Improving Student Learning Quality Through Jigsaw Cooperative

Learning Methods in Communication Theory Courses

Elva Ronaning Roem and Sarmiati

Communication Studies Program, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Andalas University, Padang, Indonesia

Keywords: Jigsaw Learning Method, Effective Communication, Learning Quality.

Abstract: Action research is a classroom research that uses a cycle of planning, action, observation, and reflection. The

main problem addressed in this study is the low creativity of students in class discussion in the application of

Student Centered Learning in the Communication Theory course. Generally, this research aims to improve

student learning in the Communication Science Study Program of the Faculty of Social and Political Science

of Universitas Andalas using a Jigsaw Cooperative Learning model. Action Research was carried out in two

ways with discussion material that had been prepared before the class and with students prepared discussion

material for presentation in front of the class to be listened to by other students, which provides creativity

space for them to conduct class presentations. The data collection tool used consisted of course materials

(Papers and Power points), evaluations (tests and non-tests), and observations. The subjects studied were all

second-semester students (2017/2018 academic year) of Communication Science Study Program who took

Communication Theory courses. The results showed that using the Jigsaw model learning approach student

learning outcomes each cycle resulted in a significant change. Before implementing the Jigsaw model almost

all of the students were assessed as not good enough but in the process of discussing the presentations the

student performance improved. From observations, students were able to show their creativity in discussions

in front of the class. The discussion group consisted of 5 students who divided one topic between them. The

implementation of the Jigsaw model learning approach could ultimately improve student learning outcomes

in the presentation of lecture material every week. Students could apply effective communication skills to

speak in the class and express their opinions and thoughts on the materials of the week in the Communication

Theory course.

1 INTRODUCTION

The duties of lecturers set out in the Tri Dharma

Perguruan Tinggi, include teaching and learning and

require use of good and effective learning methods.

The lecturer should act as a facilitator creating a

situation that allows students to learn and as a

learning manager in charge of creating learning

activities that allow students to achieve optimal

learning goals. The problems and experiences that the

authors still face as a lecturer in Communication

Science in Universitas Andalas are with the second-

semester students. When the authors taught several

times and delivered a course review every week, all

students who took this course tended avoid asking

questions or even discussing them. It led to a passive

class atmosphere.

It also seemed that students were not confident

and ashamed if they answered questions. Students

also felt afraid to ask questions which eventually led

them to becoming the focus of jokes by other students

in the class.

Communication is a central human activity. In our

daily lives we are never separated from

communication activities. Watzlawick has said that

humans need communication (Watzlawick,

Weakland, and Fisch, 1974). Thus, learning and

understanding communication theory will help

students see things related to the activities in their

surroundings. Therefore, to achieve the teaching

objectives of the communication theory course, it is

not appropriate if learning is only carried out with a

lecture method which is unlikely to provide direct

experience to students.

Communication theory courses are the subjects

that should emphasise the use of communication. In

fact, since almost all classroom activities are part of

the communication process, it was decided, based on

Roem, E. and Sarmiati, .

Improving Student Learning Quality Through Jigsaw Cooperative Learning Methods on Communication Theory Courses.

DOI: 10.5220/0008678800290033

In Improving Educational Quality Toward International Standard (ICED-QA 2018), pages 29-33

ISBN: 978-989-758-392-6

the results of discussions with teammates for this

course, it is necessary to undertake action research to

improve learning outcomes, generate student

creativity and ideas that are fun for students, through

use of Jigsaw cooperative learning. This would also

build personal and group responsibility and change

the learning method used by lecturers. The lecturer

would not be the only source of learning (teacher

centered) but peers could also become a source of

knowledge. Because of these factors, the author

designed and conducted this research with the title of

Improving Student Learning Quality Through Jigsaw

Cooperative Learning Methods in Communication

Theory Courses.

2 METHOD

2.1 Jigsaw Method

Jigsaw method is a type of cooperative learning that

encourages students to be active and help each other

in mastering lecture material and gain understanding

(Evcim and İpek, 2013; Hong et.al, 2012). Aronson

first developed the jigsaw method. In this study

students were put into small groups consisting of 4-6

people. Each group was given information that

addressed one of the topics of the course.

In the implementation of jigsaw cooperative

learning, students work in two different groups, in

their own groups and in expert groups. A group of

students that has the same information is known as

the expert group. In this group, each student discusses

and looks for the best way to explain that part of the

information to their original group members. Then all

students in this expert group returned to their original

group, and each of them explains the information to

their group friends.

2.2 The Basics of the Jigsaw Method

The Jigsaw method, as well as other group learning

processes, is an effective way to vary the atmosphere

of class discussion. Assuming that discussion

requires arrangements to control the class as a whole,

and the procedures used in the cooperative phase can

give students more time to think, respond and help

each other.

2.3 Elements of the Jigsaw Method

Jigsaw learning is more than learning in groups. Basic

elements of learning that are carried out include (1)

"Make it easy for students to learn using something

"useful" such as facts, skills, values, concepts, and

how to live in harmony with each other” (2)

Knowledge, values and skills are recognized by those

who are competent in assessing (Garcia et.al, 2017;

Tewksbury, 1995; The Foundation Coalition, 2001).

According to Anita Lie, the Jigsaw method, along

with other group-based learning, contains interrelated

elements, including:

1. Positive Interdependence.

It does not mean that students depend entirely on

other students. If students rely on others without

giving or being depended on by others it cannot

be called positive interdependence. Johnson at the

University of Minnesota, Shlomo Sharan (Sharan,

1999) at Tel Aviv University, and Robert E.

Slavin (Slavin, 1980) at John Hopkins, have

become researchers and practitioners who

develop Cooperative Learning as a learning model

that can improve student achievement while

honing student interpersonal intelligence and

create an atmosphere that encourages students to

feel a mutual need. This feeling is called positive

interdependence. This interdependence can be

achieved through the use of goals, tasks, materials

or learning resources, roles, and gifts.

2. Individual Accountability.

The jigsaw model requires individual

accountability as it involves measuring the

understanding of each group member and is gives

feedback about the learning achievements of the

members, so they know which partners who need

help. Unlike in traditional groups where

individual accountability is often overlooked so

that a few members may do most of the tasks, in

the jigsaw model students are responsible for the

tasks carried out by each member.

3. Face to Face Interaction.

Cooperative interaction requires all members of

the learning group to be face-to-face so that they

can dialogue not only with lecturers but also with

peers. Students often find it easier to learn from

peers than from lecturers.

4. Social Skill.

This element requires students to be provided by

a variety of social skills, such as leadership,

decisions making, trust building, management

communication, and conflict skills. Other social

skills such as tolerance, politeness to peer,

criticizing the ideas, daring to maintain a logical

mindset, not dominating others, being

ICED-QA 2018 - International Conference On Education Development And Quality Assurance

independent, and various other qualities that are

useful in establishing interpersonal relationships

are not only assumed but intentionally taught.

5. Group Processing.

This process occurs when each group member

evaluates the extent to which they interacted

effectively to achieve a common goal. The group

needs to discuss the behavior of cooperative and

uncooperative members and decide which

behavioral decisions must be changed or

maintained. This encourages the creation of a

learning community where learning outcomes are

obtained from the results of collaboration with

other people in the form of sharing of individuals,

between groups and between those who know and

do not know.

3 RESULT AND DISCUSSION

The classroom action research was carried out by the

Communication Science Study Program of

Universitas Andalas to second-semester students

every week from February to the end of May in 2

cycles. Each cycle was 2 x 60 minutes (1 x Meeting).

During the implementation of the research the

researcher was assisted by a peer observer from the

Communication Science Study Program who

observed the learning process, and assisted in

collecting data. This research was a classroom action

research with an emphasis on improving the quality

of learning processes and practices and focuses on the

use of Jigsaw Cooperative learning method as a way

to develop students' abilities or improve their ability

to think about Communication Theory.

Two cycles as described in the model adapted

from Slavin (1995) were used. Each cycle in this

study consisted of four components of primary

activities: (a) planning; (b) acting; (c) observing (d)

reflecting. The four components of these main

activities operate continuously with some

modifications in the planning component. The

planned actions in each cycle consists of the

following:

3.1 Planning

The researcher and colleague who form one team in

the Communication Theory course discussed the

material, learning activities and evaluation tools and

prepared teaching aids/ instruments and observation

guidelines.

3.2 Action Implementation.

In implementation, researcher’s action steps

according to the lesson plan as follows:

 Initial activities: Apperception, explanation of

learning objectives and provision of material.

 Core activities: Class presentations, group

division, Implementation of Jigsaw

Cooperative Learning: weekly course material

for selected students and their team who came

to in front of the class. The implementation of

observation assessment, Class presentations

from the results of student discussion, both

concluding and equating perceptions

continued with evaluation.

 Final activities: Giving rewards, reaffirming

the main/important matters,

improvement/enrichment, and closing.

3.3 Observation

Observation was done during the activities in the

class. Observations include both student and lecturer

activities and used observation sheets. The researcher

and colleague in the team observed the impact of the

implementation, whether it went according to plan

and what obstacles were faced by students. Data

collection techniques during learning activities

involved observing, documenting, and active learning

discussion practices.

Observation is carried out using an instrument of

affective and psychomotor performance, to measure

the indicators of work, efficiency, and involvement of

students in the learning process.

Active learning discussions were encouraged by

explaining about how students must be able to speak

and be active in front of the class in material

discussion groups. Assessment was given on student

activity and interest level of material and presentation

slides. This was done to measure the ability and skills

of students in understanding the communication

theory material.

The material for each presentation was taken from

the material contained in the semester learning plan

(RPS). Assessment was performed to identify

students' abilities before being given Jigsaw tasks

and at the same time to determine the level of each

student to form cooperative groups.

Improving Student Learning Quality Through Jigsaw Cooperative Learning Methods on Communication Theory Courses

Table 1: Learning Acquisition from The First Cycle.

Cycle

Grades

Cognitive

Affective

Psychomotor

Assessment area

I.Theory of Paradigm

Number of Students

From the data obtained it was seen that the

implementation of learning in each cycle varied

greatly, especially in the shortcomings/weaknesses.

In the first cycle, only 20 students of the 57 showed

ability to work intelligently and creatively in

conducting interesting class discussions. The rest of

the students (37 students) were passive in class

discussions, as indicated by the cognitive, affective,

to psychomotor assessments. It was considered

necessary to improve in the second cycle both the

lecturer directives, and the students’ understanding of

the topic, provide motivation, guide the discussion

and improve understanding of the material as all these

were evident weaknesses in this cycle.

Table 2: Acquisition of The First Cycle.

Cycle

Grades

Cognitive

Affective

Psychomotor

Assessments

I. Theory of Paradigm

Total of Student

In the second cycle, achievement of the class showed

a very significant improvement in the cognitive

evaluation and observations of affective and

psychomotor student behavior. The average

achievement increased from 80 to 85 and 60 to 68. (in

cycles 1 and II) meaning that students had mastered

the subject matter and had fulfilled the achievements

of the works.

Table 3: Learning Acquisition in The Second Cycle

Cycle

Grades

Cognitive

Affective

Psychomotoric

Assessments

I. Theory of Paradigm

II. Theoretical

Tradition

Total of Student

From the assessment of each cycle, we can conclude

that there was an improvement compared to the

previous cycle, both in learning achievement

measured through tests and observations during the

activity. The improvement between the initial

condition and first cycle especially on the average

grade the observation results was under 50%

(effective 47% and psychomotor 46%). Cooperative

learning is a new method; students were not used to

implementing it because they only had experience

with traditional methods so they lacked to answer or

give opinions.

The development between first and second cycles

was encouraging both in the evaluation and from the

observations. The average achievement grade result

was 100% while the result of the average observation

of student who was not passive was 60%, with

cognitive factors 7%, affective factor 10%,

psychomotor 11%. The low grade of some students is

due to the lack of courage of students to express their

opinions, while the improvements of observation

result have proved the lecturers were mastering the

classroom situation. In the second cycle, this is shown

in teaching and learning activities.

The table, clearly shows that each cycle resulted

in very significant changes and developments so that

it can be said that the indicators in the improvement

of learning have been reached. The application of

cooperative learning improved the learning outcomes

of the second-semester students of Communication

Science Study Program Universitas Andalas;

Academic Year 2017 / 2018. The following

conclusions can be drawn:

1. The Jigsaw cooperative learning approach could

stimulate students' creative thinking in solving

problems they faced. Students could remember all

forms of behavior, so that learning outcomes were

improved.

2. The role of lecturers in the learning of

communication theory courses using the Jigsaw

cooperative learning approach is as a facilitator

and learning resource that can guide students and

ICED-QA 2018 - International Conference On Education Development And Quality Assurance

direct them to find solutions related to the

problems they face.

3. Confidence and creative thinking skills are the

necessary needs for students to use the Jigsaw

cooperative learning approach more successfully.

4. Problems in learning by using the Jigsaw

cooperative learning approach can be overcome

jointly between students and lecturers until the

most appropriate solution is finally found.

5. The results showed that by using the Jigsaw

cooperative learning approach, student learning

outcomes in each cycle experienced a significant

improvement. The learning outcomes of the

second-semester students of Communication

Science, degree of understanding of the

discussion material about the Paradigm of

Communication Theory and the Theoretical

Tradition as indicated by grades 80 and 60.

Students who scored 80, cognitive average 54 %

an increase from 50%, while affective scores rose

from 47% to 50%, and psychomotor aspects from

46% to 47%. Meanwhile, students who scored 60

had an average increase that varied in both cycles.

Cognitive factors decreased from 7% to 3%.

Affective factors rose from 10% to 17%, and

psychomotor aspects decreased from 11% to 10%.

6. The application of cooperative learning approach

with the Jigsaw model ultimately improved the

learning outcomes of the second-semester

students of Communication Science Study

Program, Faculty Social Political Science at

Universitas Andalas.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Thank you very much to the students in the second

semester of 2017. Thanks for the good cooperation,

the end of this research can be done. Thanks also to

LP3M, Communication Science Study Program

Pasca Sarjna, and their lecturers.

REFERENCES

Change, W.W. Norton, New York.

Hüseyin Evcim, Ömer Faruk İpek. Effects of Jigsaw II on

Academic Achievement in English Prep Classes.

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. Volume 70,

2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.01.236.

Jon-Chao Hong, Ming-Yueh Hwang, Ker-Ping Tam, Yi-

Hsuan Lai, Li-Chun Liu. Effects of cognitive style on

digital jigsaw puzzle performance: A GridWare

analysis. Computers in Human Behavior. Volume 28,

Issue 3. 2012. Pages 920-928.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.12.012.

Garcia, Alejandro, Jesus Abrego, Reguenes Robert Using

the Jigsaw Method for Meaningful Learning to Enhance

Learning and Rentention in an Educational Leadership

Graduate School Course. Global Journal of Human-

Social Science: G Linguistics & Education, Volume 17

Issue 5, 2017.

Tewksbury, B. J. 1995. Specific strategies for using the

“jigsaw” technique for working in groups in non-

lecturebased courses. Journal of Geological Education,

43, 322-326. Retrievable from:

http://d32ogoqmya1dw8.cloudfront.net/files/nagt/jge/a

bstracts/using_jigsaw_method.pdf

The Foundation Coalition. (2001). Positive

Interdependence, Individual Accountability, Promotive

Interaction: Three Pillars of Cooperative Learning.

Retrievable from: Best Practices for Teaching S-E

Synthesis with Case Studies

http://www.foundationcoalition.org/home/

keycomponents/collaborative_learning.html

Sharan, S., ed. 1999. Handbook of cooperative learning

methods, (2

edition), Westport, CT: Praeger.

Slavin, R. (1980). Cooperative Learning. Review of

Educational Research, 50(2), 315-342. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1170149

Slavin, R.E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory,

research, and practice (2nd Ed.). Boston: Allyn &

Bacon

Improving Student Learning Quality Through Jigsaw Cooperative Learning Methods on Communication Theory Courses