Teaching controversial and contemporary topics in economics using a jigsaw literature review activity

Abstract

Most courses are taught almost exclusively using lecture and, despite gaps in textbook coverage of empirical economics, do not incorporate academic readings. The authors of this article present a “jigsaw literature review” cooperative learning activity to address these shortfalls. The jigsaw guides students through formulating a position by synthesizing key ideas from readings with diverse perspectives on a common topic. The authors provide detailed guidance on conducting the activity in upper-level economics courses, based on their experiences while teaching labor economics, public economics, urban economics, health economics, and econometrics. They argue that their activity provides a meaningful way to integrate recent research, policy topics, and diversity issues while promoting student-student interactions. Sample course materials and additional resources are provided for ease of implementation.

Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.2021.1963373

Keywords:

• Academic readings
• active learning
• briefing note
• cooperative learning
• jigsaw

JEL CODES:

• A22
• A23

Acknowledgment

The authors thank Sam Allgood and KimMarie McGoldrick for helpful comments and Emma Brick-Hezeau, Kyla Denwood, Ashley Fondo, Gregory Shoats, and Vincie Wang for help with editing.

Notes

1 For example, the “Consensus Among Economists” survey indicates that many economic questions lack consensus among economists. Out of all 44 of the questions asked, 31 have a lack of consensus (measured as at least 0.9 in entropy score, where a value of zero means complete agreement and a value of one means a uniform distribution of responses). The three economic questions with the least consensus (entropy ≥ 0.99) in 2011 were “Changes in aggregate demand will affect real GDP in the short run but not in the long run,” “The Earned Income Tax Credit program should be expanded,” and “A minimum wage increases unemployment among young and unskilled workers” (Fuller and Geide-Stevenson 2014). The latter two economic questions are addressed in our literature review jigsaw activity examples in the online appendix.

2 Please see the supplementary materials provided in the online appendix at http://www.benharrellecon.com/jigsawappendix for examples. These materials are also available from the authors upon request.

3 Collins et al. (2021) goes further and uses the survey data to assess students’ overall experiences with the jigsaw activity and students’ perceptions of general self-efficacy and task-specific self-efficacy regarding summarizing academic readings and participating in group exercises, both before and after completing the jigsaw literature review assignments. In open-ended questions, students also provided feedback on the jigsaw activities and provided suggestions for improving them.

4 While we use the racial bias in policing and criminal justice jigsaw example for illustration, please see the online appendix for detailed examples of http://www.benharrellecon.com/jigsawappendix for all our jigsaw activities, including worksheets for the reading summaries in focus and task groups as well as student introductions.

5 See Lee (2017) for more advice for students on how to read academic sources. The degree of technicality for summarizing the paper’s methodology depends upon the purpose of the exercise and the level of the course.

6 Transition time may be longer for remote-learning courses because the instructor assigns the breakout rooms and must ensure each group comprises students who read the appropriate article. In-person courses may require less transition time because students can sort into their own groups.

7 Instructors will need to be more flexible if the students make their own groups. When we did this in person (pre-COVID-19), we required that the focus groups be between three and five students, covering at least three readings, with only one duplicated reading. Usually, only one or two groups (in a class of between 40 and 50 students) needed to deviate from this setup in a minor way, which was fine.

8 As of this writing, it is not possible to save two different breakout room formations on Zoom for one session. So, if breakout rooms were created for the focus groups, as recommended, then breakout rooms will need to be made manually for the task groups if the focus and task groups are done during the same Zoom session. This process will take a few minutes, depending on the size of the class. While manually making the breakout rooms for the task groups, the instructor could tell the students that the class will be taking a three-to-five-minute break and could provide the students with instructions to read in the meantime.

9 However, these graded worksheets have the potential to distract some students from fully engaging their classmates in discussions of the assigned readings.

10 In the online appendix, we provide a handout that includes a discussion of these common mistakes. This document is provided to students when we first assign the briefing note. We also reference these common mistakes and point students toward the document when we grade their briefing notes.

11 For example, a possible exam question for Urban Economics for content on racial bias in policing and criminal justice is: “Briefly summarize the conclusions of two papers on racial bias in policing or criminal justice: one that finds racial bias and one that does not (or one that does not find it in a particular circumstance).”

12 This suggested maximum of 60 students depends on the physical or virtual classroom location and if the instructor has the support of a teaching assistant who can help facilitate the activity.