There are three ways in which student-student interaction may be organized for mainstreaming. Of the three, cooperation is the only instructional strategy congruent with the goals of mainstreaming. The essential elements of cooperation learning and the specific actions teachers need to take to implement it are presented in this article. When cooperative learning is implemented effectively, positive relationships between handicapped and nonhandicapped students result. Far more positive interaction between handicapped and nonhandicapped students within instructional situations and during free-time, as well as increased friendships, result from cooperative learning experiences.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ChasnoffR. (Ed.) (1979). Structuring cooperative learning: The 1979 handbook.New Brighton: Interaction Book Company.
2.
DeutschM. (1962). Cooperation and trust: Some theoretical notes. In JonesM. R. (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation.Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
3.
JohnsonD. W., & JohnsonR. (1975). Learning together and alone: Cooperation, competition, and individualization.Englewood Cliffs, NJ; Prentice-Hall.
4.
JohnsonD. W., & JohnsonR. (1978). Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 12, 3–15.
5.
JohnsonD. W., & JohnsonR. (1983). The socialization and achievement crisis: Are cooperative learning experiences the solution? In BickmanL. (Ed.), Applied social psychology annual 4. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
6.
JohnsonD. W., & JohnsonR. (1984a). Building acceptance of differences between handicapped and nonhandicapped students: The effects of cooperative and individualistic problems. Journal of Social Psychology, 122, 257–267.
7.
JohnsonD. W., & JohnsonR. (1984b). Classroom learning structure and attitudes toward handicapped students in mainstream settings: A theoretical model and research evidence. In JonesR. (Ed.), Special education in transition: Attitudes toward the handicapped.Reston, VA: ERIC Clearinghouse on Handicapped and Gifted Children, The Council for Exceptional Children.
8.
JohnsonD. W., & JohnsonR. (1984c). The effects of intergroup cooperation and intergroup competition on ingroup and out-group cross-handicap relationships. Journal of Social Psychology, 124, 85–94.
9.
JohnsonD. W., & JohnsonR. (1985a). Mainstreaming hearing-impaired students: The effects of effort in communicating on cooperation. Journal of Psychology, 119, 31–44.
10.
JohnsonD. W., & JohnsonR. (1985b). Motivational processes in cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning situations. In AmesC. and AmesR. (Eds.), Attitudes and attitude change in special education: Its theory and practice.New York: Academic Press.
11.
JohnsonD. W.JohnsonR.HolubecE., & RoyP. (1984). Circles of learning.Alexandria, VA: The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
12.
JohnsonD. W.JohnsonR., & MaruyamaG. (1983). Interdependence and interpersonal attraction among heterogeneous and homogeneous individuals: A theoretical formulation and meta-analysis of the research. Review of Educational Research, 53, 5–54.
13.
JohnsonD. W.MaruyamaG.JohnsonR.NelsonD., & SkonL. (1981). The effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures on achievement: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 89, 47–62.
14.
LyonsV. (Ed.) (1980). Structuring cooperative learning: The 1980 handbook.New Brighton: Interaction Book Company.
15.
RoyP. (Ed.). (1982). Structuring cooperative learning: The 1982 handbook.New Brighton: Interaction Book Company.
