10.1080/13594320344000228

Hoon, H., & Tan, T. M. L. (2008). Organizational citizenship behavior and social loafing: The role of personality, motives, and contextual factors. The Journal of Psychology, 142(1), 89-108. doi:10.3200/JRLP.142.1.89-112

Kagan, S. (1994). Cooperative learning. San Juan Capistrano, CA: Kagan Cooperative Learning.

Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(4), 681-706. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.65.4.681

Kerr, N. L. (1983). Motivation losses in small groups: A social dilemma analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(4), 819-828. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.45.4.819

Katzenbach, J. R. & Smith, D. K. (1993). The wisdom of teams: Creating the high-performance organization. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.

Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many hands make light the work: The causes and consequences of social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(6), 822-832. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.6.822

Landrum, R. E., & Harrold, R. (2003). What employers want from psychology graduates. Teaching of Psychology, 30(2), 131-153. doi:10.1207/S15328023TOP3002_11

Larson, J. R., Jr. (2010). In search of synergy in small group performance. New York, NY: Psychology Press.

Michaelsen, L. K., Fink, L. D., & Knight, A. (1997). Designing effective group activities: Lessons for classroom teaching and faculty development. Professional and Organizational Development Network in Higher Education, 16, 373-397. Retrieved from

Pfaff, E., & Huddleston, P. (2003). Does it matter if I hate teamwork? What impacts student attitudes toward teamwork. Journal of Marketing Education, 25(1), 37-45. doi:10.1177/0273475302250571

Perkins, D. V, & Saris, R. N. (2001). A “jigsaw classroom” technique for undergraduate statistics courses. Teaching of Psychology, 28, 111-113. doi:10.1207/S15328023TOP2802

Shepperd, J. A. (1993). Productivity loss in performance groups: A motivation analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 113(1), 67. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.113.1.67

Stevens, M. J., & Campion, M. A. (1994). The knowledge, skill, and ability requirements for teamwork: Implications for human resource management. Journal of Management, 20(2), 503-530. doi:10.1016/0149-2063(94)90025-6

Steiner, I. D. (1972). Group performance of unitary tasks. In I. D. Steiner (Ed.), Group process and productivity (pp. 14-39). New York, NY: Academic Press.

Valtonen, T., Havu-Nuutinen, S., Dillon, P., & Vesisenaho, M. (2011). Facilitating collaboration in lecture-based learning through shared notes using wireless technologies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(6), 575-586. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00420.x

Wageman, R. (2001). How leaders foster self-managing team effectiveness: Design choices versus hands-on coaching. Organization Science, 12(5), 559-577. doi:10.1287/orsc.12.5.559.10097

Walker, A. (2001). British psychology students’ perceptions of group-work and peer assessment. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 1(1), 28-36. doi:10.2304/plat.2001.1.1.28

Walker, I., & Crogan, M. (1998). Academic performance, prejudice, and the jigsaw classroom: New pieces to the puzzle. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 8(6), 381-393. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-1298

Weldy, T. G., & Turnipseed, D. L. (2010). Assessing and improving learning in business schools: Direct and indirect measures of learning. Journal of Education for Business, 85(5), 268-273. doi:10.1080/08832320903449535

Zacharia, Z. C., Xenofontos, N., & Manoli, C. C. (2010). The effect of two different cooperative approaches on students’ learning and practices within the context of a WebQuest science investigation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(3), 399-424. doi:10.1007/s11423-010-9181-2


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2017 The New School Psychology Bulletin

© The New School Psychology Bulletin |