adult education classes - and for a variety of skills, such as conversation/communication, reading, writing, and content courses. Despite this increased profile, CL still has not entered the mainstream in EFL.

Although the reasons CL has not been accepted are complex and varied, one stands out--lack of training, both of teachers and students. This brief article will outline a training program for English language teachers in universities in Japan. I will briefly describe a "typical" university language lesson, discuss how CL is currently being used, and conclude with a description of a program that has shown potential in training students to work successfully in cooperative groups.

Background
English is a required course at most Japanese universities and junior colleges, most often in the 1st and 2 nd years. The courses are taught by both Japanese and native-speaking teachers, who range from relatively untrained to those who hold a doctorate in an area of English. Classes are generally of widely mixed ability, and class size can range anywhere from 20 to 100 and more. Classes meet for a single 90-minute period per week over a thirteen-week semester. Students are evaluated at the end of the courses, but in most cases this evaluation has little effect on their academic progress; students who fail can continue in the next English course while simultaneously making up the failed course. Finally, classes often meet in language laboratories or in classrooms with long desks that are bolted to the floor.

Given this description, it is easy to imagine the difficulties involved in implementing CL. But the situation looks even worse when several other factors are added to the mix--little coordination between teachers, relatively poor student attendance, and general lack of in-service training opportunities. What, then, can a teacher who wants to use CL do?

One obvious answer is to use the Structural Approach. Popular structures for use in EFL classes include Numbered Heads Together, Three-Step Interview, Roundtable/Roundrobin, Talking Chips, and Think-Pair-Share (see Kagan & Kagan, 1994; Olsen & Kagan, 1992). Jigsaw is also a favorite choice of many teachers, although the added burden of having to adapt existing materials to the Jigsaw format puts off some. In general, the use of structures is successful--students take a more active role in learning, interact more in English, and, presumably, learn more. For teachers, structures allow for the efficient use of class time, enhance the learning atmosphere, and provide a stabilizing thread throughout the course.

However, many teachers feel that structures simply are not enough. These teachers perceive that groupwork in general is a waste of time, and point to the need for training students in how to work in a group. The feeling among these teachers often is that, while structures are "cute" and easy to implement, students often do not see the connection between the structures they use in one lesson with activities in other courses. What is needed is a mindset that can be readily transferred to other classroom situations where the teacher is not necessarily well versed in CL.

The Training Program
With this in mind, my colleague Robert Homan and I created a set of materials to train university students how to work effectively in groups. The first lesson, How to be a Group Leader, grew out of materials that were originally created for the intensive English program at International Christian University in Tokyo. The chief components of this lesson are:

          (1) categorizing -- students sort phrases into categories for group leaders
                (opening a discussion, asking for an opinion, responding,
                summarizing, and closing a discussion) and for group participants
                (giving an opinion, agreeing, disagreeing, and asking for clarification).