CHAPTER 3

COOPERATIVE LEARNING IN JAPAN

SHUJI S U G I E

Department of Educational Psychology, Faculty of Liberal Arts, Chukyo University.

101-2 Yagoto Honmachi, Showa-ku, Nagoya 466, Japan

Abstract
Cooperative small groups are frequently used in Japanese schools. The principles of Buzz
Instruction, one model of CL, are outlined as an illustration of Japanese CL. Additional
applications of cooperative guidance and teaching to resolve problems such as delinquency.
discrimination, and maladjustment to school are also described. Japanese culture facilitates
cooperation, but there are serious obstacles to its use originating in the organization of
school education. In addition to the historical development of cooperation in education,
trends in educational policies and prospects for CL in Japan are discussed.

Positive Applications of Cooperative Small Groups

Conditions of Small-Group Applications

Cooperative small groups are frequently used in the context of whole class instruction
in Japanese schools. Kajita, Shiota, Ishida, and Sugie (1980) reported on the actual use
of small groups in elementary schools (grades 1-6) and junior high schools (grades 7-9),
based on their survey of school teachers. Teachers reported that they use such group
learning forms not out of necessity, but also for positive reasons. The goals included the
following: to (1) afford better understanding among pupils, (2) match learning style With
each student's aptitude, (3) promote human relations, (4) cultivate personal thinking,
and (5) increase each pupil's level of participation.

Models of Cooperative Learning

In Japan we can identify three main models of cooperation which have been actively
adopted to form cooperative small groups. The first type is called "Bazu Gakushu" (Buzz
Instruction), the second is called "Shoshudan Gakushu" (Small Group Instruction). The
third model is called "Shudanshugi Kyoiku" (Collectivistic Education).
213
214 s. SUGIE

The educational objectives of the first two models are based on Japan's Fundamentals
of Education Act of 1947. They advocate the fostering of independent and peaceful
personalities in students. Teiji Sueyoshi has been the main proponent of Small Group
Instruction. He and his collaborators have been researching and implementing this
model vigorously for over 30 years (Sueyoshi,1959; Sueyoshi and Nobukawa,1965;
Takahata, 1981). Since 1956, Buzz Instruction has been studied and applied by
the late Yoshihisa Shiota and his colleagues (Shiota, 1989; Shiota and Abe, 1962;
Shiota and Toyokawachubu Shogakko, 1965; Sugie and Ito, 1990). These models both
focus on the improvement of academic achievement of learners and the simultaneous
attainment of beneficial social attitudes,and using techniques for the maintenance of
interpersonal relationships. Cooperative small groups are applied also to non-academic
school activities. These include school excursions (overnight class trips to a distant city)
and classroom cleaning (which is the responsibility of students in all schools), in order
to keep consistent the principles of education inside and outside the classroom.
The theoretical basis of the third model, Collectivistic Education, is the work of
Makarenko and Krupskaya in the former Soviet Union (Ogawa, 1967). This model
aims toward the organization of democratic groups and its goal is to promote the group
rather than the individual (Zenseiken Joniniinkai, 1990). It also is intended to foster a
socialistic morality. Applications of this model have been as extensive as the first two
models.

Principles of CL in Japan

Basic Principles of Buzz Instruction

Below, the principles of Buzz Instruction are listed as one illustration of Japanese CL
(Shiota and Yokota, 1981). First of all, there are four basic sets of assumptions in the
Buzz approach.
1. A human being exists as an individual and as a member of society at the same time.
Therefore the relationship between the individual and the group is not contradictory.
2. Education is the process of assisting students in their self-comprehension, self-
integration, self-guidance, and self-training. Therefore, the goal of education is to assist
the development of people who are capable of self-education.
3. Human relations are the basis of education. The first step in the formation of
human relations is recognition of one's reliance on others.
4. Students normally learn in group or social situations, and we can also find the
essence of humanization at school in the process of cooperative learning among
individuals with various abilities. We cannot get comparable results as in CL through
coercion and competition, as research has shown in Japan (Furuhata, 1965; Sueyoshi,
1959).
In addition to these assumptions, all of which may be tested empirically, five other
essential points from the standpoint of Buzz Cooperative Learning are as follows.
1. Education is the process of a desirable change of behavior in each learner.
2. Learning is an internal activity. So learners must have definite objectives, ability
appropriate for the objectives, and information applicable to their attainment.
 Cooperative Learningin Cultural Context 215

3. Learning does not occur without a learner's awareness of the task. The quality and
quantity of the task have a great influence on learning activities and their results.
4. The learning process is the integrative process of the cognitive and attitudinal
domains
5. The essential meaning of evaluation in education lies in the function of feedback
of information about how well objectives were attained. Self-evaluation and mutual
evaluation should also be used.

Cooperation in Wide-Ranging School Activities

Cooperation in Non-Academic Activities

As Shwalb, Shwalb, and Nakazawa (in press) have shown through factor analysis,
cooperation is multi-behavioral in Japanese schools, and includes prosocial as well as
instrumental team behavior, in both academic and non-academic contexts. For instance,
participation in the school-run club activities is strongly encouraged at Japanese junior
and senior high schools. Shiota and Abe (1962) reported a successful case of the
cooperative management of sports clubs in a small rural junior high school. There,
students were required to have conferences and discussions, and make group decisions
and mutual evaluations of members' skills. These students achieved positive results jn
regional prefectural athletic tournaments. In addition, the Zenkoku Kyoikukenkyusho
Renmei (1981) has published two case study reports of successful clubs where a sense
of belonging and solidarity was achieved in each club member.
Kajita, Sugie, Shiota, and Ishida (1980) reported on the utilization of cooperation
in non-academic fields in school activities. For instance, their survey data showed that
the percentages of junior high school teachers who use the cooperative small groups
frequently in their class are as follows: cleaning the classroom 89.2%, school excursions
76.1%, planning of special events 17.4°, etc. Teachers also reported frequently dividing
classes into small groups to give students tasks to perform cooperatively.

Cooperative Ties with Parents to Combat Delinquency

There have also been several cases of research on efforts to combat delinquency
through cooperative guidance and teaching. For example (Takaoka J.H.S. in Himeji City,
Hyogo Prefecture), teachers were troubled by the increasing incidence of delinquency
from the beginning of the 1960s. In 1965, they decided to apply the principles of
Buzz Instruction to their school activities. At the same time they tried to persuade
parents that it was essential to cooperate with one another, as they built a sense of
educational solidarity in their school district. These researchers were able to organize
learning groups in each sub-district, where students gathered on Sundays and studie d in
groups. Here the conditions of a pro-cooperative orientation, the solidarity of teachers
and parents, and the zeal of the community brought about drastic and fundamentally
positive educational outcomes (Nagai and Sugie, 1991).
216 s. SUGIE

Attacking Discrimination Through Cooperation in Education

There are serious social problems involving discrimination and prejudice in Japan
(Burakukaiho Kenkyusho,1986). Three groups known to have faced particular dis-
crimination include the Ainu, Koreans and Hisabetu Burakumin. The Ainu, the indigenous
people of Hokkaido (the northern most island of Japan) numbered about 50-60,000 as of
1982 (Burakukaiho Kenkyusho, 1986). The Korean people, who were forced to relocate
to Japan as the result of Japanese aggression during World War II numbered 693,000
in 199l (Statistical Bureau Management and Coordination Agency,1992). Finally,the
Hisabetu Burakumin, an underclass which is a vestige of the class system established
in the Edo era (1603-1867), had a population of 1.16 million as of 1985 (Burakukaiho
Kenkyusho, 1986). All of these groups have faced and continue to face social and
educational discrimination.
Ochi (1978), the leader of Kaiho (Liberation) Buzz Instruction Group, whose
members are high school teachers in Hiroshima, asserts that it is important and
necessary to realize integrated education based on trusting human relationships. He
has emphasized that both the victims of discrimination and those who discriminate must
strive for basic attainments to achieve personal independence. Ochi and his associates,
with support from Professor Shiota, conducted a long term intervention into school
practices from 1976-1985 on two islands in Hiroshima Prefecture, where there were
serious discrimination problems. There were 1,600 students in the targeted elementary,
junior high, and senior high schools. Every teacher on those two islands introduced the
principles of Buzz Instruction in their daily teaching activities, and promoted interactions
between students, and facilitated the learning of basic materials (Shiota, 1980, 1983).

Cultural Change and the Development of CL

Improvement of Instructional Methods in the "Taisho Democracy" Era

Liberal education in the Taisho era

The system of public education in Japan was founded at the beginning of the Meiji era
(1868-1912), and was fully implemented by the end of that era. The proportion of pupils
who went to elementary schools (compulsory education) was already over 90% in 1904
(Hosoya, Okuda, Kono, and Konno, 1990). But the motivation for the development of
this educational system was to acquire national wealth and military strength, to increase
production, and to promote industry. In addition to those objectives, students were
taught absolute loyalty to the Emperor. Educational policies were all centralized, so
the subject matter of education was uniform and formal across all of Japan. At the
beginning of the Taisho Era (1912-1926), this homogeneity aroused criticism concerning
the contents of school education. "Emile", written by J. J. Rousseau, was translated
into Japanese in 1913 by Kanzo Miura, and popularized the idea that the education of
a liberal and independent people was necessary.
After World War I, Japanese culture was influenced by an international trend toward
liberalism. People began to advocate humanistic demands for improving citizens' welfare
and lives. In this climate, attempts to reform the educational system were made, to
 Cooperative Learningin Cultural Context 217

cultivate children's natural abilities and self-growth. Many experts urged that the
educational system based on the Emperor System be reorganized and reformed.

The teaching method developed by Heiji Oikawa

The Taisho era was the period of the first active movement towards educational
reform. We can observe that in that period positive functions of cooperative human
relations were considered important, in contrast to the prevailing uniformism of the
Meiji era. Oikawa (1912, 1915) tried to theorize and implement a "Bundanshiki
Doteki Kyoikuho" (Dynamic Group Educational Method). Nakano (1972) reported
that Oikawa's method created a sensation in the Japanese educational world at that
time. Between 1915 and 1917, over 30,000 school teachers visited Akashi Attached
Elementary School each year, where the leading applications of "Bundanshiki Doteki
Kyoikuho" had been practiced. Oikawa learned and introduced new theories from the
USA, and in fact he was taught personally by John Dewey at Columbia University.
Important aspects of the Dynamic Group Educational Method included to (1) provide
positive learning activities in children, (2) pay attention to pupils' individual differences,
and (3) try to create a suitable learning environment. This technique resembles Mastery
Learning (Bloom, 1976) in some ways. Oikawa also used the term "competitive
cooperation" to make the work of both sides more lively, and used more pu~re
cooperation to facilitate mutual and integrative learning.

Democratizing Education after World War 11

Democratization of education and Group Learning

Early in the lengthy Showa Era (1926-1989) Japan became a totalitarian and
militaristic state, and rushed towards a war of aggression. Schools were expected to
teach young people to be indiscriminate emperor-worshippers and to be blindly loyal
soldiers. The atmosphere of that period precluded most cooperative or democralic
practices in education. Groups were used only as the instrument of uncritical conformity,
as units of military training, and to control students through inter-group competition.
After Japan's total defeat in 1945, the Japanese people began to construct a new
democratic society. The policies of the United States Education Mission to Japan,
dispatched between 1946 and 1950 (Kawai, 1967), significantly influenced Japanese
educational methods and contents. Post-war educational theories of democratic reform
were based mainly on the works of Dewey, who emphasized the importance of
experience in educational activities. Teachers at that time tried to construct suitable
learning environments, where pupils and students could learn democratic and independent
attitudes. Applications of cooperative small groups in school learning were called
"Bundan Gakushu" (Group Learning) at that time (Nakano, 1959). As described by
Nakano, a cooperative small group was often used as the arena for democratic activitiles.
In academic lessons, learning tasks were selected on the basis of learners' own concerns
or experiences, and tasks were divided into several parts. Each small group received one
portion of the over all task, which the group members then studied cooperatively and
presented or published for the benefit of the whole class. In my opinion, this technique
218 s. SUGIE

was one of the most ideal educational methods ever used in Japan, because it made the
most of students' experiences in learning. In those days (the late 1940s) it was said that
the learners should study more actively, and that teachers could bring out the students'
individual characteristics and creativity. But some disputes on the effectiveness of this
approach arose gradually as Japan grew into a more modern society.

Conversion to systematic instruction

From early times, there were major criticisms on the use of education based on
students' experiences. The main point of criticism was that the contents of learning
were not impartial. A trend toward conservatism in politics from the early 1950s
aroused a negative view toward child-centered instruction. From the standpoint of such
conservatism, it was said that in child-centered education children were not adequately
trained to be patriotic or disciplined. On the other hand, reformists pointed out that
there was something lacking in traditional education with regard to basic abilities to
live as citizens. These reformists believed that the contents of learning in child-centered
instruction were disjointed so that students could not understand society as a whole, or
have a historical view (Yagawa,1949).
At this time, there was a trend toward "Keito Gakushu" (Systematic Instruction)
which emphasized the systematic and sequential arrangement of learning materials
and daily lessons. But Systematic Instruction was often related to the promotion of
efficiency. Thus individual differences in academic achievement were magnified by
this movement toward whole-class, teacher-centered instruction. At this point, several
attempts were made to alter the framework of Systematic Instruction. From the early
1950s, work on group dynamics were introduced to Japan by social psychologists and
sociologists (Sakamoto, Nakano, Hatano, and Yoda, 1953), and applied in some schools.
Also in this period Buzz Instruction and Small Group Instruction, cited above, emerged
as alternative models.

Cultural Receptivity Toward Cooperation in Japan

The Bases for Receptiveness to Cooperation

Collectivism and equalitarianism

Collectivism is one word often used to explain an important aspect of Japanese

culture (Hamaguchi and Kumon, 1982; Kawamoto, 1982). Collectivistic describes the
tendency to give priority to the values of one's group, more so than to the values
of the individual. Indeed, the characteristic of interdependence is fairly typical of
Japanese human relations. Japan has a large population (about 124 million in 1991),
but the racial variation has been considered minimal. Minorities such as those described
earlier account for only 0.98% of the population, according to the Statistical Bureau
Management and Coordination Agency (1992). In addition, Japanese of all ethnic
varieties have spoken almost the same language for centuries. Therefore the feelings
and mentality of individuals in Japan may be more homogeneous than in most other
modern countries. When a Japanese group is formed too readily, the character of
 Cooperative Learningin Cultural Context 219

the group often becomes conservative, and the group's main function becomes the
maintenance of its members' emotional stability. Yet the research of Yamaguchi (1991)
reports a recent trend away from this collectivism in younger people, for three reasons:
(1) material richness of society, (2) loss of traditional culture by the young, and (3)
decreased chances for learning about traditional collectivism.
We can also identify the importance of effort and environment in the educational
philosophy of current Japanese society. In Japan, many people may concur with
the "tabula rasa" view that the environment has an important influence on human
development. In one Japanese study Japanese mothers reported the under-achievememnt
of a child results from unskillful teaching or lack of effort, and rarely does it result from
the predisposition of the child (Hayamizu, 1981). On questionnaires, mothers tend to
respond positively to the statement "Academic achievement is the function of effort". In
fact, 96% of mothers agreed with this view in one survey (Fukaya and Fukaya, 1976).
Belief in equalitarian values have also been found by researchers, in the negative
reactions of parents toward ability grouping, and toward the entrance examination
system which emphasizes ability grouping in senior high schools. Teachers are also
not very receptive to ability grouping. In spite of recent recommendations favorijng
ability grouping by the Ministry of Education only 15.7% of Japanese teachers reac~ed
positively to such an approach,while the comparative figure was 26.6% of teachers in
the USA (Sato,1988). Teachers seem to feel intuitively that ability grouping is unfair to
the children who are placed in the lower class or group, as they are very anxious about
placing children into a poor environment. Even in the context of severe competition for
entrance examinations, the Japanese people still think it important to learn to cooperate
in school. This is reflected in students' attitudes toward cooperation and competition.
For instance, in one survey cooperation was the preferred orientation of fifth through
twelfth graders over competition (D. Shwalb and B. Shwalb, 1985). Unfortunately this
preference for cooperation can be ironically viewed as the basis for maintaining the
uniform educational system with little consideration for individual differences. Thus,
cooperative orientations may indirectly support the competitive status quo.

The Basis for Japanese Opposition to Cooperation

The success of industrial development

Following the Japanese industrial boom of the 1960s, there arose a vigorous tendency
to not criticize competition, because competition is a powerful principle in the world of
international business. Proponents of competition also express the view that competition
is a basic and universal aspect of human behavior. Unfortunately, in assuming this
universality they paid no attention to the strong influence of culture over the development
of competitive behavior (Madsen, 1967; Shapira and Madsen, 1969).
Faith in competition seems to be the ideology of the powerful. There has been some
government-sponsored research which asked whether competition is meaningful or not
(Sorifu Seishonen Taisakuhonbu, 1981). The results of one study showed that the
more successful one was at school, the more positive one's attitudes were toWard
competition. Recently there have been attempts to reform entrance examinations in
senior high schools, in many prefectures in Japan. Almost all such attempts seek
220 s. SUGIE

to reorganize schools according to achievement through competition. At the core of

this reform is conservatism, as promoted by the national Ministry of Education, the
members of prefectural boards of education, and high socio-economic status parents.
This tendency by which financially competitive and successful people determine the
philosophy of children's social interactions and education, is currently a serious obstacle
to the organization of school education along cooperative principles.

Trends in educational administration: The pursuit of efficiency

Japanese education is cheap and efficient. In fact, in 1992, the total educational
expenditure in Japan was only 4.8% of its gross national product, compared to 5.3%
in France, 6.8% in U.S.A. and 8.6% in Israel (Zamoto, 1993). In the 1960s, the period
of abrupt economic growth, many classes had more than 50 members, but recently there
has been a decrease in the number of students per class. In 1991 class size limits were set
at 40 per class for elementary and junior high schools. Usually there is only one clerk in
elementary and junior high schools, and teachers have many types of non-instructional
duties. For instance, they are expected to coach or supervise the activities of daily
after-school clubs.
Teachers have little time to make preparations for daily lessons, let alone to
independently study teaching materials and teaching methods. Yet in general, Japanese
education boasts high academic achievement in comparison with that of the other
countries (Stevenson and Stigler,1992). Japanese data also indicate a low percentage
in dropouts (the proportion of students who go to senior high school=94.6% in 1991;
dropouts=2.2%, and those who repeat a grade=0.6% in 1989 - - Somucho Seishonen
Taisakuhonbu, 1993). I should also point out the contributions of "juku" (private
after-school review classes) and of tutors to academic achievement - - these costs are
borne by families. Under these strictly regulated and complex conditions, it is difficult
to introduce labor-intensive teaching methods. The time and energy of teachers is not
sufficient to think out adequate ways of teaching every individual child.

CL and the Educational System in Japan

Japanese Teachers and CL

Many Japanese teachers are not accustomed to making decisions by themselves. They
may leave curricular decisions to the "Course of Study" handbooks prepared by the
Ministry of Education, and other judgements to the school principal. In addition,
chances for teachers to study or join in-service training have been decided mainly by
local boards of education. Study meetings organized by local government educational
supervisors are held frequently, so teachers can rarely find a chance to participate in
private "study circle" meetings. It is no exaggeration to say that teachers in Japan are
bound within a tight administrative net.
In addition, the negative aspects of Japanese collectivism are exposed in groups
of teachers. We can observe spontaneous conformity in teachers' tendencies to feel
guilty when they have different thoughts from other teachers. They also tend to remain
 Cooperative Learning in Cultural Context 221

together unnecessarily late in the teachers' workroom at school, not wanting to be the
first to leave, until someone at last returns home. This conformity gives way easily
to opportunism and competition. In my opinion, this conformity ultimately leads to a
lowering of the standards of all teachers in a school. What often occurs is that teaching
falls to the level of the most idle teachers, who use competition in the class, because
competition requires much less effort than a cooperative approach.
Besides the burden of being overworked, the teaching profession does not encourage
an increase in the number of teachers who try to educate children to behave coopera-
tively. Small groups are used frequently in Japan, but they do not always function
cooperatively. Teachers have succeeded in their own school careers and have more
experience at victory than at defeat. Believing that they succeeded by being competitive,
many do not think that cooperation in education has a positive meaning. In some schools
where Buzz Instruction has been introduced as a basic principle, new teachers begin to
learn Buzz with their students from the beginning of a school term. Several manuals
on Buzz are available for teachers and students (Shiota and Kajita, 1976; Tokishiritsu
Izumi Chugakko, 1975). In such cases, Buzz has become the normal and main principle
of such schools over an extended period. For example, the Toki Municipal Izumi J.HiS.
has been known as a "Buzz School" for over 30 years.

Family, Community and CL

Parents of students who attain excellent achievement levels tend to think that it is a
disadvantage for their children to learn in cooperative situations. They often believe
that valuable learning time is lost under cooperative learning methods, and complain
vociferously to the teacher, so the general public must be informed about the positive
effects of teaching activities of students (Sugie and Kajita, 1989), and peer tutoring
(Allen, 1976).

Positive Approaches to CL

Research on education is an important element of any educational system. There are

three features in research of teaching methods. First, they often attempt to interpret
teaching materials. Needless to say, a deep understanding of the content of materials
is important. But often interpretation itself is considered as the goal of the study, and
the writers do not search for suitable learning situations. The second issue, related to
the first, focuses on "how to teach" rather than "how to aid learners". The logic of
teaching has been emphasized while learner activities have seldom been investigated.
Thirdly, Japanese writers have almost completely neglected the fact that students learn
in a social context, especially in schools. Placing too much importance on objectivity,
most researchers have avoided studying group situations, because of over-reliance on
the experimental method.
Studies of groups was one of the mainstreams of research on education in the 1950s,
but gradually decreased in number because of the narrowness of operant paradigms,
and not because of any lack of meaning in the study of cooperation. It is regrettable
222 s. SUGIE

to find that very little energy now is focused on research about cooperation in Japanese
education.

The Future of CL in Japan

Educational Problems in Japan

A current major concern in Japanese education is the increase of maladjustment of

children to school life. The number of reported cases of school phobia increased from
3,679 in 1980 to 9,645 in 1992 in elementary schools, and from 13,536 in 1980 to 43,711
in 1992 in junior high schools (Somucho Seishonen Taisakuhonbu, 1993). Increases
in the incidence of bullying (particularly at ages 12 to 14) and delinquency (most
common from ages 14 to 16) have also become serious social problems (Somucho
Seishonen Taisakuhonbu,1993). These problems are rooted in our society as a whole.
More specifically, we can find the source of such problems in the loss of close personal
relationships in today's youth culture. Nagane (1991) found that the main correlate
of stress in elementary schools was in difficulty concerning relationships with friends.
It seems critically important that today's pupils are immature and distrustful of their
peers. It is also important that the main problem here does not seem to lie in teachers
or school authorities. The more fundamental dilemma is a basic inconsistency between
(1) the need in school life for cooperation and (2) competitive academic learning.
Another current concern in Japanese education is the new field of lifelong adult
education. There is presently a very weak connection between school learning and
adult learning. I believe that this connection could be strengthened by fostering a more
independent and creative attitude toward learning at school.

Concerns About Educational Policies

Amano (1985) writes that the history of Japanese education had been one of
discussions on reform. He arranges the themes of those discussions into four areas:
"emphasis on rationality or efficiency," "realization of equality," "democratization,"
and "diversification".
After the drastic changes in the Japanese economy between 1960 and 1970, a variety
of political reforms in education were promoted by the government. The theme of these
reforms was to create a system of education suitable for a transition in socio-economic
conditions. The goals were basically intended to increase the efficiency of the system and
to "diversify education". The Fundamentals of Education Act in Japan declares that the
fulfillment of the personality is the main objective of education. But in recent policies,
the objectives of public education have clearly changed toward the principles of "talent
first" for the good of international economic competition, and for the maintenance of
the present social system. "Diversity" means the preparation of divergent courses of
learning, but not the diversification of choices for learners. Diversity as promoted by
the government has only been in the sense of entrance into different types of schools,
and ultimately serves the goal of increased efficiency.
 Cooperative Learning in Cultural Context 223

Future Prospects

The principles of Buzz Instruction introduced earlier have been accepted easily and
positively by many teachers who are seeking a better education for students. In Kasugai
Shiritsu Minamishiro J.H.S. (1988), the principle of cooperation was practiced positively
in a wide-ranging attempt to internationalize education in a junior high school. Yet
in the present circumstances of Japan, models of CL are not widely popular. Many
teachers have serious problems with instruction and want answers to their problems, but
they do not have the time or opportunity to study methods or principles of CL. I believe
that the effort to restore humanitarianism to Japan, a society which now tends toward an
anti-humanistic orientation, must come primarily through education. But the orientation
of the educational bureaucracy is to emphasize lowering costs and increasing efficiency.
In such social conditions, it is difficult to implement learner-centered education. In Buzz
Instruction and in the other CL movements, it is difficult to inspire younger teachers
who have only experienced teaching and learning in a tightly controlled school system.
This remains the greatest challenge to those who seek to make true cooperation a basic
and consistent principle of Japanese education.

References

Allen, V. L. (Ed.). (1976). Children as teachers. New York: Academic Press.

Amano, i. (1985). Kyoiku Kaikaku o Kangaeru [To think educational reformation]. Tokyo: Tokyodaigaku
Shuppankai.
Bloom, B. S. (1976). Human characteristics and school learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Burakukaiho Kenkyusho (Ed.). (1986). Buraku Mondai Jiten [A dictionary of Buraku problems]. Osaka:
Kaiho Shuppansha.
Fukaya, M., & Fukaya, K. (1976). Asobi to Benkyo [Playing and studying[. Tokyo:Chuokoronsha.
Furuhata, Y. (1965). Kyodo to Kyoso ni Kansuru Jikkenteki Kenkyu [An experimental study of cooperation
and competition[ Japanese Journal of Educational Psychology, 133, 1-12.
Hamaguchi, E., & Kumon, S. (1982). Nihonteki Shudanshugi [Collectivism in Japan]. Tokyo: Yuhikaku.
Hayamizu, T. (1981). Gakugyo Fusinji no Geninkizoku [Casual attributions about poorly performing
pupils[. Japanese Journal of Educational Psychology, 29(4), 287-296.
Hosoya, T., Okuda, M., Kono, S., & Konno, Y. (1990). Shin Kyoikugaku Daijiten [New encyclopedia of
educationl. Tokyo: Daiichihoki.
Kajita, M., Shiota, S., Ishida, H., & Sugie, S. (1980). Shochugakko ni Okeru Sido no Chosateki Kenkyu
1 [Teaching methods in elementary and junior high schools I]. Nagoya University Bulletin of the Faculty
of Education (Educational Psychology), 27, 147-182.
Kajita, M., Sugie, S., Shiota, S., & Ishida, H. (1980). Shochugakko ni Okeru Sido no Chosateki Kenkyu
!I [Teaching methods in elementary and junior high schools II]. Nagoya University Bulletin of the Faculty
of Education (Educational Psychology), 27, 183-205.
Kasugai Shiritsu Minamishiro Chugakko (1988). Kokusai Rikai Kyoikukenkyu Kiyo [The bulletin of
internationalization of education]. Kasugai: Minamishiro Chugakko.
Kawai, S. (1967). Japan's American interlude. New York: MacMillan.
Kawamoto, A. (1982). Nihonjin no Shudanshugi [Japanese and collectivism]. Tokyo: Tamagawa Daigaku
Shuppankai.
Madsen, M. C. (1967). Cooperative and competitive motivation of children in three Mexican sub-cuRures.
Psychological Reports, 20, 1307-1320.
Nagai, T., & Sugie, S. (1991). Hiko o Nakusu Bazu Gakushu No Jissenjirei [A case of the practice of
Buzz learning reducing delinquency[. Unpublished manuscript, Chukyo University, Nagoya, Japan.
Nagane, M. (1991). Gakkoseikatsu ni Okeru Jido no Shinriteki Sutoresu no Bunseki [Analysis of
psychological stress in school life]. Japanese Journal of Educational Psychology, 39, 182-185.
Nakano, A. (1972). Oikawa Heiji no Kyoiku Riron to Jissen [Educational theory and practice o~ Heiji
Oikawa]. In S. Umene, and S. Katsuta (Eds.). Sekai kyoikugaku senshu: Oikawa Heiji [Selected works
on education in the world: Heiji Oikawa] (pp. 317-336). Tokyo: Meijitosho.
224 S. SUGIE

Nakano, S. (1959). Budan gakushu [Group learning[. Japanese Journal of Educational Psychology, 7(3),
176-184.
Ochi, A. (1978). Dowa Kyoiku to Bazu Gakushu [Dowa education and Buzz]. Zenkoku Bazugakushu
Kenkyurenrakukyogikai (Ed.). Bazugakushu towa ]This is Buzz] (pp. 81-96). Hiroshima: Yutakakokoku
Kyoikusuishin Kyogikai.
Ogawa, T. (1967). Shudanshugi Kyoiku no Kiso Riron ]Basic theory of Collectivistic Education]. Tokyo:
Meijitosho.
Oikawa, H. (1912). Bundanshiki Doteki Kyoikuho [Dynamic Group Educational Method[. Tokyo:
Kogakukan.
Oikawa, H. (1915). Bundanshiki Kakuka Doteki Kyoikuho ]Applications of Dynamic Group Educational
Method]. Tokyo: Kogakukan.
Rousseau, J. J. (1913). Jinsei, Kyoiku, Emiru [Life, education, and Emile] (K. Miura, Trans.). Tokyo:
Ryubunkan. (original work published 1762).
Sakamoto, I., Nakano, S., Hatano, K., & Yoda, A. (Eds.). (1953). Gakkyushakai no shinri ]Psychology
in the classroom]. Tokyo: Kanekoshobo.
Sato, G. (1988). Kyoin no Shidokan no Jisshobunseki [Positive analysis of teacher's view of teaching]. In
Y. Kudomi (Ed.). Kyoinbunka no shakaigakuteki kenkyu [Sociological study of teacher's culture] (pp.
85-146). Tokyo: Taga Shuppan.
Shapira, A., & Madsen, M. (1969). Cooperative and competitive behavior of Kibbutz and urban children
in Israel. Child Development, 40, 609-617.
Shiota, Y. (Ed.). (1980). Kyoikukadai o motomete: Dai ichiji jittaichosa kenkyu hokokusho [The pursuit
of educational tasks: Report #1]. Hiroshima: Hiroshimaken Yutakakoukouku Kyoikusuishin Kyogikai.
Shiota, Y. (Ed.), (1983). Kyoikukadai o motomete: Dai niji jittaichosa kenkyu hokokusho [The pursuit of
educational tasks: Report #2]. Hiroshima: Hiroshimaken Yutakakoukouku Kyoikusuishin Kyogikai.
Shiota, Y. (1989). Jugyo Kasseika no Bazu Gakushu Nyumon [Guide to Buzz Instruction for active school
work]. Tokyo: Meijitosho.
Shiota, Y., & Abe, T. (Eds.). (1962). Bazu Gakushu Hosiki [Method of Buzz Instruction]. Nagoya:
Reimeishobo.
Shiota, Y., & Kajita, T. (Eds.). (1976). Bazu Gakushu no Riron to Jissai [Theory and practice of Buzz
Instruction[. Nagoya: Reimeishobo.
Shiota, Y., & Toyokawachubu Shogakko (Eds.). (1965). Shogakko no Bazu Gakushu [Buzz Instruction in
elementary school]. Nagoya: Reimeishobo.
Shiota, Y., & Yokota, S. (Eds.). (1981). Bazu Gakushu ni Yoru Jugyo Kaizen [Improvement of school
lessons through Buzz Instruction]. Nagoya: Reimeishobo.
Shwalb, D. W., & Shwalb, B. J. (1985). Japanese cooperative and competitive attitudes: age and gender
effects. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 8, 313-328.
Shwalb, D. W., Shwalb, B. J., & Nagasawa, J. (1995). Competitive and cooperative attitudes: A
longitudinal survey of Japanese adolescents. Journal of Early Adolescence, 15(1), 267-290.
Somucho Seishonen Taisakuhonbu (1993). Seishonen Hakusho Heisei 4 Nenban [A white paper of adolescent
and children in 1992]. Tokyo: Okurasho Insatsukyoku.
Sorifu Seishonen Taisakuhonbu (1981). Ima no Seinen lma no Otona [Adolescents and adults nowadays].
Tokyo: Okurasho Insatsukyoku.
Statistical Bureau Management and Coordination Agency (Ed.). (1992). Japan statistic yearbook. Tokyo:
Mainichi Shinbunsha.
Stevenson, H. W., & Stigler, J. (1992). The learning gap. New York: Summit Books.
Sueyoshi, T. (1959). Shudangakushu no Kenkyu [Studies of Group Learning]. Tokyo: Meijitosho.
Sueyoshi, T., & Nobukawa, M. (1965). Jihatsu Kyodo Gakushu [Spontaneous and cooperative learning].
Nagoya: Reimeishobo.
Sugie, S., & Ito, M.(1990). Bazu Tangenmitoshi Hoshiki ni Yoru Koko Hokenka Gakushu Sido no Koka
ni Kansuru Jisshouteki Kenkyu [An experimental study of the effects of Buzz Unit Initiation Method
in health lessons in senior high school]. Chukyo University Bulletin of the Faculty of the Liberal Arts,
31(1),149--172.
Sugie, S., & Kajita, M. (1989). Kodomo no Kyoju Katsudo no Koka [The effects of teaching activities of
children]. Japanese Journal of Educational Psychology, 37(4), 381-385.
Takahata, M. (1981). Jishukyodo no Gakushu Riron [A theory of independent and cooperative learning].
Tokyo: Meijitosho.
Tokishiritsu Izumi Chugakko (1975). Gakko Seikatsu no Tebiki [Guidelines for school life[. Toki City,
Japan: Izumi Chugakko.
Yagawa, T. (1949). Shinkyoiku eno Hihan [Criticism upon new education]. Tokyo: Tokoshoin.
Yamaguchi, S. (1991). Shudanshugiteki Keiko to Nenrei, Sozosei, Oyobi ta no Seikaku Tokusei Tono Kanren
ni Tsuite [Relations between the tendency for collectivism and personality]. Nihonkyoikushinrigakkai Dai
33-kai Sokai Happyo Ronbunshu, 765-766.
 Cooperative Learning in Cultural Context 225

Zamoto, T. (Ed,). (1993). Britannika internationalyearbook. Tokyo: Buritanikanenkan.

Zenkoku KyoikukenkyushoRenmei (Ed.). (1981). Kurabakatsudo Nokyoikuteki Koka [Educational effects
of club activities].Tokyo: Toyokan.
Zenseiken Joniniinkai (1990). Gakkyushudan Zukuri Nyumon (sinpan) ]Guides of formingclassroom groups
(new ed.)]. Tokyo: Meijitosho.

Biography

Shuji Sugie is a professor of education at Chukyo University in Nagoya, Japan. He

is the current leader of the Tokai Association of Private University Teacher Educators,
and a standing committee member of the Japanese National Society of Buzz Learning.
He is a co-editor of three books (in Japanese): You who wants to be a teacher?, W h o m
are our high schools for?, and Developmental and educational psychology.