Comparative analysis between effectiveness of the Jigsaw participatory model and traditional teaching methods in urban environment teaching

Introduction: Participatory teaching as a teaching method is a form of inter-personal relationship (Hsiung, 2012). There is an obvious gap in using the participatory teaching method for conveying environmental principles and monitoring them and examining studies of this teaching method would significantly help environmental educators (Baker and Clark, 2010) and activists in selecting the most effective method for conveying the principles (Alton-Lee, 2012). Such training can be effective in developing interpersonal and mental skills and high-level critical thinking skills, bringing about more learning, efficient memorizing of information and classrooms enjoyment. This article aims to compare and monitor the effectiveness of inculcating urban environmental topics using the Jigsaw participatory and a traditional teaching method. The main questions outlined here are as follows: Which of aforementioned teaching methods is more effective in conveying urban environmental topics? How is the sustainability of environmental principles over time? Materials and methods: This is a quasi-experimental study with a pre-test/post-test design among two groups (participatory and traditional teaching methods). The statistical population consisted of male grade-three elementary students in Ahwaz, Iran. A total of 62 students (32 in the participatory teaching group and 30 in the traditional teaching group) were enrolled as the sample using random cluster sampling. Identical groups were verified using the pre-test and reliability was verified using Cronbach's alpha (0.84). The teaching methods were performed for three consecutive weeks and post-test was performed after one week and one month. Independent and dependent t-tests and effect size were employed to analyze the data using SPSS.Results and discussion: The results of the independent t-test of pre-test in participatory and traditional groups showed that the level of awareness concerning the urban environment is equal among the students and no significant difference was observed between two groups. The mean scores of participatory and traditional teaching methods were 18.68 and 18.66 in the pre-test concerning urban environmental topics, respectively. The results of post-test after a week showed that the mean scores were 26.28 and 23.10 in the participatory and traditional groups, respectively. They were 25.65 and 21.93 after a month, respectively. The mean scores were greater in the participatory group than in the traditional group at the post-test stage after one week and one month. The results of effect size showed that the effect size of the Jigsaw participatory method was 1.870 over a one-week interval and 2.137 over a one-month interval. According to the results of the dependent t-test, the level of awareness had a significant difference before the intervention and one week after the training programme. One month after the training course, the level of awareness decreased from 26.28 to 25.65 in the participatory group, and from 23.10 to 21.93 in the traditional teaching method group. A significant difference was found compared with the test prior to the training course. These results showed that students taught through the Jigsaw participatory method learn better than those taught through the traditional teaching method.Conclusions: The results of analyses showed that the level of awareness about the urban environment was significantly greater in students taught by the Jigsaw participatory teaching method than those in the traditional teaching group. The results of monitoring the effectiveness also showed that the Jigsaw participatory teaching method was superior to the traditional method.