The Cooperative School Cooperative versus traditional schools Cooperative school structure Quality education and continuous improvement Providing leadership References Cooperative Versus Traditional Schools Schools are not buildings, curricula, timetables, and machines. Most fundamentally schools are relationships and interactions among people focused on learning. How interpersonal interactions are structured among everyone in the school environment determines how effective schools are. Cooperation among students is part of the larger issue of the organizational structure of the school. Traditionally over the past century, schools have functioned as "mass-production" organizations that divided work into small component parts performed by individuals who worked separately from and, in many cases, in competition with peers. Teachers worked alone, in their own room, with their own set of students, and with their own set of curriculum materials. Students were assigned to one teacher for short segments of time such as one class period each day and/or one school year. Teachers and students alike were considered to be interchangeable parts in the organizational machine. Schools need to change from a mass-production, competitive/individualistic organizational structure to a high-performance, cooperative, team-based organizational structure (see Johnson & Johnson, 1994). In doing so, traditional schools become cooperative schools. In a cooperative school, students work primarily in cooperative learning groups, teachers and building staff work in cooperative teams, and district administrators work in cooperative teams. The organizational structures of the classroom, school, and district are then congruent. Each level of cooperative teams supports and enhances the other levels.   Cooperative School Structure A cooperative school structure begins in the classroom with the use of cooperative learning the majority of the time (Johnson, Johnson, and Holubec, 1993). Work teams are the heart of the team-based organizational structure and cooperative learning groups are the primary work team. Research-validated outcomes include increased student achievement, more positive relationships among students, and enhanced student psychological well-being. Cooperative learning is also the prerequisite and foundation for most other instructional innovations, including thematic integrated curriculum, whole language, critical thinking , active reading, process writing, materials-based (problem-solving) mathematics, learning communities, and authentic performance-based assessment. The second level in creating a cooperative school is to form collegial teaching teams, task forces, and ad hoc decision-making groups within the school (Johnson & Johnson, 1994). The use of those types of cooperative teams among faculty members tends to increase teacher productivity, morale, and professional self-esteem. The groups are structured for (a) continuously improving instructional practice, (b) school-based decision making, and (c) staff meetings. Just as the heart of the classroom is cooperative learning, the heart of the school is the collegial teaching team. Collegial teaching teams are small cooperative groups (from two to five faculty members) whose purpose is to increase teachers' instructional expertise and success (Johnson & Johnson, 1994). The focus is on improving instruction in general and increasing members' expertise in using cooperative learning in specific. Collegial teams are first and foremost safe places where (a) members like to be, (b) there is support, caring, concern, laughter, camaraderie, and celebration, and (c) the primary and mutual goal of continually improving competence in using cooperative learning is never obscured. School-based decision making occurs through the use of two types of cooperative teams (Johnson & Johnson, 1994). First a task force considers, studies, and diagnoses a school problem. Data is gathered, alternative solutions are considered, conclusions are made, and a recommendation is presented to the faculty as a whole. Ad hoc decision-making groups are then used during faculty meetings to involve all staff members in making the decision. The ad hoc teams listen to the recommendation, consider whether to accept or modify the recommendation, report to the entire faculty their decision, and then participate in a whole-faculty decision as to what the course of action should be. Faculty meetings represent a microcosm of what administrators think the school should be. If administrators us a competitive/individualistic format of lecture, whole class discussion, and individual worksheets in faculty meetings, they have made a powerful statement about the way they want their faculty to teach. The most visible modeling of cooperative procedures in the school may be in faculty meetings and other meetings structured by the school administration. Formal and informal cooperative groups, cooperative base groups, and repetitive structures can be used within faculty meetings just as they can be used within the classroom. In this way, faculty meetings become staff development and training as well as business meetings. The third level in creating a cooperative school is to implement administrative cooperative teams within the district (Johnson & Johnson, 1994). Administrators are organized into collegial teams to improve continuously their administrative expertise and success. Administrative task force and ad hoc decision-making teams are used for making shared district-wide decisions. And in administrative meetings, cooperative procedures dominate to model what the school district should be like. The more the district and school personnel work in cooperative teams, the more the environment supports teacher use of cooperative learning in the classroom.   Quality Education And Continuous Improvement In the cooperative school all important work is done by teams. Teams are not an option; they are a given. Collegial teaching teams are comprised of faculty members from different disciplines, grade levels, and departments to help break down the barriers that traditionally have separated teachers, grade levels, and academic disciplines. Doing so helps teachers perceive their mutual goal of providing quality education for all students and see the overall process toward which their efforts are contributing. Teachers in a collegial teaching team ideally are jointly responsible for one cluster of students over a number of years. This serves to strengthen positive interdependence among teachers, heighten shared accountability, and provide purpose for helping and supporting one another in continuously improving instructional expertise. Key activities of a collegial teaching team include (Johnson & Johnson, 1994): Frequent professional discussions of cooperative learning in which common vocabulary is developed, information is shared, successes are celebrated, and implementation problems are solved. Coplanning, codesigning, copreparing, and coevaluating cooperative learning lessons and instructional units. Coteaching cooperative lessons and jointly processing those lessons.   Providing Leadership For the cooperative school to flourish the school has to have leadership. In general, leadership is provided by five sets of actions (Johnson & Johnson, 1994). Challenging The Status Quo: Leaders challenge the efficacy of the status quo. The status quo is the competitive-individualistic mass-production structure that traditionally has dominated schools and classrooms. In the classroom it is represented by lecturing, whole class discussion individual worksheets, and a test on Friday. In the school it is one teacher to one classroom with one set of students, as well as separating teachers and students into grade levels and academic departments. Inspiring A Mutual Vision Of What The School Could Be: Leaders frequently communicate the dream of establishing the cooperative school. Leader is the keeper of the dream who inspires commitment to joint goals of creating a team-based, cooperative school. Empowering Through Cooperative Teams: When teachers or students feel helpless or discouraged, providing them with a team creates hope and opportunity. It is social support from and accountability to valued peers that motivates committed efforts to achieve and succeed. Students are empowered by cooperative learning groups. Teachers are empowered through collegial teaching teams and involvement in site-based decision making. Leading By Example: Leaders model the use of cooperative strategies and procedures and take risks to increase their professional competence. Actions must be congruent with words. What is advocated must be demonstrated. Encouraging The Heart: Long-term, committed efforts to continuously improve one's competencies come from the heart, not the head. It takes courage and hope to continue to strive for increased knowledge and expertise. It is the social support and concrete assistance from teammates that provides the strength to persist and excel.   References Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1994). Leading the cooperative school (2nd ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. J. (1993). Cooperation in the classroom (6th ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.

Navigation Home Cooperative Learning Q&A Essays (on home page) About the center (on home page) Newsletters (on home page) Books and supplies Contacting us (by email and otherwise) The U of M College of Education and Human Development The University of Minnesota Etc. Except as noted, the contents of this site are copyright © David and Roger Johnson. About reproduction.