Strengthening Ties between IASCE and New Members:
What I Learned from the Forum Series 

Yael Sharan
yaelshar@zahav.net.il

What is it about cooperative learning that causes it to continuously spread around the world? Several factors come to mind. The increasing diversity in classrooms everywhere, for one, propels teachers to turn to CL as the most appropriate mode of instruction. CL practice is supported by ongoing research and is constantly refined, earning it the title of "best practice" in education. It has spawned a wealth of books, handbooks and guidebooks, and its researchers and practitioners are eager roving ambassadors. The IASCE, from its inception in 1979, has also played a vital role in the dissemination of CL by providing a venue for the global exchange of ideas about research and practice in the field, through the newsletter and at regional and international conferences. 

Historically the '70s and '80s were years of intense development of ideas, strategies and techniques for CL. It was fascinating to discover at the time how many teachers were devising similar strategies. For example, at a conference in Canada in 1985, Peter Forrestal of Australia presented a version of Group Investigation for his English curriculum that he had developed independently of the work on GI that Shlomo Sharan, myself and others were doing at the time in Israel.

The '90s saw a spurt of growth in the number of countries interested in CL. At the IASCE conference in Manchester in 2002, sessions led by researchers and educators from the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, and Cyprus gave everyone a glimpse of their work in CL. Both the similarities and differences between their experiences and those of the "veterans'" aroused everyone's interest. The Forum series in the IASCE newsletter was established at that conference to give these countries and others a platform for describing how and why they developed CL. The October, 2002 issue marked the initial appearance of articles (Fall, 2002, vol.21 no.3; back issues available at:  http://iasce.net/newsletters_menu.shtml#previous_newsletters). I would like to attempt to summarize some of the patterns that emerge from the thirteen Forum articles that have appeared so far and suggest some topics for future articles.

Introduction to CL

The first thing that strikes me in the Forum articles is that teacher educators in several countries who became interested in CL in the 90s generally avoided the pitfall of adhering to any one CL method associated with a well known person in the field. The writers in the series testify to the luxury of "shopping" in a "CL supermarket" full of tempting "products." In most countries represented in the Forum series, teacher educators learned more than one of the better known methods or strategies, and then went on to adapt what they learned to their own settings and needs. It seems a given today that CL is not to be identified with any single developer and that there is much to learn from all cooperative learning methods and strategies.

Initiating CL

A major point in most Forum stories is that interest in CL was initiated by a university or a government ministry as part of their search for solutions to severe educational problems in schools. Whereas a few innovators became interested in CL to improve the teaching of a specific content area, typically ESL (e.g. Lebanon and Hong Kong), most teacher educators were charged with running a sweeping change project. They had to learn about cooperative learning and at the same time learn how to teach it to teachers. They didn't have the benefit of trying out different approaches and strategies in their own classrooms before teaching teachers how to use them. Their solution was to form their own study groups in which they learned various cooperative learning techniques, strategies and methods, as well as how to teach them to teachers (e.g. Latvia and Lithuania). (Incidentally, this is how the Canadian founders of GLACIE - Great Lakes Association for Cooperation in Education -approached CL in the 80s.) They were simultaneously learning about cooperative learning while teaching it at a university or a teachers college or while conducting a change project. As part of this process they turned to experienced CL researchers and trainers for further guidance. In some cases the process resulted in the development of a unique model for teacher education for CL (e.g. Germany).

Designing change projects

Many Forum authors have written about the benefit of applying lessons that they learned from veteran innovators, such as designing a change project for whole schools and not for random teacher groups or specific content areas. In some small countries the change project was nationwide (e.g. Lithuania). From the start, the goal of most teacher educators was not just to use a few CL strategies in every lesson, which is a widely accepted practice when initiating CL, but to develop a comprehensive perspective of cooperative learning, and focus on an understanding of its basic principles and on the mastery of fundamental skills (e.g. Finland and Italy). Most teacher training and school-based change projects have been accompanied by ongoing research, which helped develop a local empirical base for CL.

Another lesson that Forum authors have learned from veterans' experience was to conduct experiential workshops and use a variety of CL methods to train teachers. As we all know, experiential workshops enable teachers to learn directly the advantages and difficulties of CL. This is especially important in countries with highly centralized and authoritarian traditions of education (e.g. Armenia).

As an outcome of their commitment to CL, many countries established regional cooperative learning associations or centers, organized regional conferences, and joined the IASCE (e.g. Cyprus, Japan). Some sent representatives to IASCE international conferences, where we've all been enriched by the face to face exchange of ideas and experiences. Such was the case in 2004, when Singapore, after many years of research and practice, gallantly hosted the IASCE international conference.

Problems encountered

Although CL is becoming familiar to teachers all over the globe, problems and challenges remain. These are not unique to countries new to the practice and dissemination of CL, and there is still much we have to learn from one another. Among the most prevalent problems cited by Forum authors are the lack of long term, in-depth teacher training, the lack of appropriate instructional materials, and the need for more research. Another issue is that while ministries or universities may view CL as the means to realizing broad social and educational goals, they still send double messages to teachers. Teachers all over struggle to find a balance between the need to innovate their teaching methods, on the one hand, and the demand to meet standards and "cover the curriculum," on the other hand (e.g. Australia). 

Future topics for the Forum series

The authors of the Forum articles write about the problems and satisfactions they experience as CL continues to develop in their respective countries. In future articles we hope to hear more from them and from all members of the IASCE about the ongoing problems and solutions of teaching CL to students and to teachers. It would be instructive to hear more about CL's contribution to areas such as intercultural education, special education, e-learning, adult education, university education, student collaboration outside the classroom, and the perennial issue of CL assessment. We all have much to learn from the creativity and determination of educators all over the world who strive, by means of CL, to introduce change in their country's educational systems.