It’s called “jigsaw,” and requires students to perform tasks in groups, derive the tasks’ results and then teach what they learned to other students. . . .
The jigsaw process, she said, almost creates an individualized education plan for each student regardless of that student’s level – helping teachers reach the lower-achieving students while still challenging the higher-achieving ones as they proceed through the lesson.
This begs the question, is it the teacher that is reaching the lower-achieving students or other students that are doing the job? Who is being paid to transfer knowledge to the students? Who is more likely to produce accurate information to the students?
The "Jigsaw Classroom" was originally conceived as a way to socially integrate different racial groups -- i.e., its objective was social engineering, not fostering the transfer of knowledge. "Jigsaw" is a variant of the "cooperative learning" technique where students "construct their own knowledge."
"Jigsaw," "cooperative learning," and variations on the theme all work to reduce the importance of the teacher -- and the "older generation" -- as a source of knowledge. They also give a false perception of "expertise" to the student participants. These techniques have been around for about 40 years.
We have a serious problem with academics in this country, and with inexperienced "know-it-alls" running society's institutions. Are these problems connected to these teaching techniques?