Reviewed by Miriam Landor [M.S.Landor@dundee.ac.uk]

Deadly conflict is an urgent global problem, which cries out for improved education in conflict resolution and for the construction of a peaceful world. This is the message of the book Learning to Live Together. As an educational psychology student, I particularly valued the marriage of a wide range of psychological theories to detailed descriptions of educational applications. These are differentiated according to developmental stages. The book is research-based and thorough, tracing the development of both inter-group conflict and prosocial behaviour through the childhood years to adulthood. It describes successful school and media programmes for conflict resolution and explains the difference between these and a higher-level ‘peace education’.

The main psychological approach is the ethological – the evolutionary adaptiveness of attachment, group behaviour, regulation of fear, and so on. However, the Hamburgs also

range widely through the psychological landscape, choosing exemplars from naturalistic and controlled experimental studies, from social and developmental psychology, and from classic research such as Bandura’s and the Sherifs’.

Educational methodologies include numerous strategies from cooperative learning, which has a whole chapter devoted to it. Cooperative learning has its roots in Allport’s contact theory, which showed that prejudice can be reduced in groups of majority and minority members as long as they have equal status and are pursuing common goals. It has developed in response to divisions along racial and ethnic lines in an increasingly “globalized turbulent world” (p. 113). The formation of friendships prevents the holding of prejudice.

Cooperative learning techniques, such as the creation of learning groups of four or five, give students a more active involvement in their learning. They also tap into peer tutoring, the benefits of which are well researched. Not only does peer tutoring offset traditional individual competitiveness which leads to winners and losers, it also instills appreciation of the benefits of mutual aid. Joint problem-solving leads to greater productivity. Small group teaching promotes prosocial behaviour amongst children, and also increases academic achievement.

The learning activities set for the groups are designed to encourage all the students to contribute substantially and with equal status to the team’s output. In some cases points can be awarded based on the average performance of each person, thus making rewards dependent on the performance of everyone in the group. Group work and cooperative learning differ in that cooperative learning is mainly concerned with the academic success of each student, rather than the performance of the group as a whole.

Examples are given of a variety of cooperative learning strategies. According to the Hamburgs, the most successful of these are Student Teams - Achievement Divisions (STAD), Teams – Games – Tournaments (TGT) and Team-Assisted Individualization (TAI). STAD assigns group rewards for individual achievement, in groups of mixed gender and ethnicity, where study and test preparation are undertaken through mutual assistance but questions are then answered individually. TGT is similar but uses a system of academic game tournaments. TAI combines the two with the addition of individual instruction. In all cases, more cross-racial friendships developed than in control groups.

Studies suggest that after only a few weeks of cooperative learning students transcend cultural norms in forming meaningful cross-racial friendships, because they understand their differences through a different cultural model. Friendliness and trust are increased, with fewer stars or isolated students. Competitiveness decreases, and is less likely to be chosen than cooperative modes where the option exists. However, the point is made that the success of cooperative learning depends on serious teacher training and commitment to master the techniques.

Some common concerns about cooperative learning are refuted by the authors. They claim that competition is balanced with cooperation rather than eliminated, that high achievers learn as much as they do in traditional classrooms, that individual grading can be done alongside group grading in order to give fair results, and that individual accountability stimulates ‘lazy’ students to be more active.

In conclusion, through cooperative learning, “Children learn to work together; everyone contributes in some way; everyone is good at something; everyone learns to appreciate diversity; a meshing of different skills in a division of labor takes place; and a mutual aid ethic is encouraged. And most important, youngsters engaged in cooperative learning have gratifying firsthand experiences, learning that working together constructively allows all members of the group to be winners and that cooperation with other people increases rewards” (p. 119).

The authors are highly distinguished pioneering academics in development and psychiatry. Abundant academic references and quotations are annotated so that they can be followed up at will without disrupting the reading flow.

I was a little concerned that despite the book’s global theme, there is a lingering impression of US bias which may jar on readers of other nationalities. The selection of conflict resolution programmes is mainly from the US, and the concerns and issues chosen seem to reflect current US thinking. “Active opposition  …. by outside nations” in the event of genocide or civil war (p.45), elaboration of Palestinian but not Israeli “hate education campaigns” (p.59), and the conviction that the US leads the world in terms of civic nationalism and ethnic integration (p.36) may comfort a home audience, but may also feed anxiety that terrorists’ causes can be fuelled by such unconscious complacency.

Miriam Landor is an Educational Psychologist in Training at Dundee University         

2.         Tjosvold, D. [tjosvold@ln.edu.hk], Yu, Z. Y., & Su, F. (2004). Cooperative learning: Potentials and challenges for Chinese management education. In C. Wankel & R. DeFillippi (Eds.). The cutting edge of international management education (pp. 223-242). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

The following is excerpted from the chapter.

Based on research and our professional experiences teaching managers in Hong Kong and mainland China, we argue that cooperative learning can very much contribute to educational reform in China and, in particular, to management education. Researchers though have objected to applying Western ideas and practices in China and, specifically, questioned the culturally appropriateness and utility of high student involvement approaches like cooperative learning in Chinese classrooms.

This chapter reviews the research support for the value of cooperative learning in management education in China and discusses ways to overcome barriers and implement it successfully. The first section discusses how cooperative learning can contribute to the reform of management education in China. The second section outlines objections to cooperative learning as culturally inappropriate and our view that cooperative learning is compatible with Chinese values. The third part reviews cooperative learning and its research support and the fourth part reviews research in China. The next section uses recent studies to show how Chinese values can support spirited, productive cooperative teamwork. The final section notes procedures that we have found particularly useful for Hong Kong and mainland China classrooms.

Our position is that Chinese values themselves are not so highly restrictive and inimical to student participation in their own education. For example, although values reinforce

submissive acceptance of authority, other values support inquiry and debate. For example, Mencius, an influential Confucian scholar, argued that wise rulers should adopt ideas that may oppose their own. He himself was famous for his eagerness to debate and challenge rulers and people as he tried to teach them the right ways: “Indeed, I am not fond of disputing, but I am compelled to do it …I am alarmed by these things, and address myself to the defense of the doctrines of the former sages … I also wish to rectify men’s hearts, and to put an end to those perverse doctrines, to oppose their one-sided actions and banish away their licentious expressions.”

Befitting an ancient, ongoing culture, Chinese people have many values. Just in the twentieth century, the nationalist movement, the revolution of 1949, the Great Leap Forward, the cultural revolution, the Gang of Four movement, and the opening and reform since 1979 have engendered a whole host of values and traditions. In China, socialist and nationalistic values co-exist with free market and international ones. The third section argues that Chinese values can be applied in ways that support cooperative learning. The next section elaborates on the rationale and research support for cooperative learning.

As collectivists recognize the importance of their relationships, Chinese students are often reserved and introverted. Group members often do not know each other’s names. However, cooperative learning is based on students knowing each other as individuals. What we have found effective is to give students activities and time for personal disclosure so that they know each other as individuals. For example, they might begin each meeting with discussing their favorite activities, career goals, and so on. These activities are useful for western students but structuring them in China appears to be particularly appropriate.

Chinese people also want to be respectful and avoid appearing to be particularly critical. Explicitly defending the usefulness of feedback and structuring times to give feedback and to process their group functioning can develop openness. Guidance as to how to provide feedback without showing disrespect needs to accompany the opportunities to give feedback. The emphasis should be on providing positive feedback to help students build upon their strengths.