論文

Is Conflict Resolution Content Beneficial andAppropriate for Use in University Level ESL
Courses?
Michael C. BOYCE
要

旨

本稿は大学教育での英語第二外国語コース，およびそのカリキュラムにおける紛争解決をテーマとした教材の使用法について述べる。英語を若年層に母国語として教える場合と，大人向けに第二外国語として教える場合
では非常に大きな違いがある。大人の学習者は高度なレベルでの論理的思考が可能であるが，その一方でそれは外国語を文法のみを通して学習する
際に感じる物足りなさを生じさせるのだろう。クラスにテーマに基づいたコンテンツを取り入れることにより，指導者はカリキュラムで必要な全てのポイントを網羅でき，学習者は英語能力を高めると共に付加的なスキルも学ぶことができる。この論文では，学習者にとって紛争解決のコンテンツを学ぶと同時に英語のスキルを学ぶことは適切かつ有益であるかを考察する。
紛争解決のために使われるスキルの残念な点として，そのスキルを定量的に分析することが非常に困難なことがあげられる。たとえそれが不可能ではないとしても，個人が自分の考え方や，現実生活で争いごとが起こった時のその対処方法に，以前と明らかに違いが表れていることを測定する
ことは非常に難しい。それを考慮したうえでこの論文では，紛争解決のコンテンツを ESL コースで使用し，英語学習の質にネガティブな影響を与えるかどうかに焦点をあてて考察する。

プログラムの主な構成要素は，紛争解決教育（CRE) 学，コンテンツベー
ス学習（CBL) 学，および ESL 環境における共同学習学から得られている。

― 131 ―

愛知大学

言語と文化 No. 36

紛争解決スキルが社会においてポジティブな影響を与えることを示す重
要な実例証拠は，学術的な場面でもプロフェッショナルな場面でも存在している。紛争解決論のコンテンツが英語学習において悪影響がないことが示されるならば，たとえ最悪のケースを考慮しても，紛争解決のためのス
キルは学習者やクラスに中立的な影響にとどまるだけであり，ESL コースにこのコンテンツを採用して学術的な弊害にはならないのである。
キーワード：紛争解決教育，CRE，共同学習，コンテンツ学習，CBL，
ESL，建設的論争，グローバル学習，大学の ESL コースにおいて紛争解決論のコンテンツは適切かつ有益か

Abstract
This paper addresses the use of conflict resolution themed content basedmaterials in university level English as a Second Language (ESL) classrooms andoverall curriculum. Teaching English as a second language to adults is
considerably different from teaching young, first language learners. Adults arecapable of higher level reasoning and perhaps due to this, can find language
learning by grammar alone to be slightly lacking in stimuli. Using theme based
content in class allows for the teacher to cover all of the necessary points on the
curriculum, and give the students additional skills to use together with increased
English language ability. The question to be reviewed by this paper is if it isappropriate, and beneﬁcial for students to be learning conﬂict resolution content
alongside their English language skills.
Keywords: Conﬂict Resolution Education, CRE, Cooperative Learning, Content
Based Learning, CBL, ESL, Constructive Controversy, Global
Learning― 132 ―Is Conﬂict Resolution Content Beneﬁcial and Appropriate for Use in University Level ESL Courses?

An unfortunate aspect of the conflict resolution skill set is that these skills are very
difﬁcult to quantitatively analyze. Determining if an individual has undergone a signiﬁcanttransformation in their attitude and way in which they respond to real conflict isconsiderably challenging, if not impossible. With this in mind, the focus of this paper will
be on establishing if the use of conﬂict resolution content in ESL classrooms has a negative
effect on the quality of English language education. The main components of the program
will draw from studies in conﬂict resolution education (CRE), content based learning (CBL),and cooperative learning in ESL environments.
There seems to be considerable anecdotal evidence that shows the positive inﬂuence of
conﬂict resolution skill holders in society, both academic and professional. It is determinedthat conflict resolution content does not in fact have a negative influence on English
language learning. So, even if in the worst case, the conﬂict resolution skills have a neutral
effect upon the students and the classroom environment, there would be no academic harmin introducing this content to the ESL classroom.
The ﬁeld of conﬂict resolution is deep and diverse and is becoming more so with every
passing year. The variety of training programs and the appropriateness of conﬂict resolution
training is developing and being constantly tested. Despite these general advancements inthe field, it seems that conflict resolution training in the ESL (English as a Second
Language) world has yet have attained large scale support. This could in part be due to theapparent lack of empirical studies of the efficacy of conflict resolution training in ESL
programs.
In this review I will outline the available literature in the ﬁelds of conﬂict resolution
training, content-based ESL training, and cooperative learning in an ESL classroom. It
seems that although there has been considerable study of cooperative learning and global
education in the ESL classroom, there has yet to be any studies written that focus on conﬂict
resolution programs in the ESL environment.
The primary search engine used for the review was Google Scholar. Wiley Online,
EBSCO, ERIC, Academic Search Premier, and JSTOR were used as well, but Google
Scholar seemed to provide the most fully-accessible articles. When conducting my search I
used the following key words and phrases: ESL, conflict resolution, dispute resolution,
education, CRE, TESOL, language, ADR, English as a second language, and constructive
controversy. As is to be expected, I found the best results for conflict resolution training― 133 ―

愛知大学

言語と文化 No. 36

when I used “conflict resolution” and “education” as search words. My searches for
information on the use of conflict resolution in ESL environments were most productivewith “tesol” or “esl” and “constructive controversy”, “global learning”, or “conflict
resolution”.

Conﬂict Resolution Education (CRE)
Stevahn, Johnson, Johnson, Green & Laginski (1997) wrote a paper outlining theevaluation of a conﬂict resolution training program that was integrated into a Canadian highschool literature course. The authors argue that since levels of conﬂict, both physical andemotional, are increasing in the educational environment, it is beneficial to introduce
conﬂict resolution training into the school curriculum. At the time of this research, there had
been little empirical research on the effectiveness of conflict resolution programs being
implemented in schools and there had been no connection of these programs to conflict
resolution theory and research. Without the research and proof of increased educational
achievement, special conflict resolution programs were not being widely adopted or
maintained. “Conﬂict-resolution training, therefore, may never be permanently integrated
into school life unless it is incorporated into academic subjects in ways that increase
academic achievement” (Stevahn, Johnson, Johnson, Green & Laginski, 1997, p.86). The
authors chose to study 40 ninth grade English class students in Ontario, Canada. Nine
students from one class and 11 students from another class were randomly chosen to receive
the experimental conflict resolution training. A pre-post/experimental design was used todetermine the inﬂuence of integrative negotiation, and perspective reversal procedures beingtaught to the experimental group. This training involved the identiﬁcation and use of a sixstep process for conﬂict resolution. Students stated desires, feelings, reasons for desires andfeelings, understanding of the other person’s desires and feelings, three optional agreements
for mutual benefit, and finally a mutually accepted agreement. The students’ overall
achievement was measured through four indicators. The ﬁrst was academic achievement,
the second was mastery of the negotiation procedure, the third was the long term retentionof the negotiation procedure, and ﬁnally, the fourth was the students’ ability to apply thenegotiation procedures to conﬂicts. Students in the conﬂict resolution experimental group
worked in pairs for the ﬁrst six classes of the study, and then in triads for the remaining two
periods. The results of the study indicated that the members of the experimental conﬂict― 134 ―Is Conﬂict Resolution Content Beneﬁcial and Appropriate for Use in University Level ESL Courses?

resolution group had higher levels of academic achievement, better mastery and retention of
the negotiation procedures, and were better able to apply these techniques in future conﬂicts.
The authors concluded that, “integrating conflict resolution into academic lessons is aseffective as teaching conﬂict resolution as a separate subject” (Stevahn, Johnson, Johnson,
Green & Laginski, 1997, p.86).
In their chapter on constructive controversy, Johnson, Johnson & Tjosvold (2006)
argue that conﬂict should not be avoided in the academic environment, and that the processof constructive controversy “results in signiﬁcant increases in the quality of decision making
and problem solving, the quality of relationships, and improvements in psychologicalhealth” (p.90). Of course, creating controversy alone will only cause trouble, but how thecontroversy is framed and handled dictates whether or not the controversy will create apositive or negative result. If controversy is used to seek improved ideas, originality, andcreativity, then the results will quite likely be positive, in particular in an academic
environment. Using inductive and deductive logic to generate ideas, collect relevant
information and ﬁnd tentative conclusions from rational arguments, students gain thinking
skills that are beneﬁcial to any communication environment (Johnson, Johnson & Tjosvold,2006). Considering the primary goal of many ESL classes is communication, then it seems
that the process of constructive controversy and the accompanying rational argumentation isalmost perfectly suited to promote both oral and verbal communication. The concurrence
seeking when group members limit discussion due to a desire to avoid confrontation andstay within the accepted parameters of the group is one of the greatest challenges forteachers in communication classes (Johnson, Johnson & Tjosvold, 2006).
With their chapter on “Teaching conflict resolution skills in a workshop”, Raider,
Coleman and Gerson (2006) outline their tested and widely used workshop for three andsix-day sessions. As a framework for developing future programs and avoiding pitfalls, thischapter supplies very useful guidelines. The authors review their insights from
implementing the workshop, provide an overview of the workshop design including theirobjectives and pedagogy, and in the postscript add their observations from the extensive
international use of the workshop in the years after the original chapter was written. The
chapter covers the seven modules of the workshop. The modules are: conflict overview,
elements of negotiation, communication behaviors, stages of negotiation, culture andconflict, dealing with anger and emotions, and an introduction to mediation (Raider,
Coleman & Gerson, 2006). Throughout the chapter the authors stress that although their― 135 ―

愛知大学

言語と文化 No. 36

three and six-day workshops have received very positive support, they feel that despite thistheir workshops only represent the beginning of the learning process and much more work
is needed to establish an effective collaborative process for mixed-motive conﬂicts (Raider,
Coleman & Gerson, 2006). In the postscript they repeat the recommendation that any
workshop or program that introduces these conﬂict resolution strategies should be supported
by follow-up classes and access to research materials if possible.

Content-based ESL Training
In their article on the effectiveness of innovative learner centered pedagogy, Vega andTayler (2005) consider the merits of adapting teaching/learning practices that are morelearner centered than the traditional teacher centered style. Vega and Tayler (2005) surveyed
127 educators from the Leadership Associate program at Mont Clair State University. The
study focused on three aspects of learner centered pedagogy; peer evaluation, small grouplearning practices, and community of enquiry. Of the 127 participants that were surveyed
between 1995-2001, 30 were determined to have programs that were sufﬁciently complete
to warrant inclusion in the study. Vega and Tayler found that over 80% of the students in thelearner centered programs run by the Leadership Associates’ 30 educators showed greater
participation, greater student-to-student interaction, and more student initiative than thestudents who did not join the learner-centered class. In 50-67% of the participants theauthors reported more student creativity, better knowledge retention, and fewer failures.
Interestingly, the authors also found that “a less signiﬁcant relationship was found between
the innovative teaching/learning practice and performance tests” (Vega & Tayler, 2005,p.84). It seems that this lack of dramatically positive test results with content based
educational programs could make the programs even more challenging to implement in a
traditional educational environment.
Jacobs and Cates (2004) discuss the positive role of global education in second
language learning with a particular focus on peace education and environmental education.
Peace education with the goal of a reduction of violence and the resolution of conﬂict, andalthough it is not conﬂict resolution per se, it does share a number of the same goals. The
authors wrote that many of the teaching methods used in peace education are also very
commonly used in the ESL classroom and encourage students to imagine themselves as
different people in different situations (Jacobs & Cates, 2004). These methods include role

― 136 ―Is Conﬂict Resolution Content Beneﬁcial and Appropriate for Use in University Level ESL Courses?

plays, simulations, projects, and cooperative learning. “The very act of learning a second
language plays an important role in bringing about peace, because knowing other people’s
language opens paths toward better understanding and communication”(Jacobs & Cates,
2004, p.45). The authors stress that the prevalent communicative approach to second
language instruction shifts the focus of ESL away from a study of grammar and vocabulary
and more toward the use of language to communicate meaning (Jacobs & Cates, 2004).
In his argument against the use of content-based materials in the ESL classroom, Silva(1997) advocates simply focusing on the mechanics of English language production. The
author lists four necessary points for the ethical treatment of ESL writers. The ﬁrst is theneed to understand that ESL writers are not native English writers and will quite likely nothave access to the same vocabulary, linguistic background, culture, and learning strategies.
Silva argues that the ESL teacher must allow the student more time and effort to complete
writing assignments. His second point is that ESL students should be exposed to as many
instructional contexts as possible. ESL learners are likely coming from varied educationaland cultural backgrounds, and because of this it is essential to supply a varied program that
could address the educational needs of learners more accurately. A third point for the ethicaltreatment of ESL students is to create an evaluation system that fairly takes into account thestudents’ varied backgrounds and abilities. Silva’s final point is the one that is mostapplicable to the creation of a conﬂict resolution component within an ESL class. He argues
that students should not be treated as “blank slates for teachers to inscribe their opinions on
nor as buckets to be ﬁlled with their teachers’ worldly wisdom” (Silva, 1997, p.361). The
author comments that although the global issues are very important to society, they have noplace in the English as a second language classroom. When students sign up for acomposition or writing class, they should be taught only the mechanics of grammar and thenuse their own experience and interests to provide themes and information for their writing
exercises (Silva, 1997).
A year after Silva published his rules for the ethical treatment of ESL writers, Nathan
Jones (1998), wrote an article in response, and defended the use of themes and topics toteach ESL writing. Jones argues that the ability to write on a speciﬁc topic is a critical aspectof writing academic papers. The author observes that although some freedom of topic choice
can be beneﬁcial, too much freedom can be paralyzing for the student because they have too
many topics to choose from. By focusing the themes on a particular topic teachers are
greatly assisting ESL students in making the ﬁrst steps to begin a writing assignment.

― 137 ―

愛知大学

言語と文化 No. 36

Cooperative Learning in ESL Environments
In a study by Ghaith and Yaghi (1998), the goal was to examine the influence ofcooperative learning on the acquisition of ESL rules and mechanics. This research not only
questioned the efﬁcacy of cooperative learning in an ESL environment, but also attempted
to identify any differences in knowledge acquisition between both high and low-achieving
students. The study aimed to determine the general effect of the program on students’acquisition of ESL rules and mechanics, if in acquisition of ESL rules and mechanics
cooperative learning is more effective than individualistic learning, and if low-achieving
ESL learners beneﬁt more from cooperative learning than high-achieving students. There
was a total of 318 Middle Eastern junior high school grades 4, 5, and 6 ESL students
involved in the study. Twelve classes were divided into two groups of six classes, with eachgroup being randomly assigned control or experimental cooperative learning conditions.
Results were measured using both pre- and post-tests. Teachers trained in the Student TeamsAchievement Division (STAD) method taught one control and one experimental class overa period of six weeks. It was found that when comparing the results of individualistic
learning to cooperative learning, the cooperative learners were at least equal to theindividualist learning control group. The authors note that although the high-achievers did
not improve significantly, the cooperative learning program was beneficial for the lowachieving students (Ghaith & Yaghi, 1998). In conclusion, the authors determined that theuse of cooperative learning methods in a second language classroom were beneficial, inparticular for low achieving ESL students (Ghaith & Yaghi, 1998).
Writing on the theoretical relevance and efﬁcacy of using cooperative learning in the
ESL/EFL classroom, Shaaban and Ghaith (2005) provide a summary of research involving
various forms of cooperative learning in ESL learning environments. The authors summarize
a number of cooperative learning methods, and identify if and how these methods might beeffective in an ESL classroom situation. Of particular interest to the creation of ESL conﬂict
resolution materials are learning together, group investigation, constructive controversy,
complex instruction, cooperative learning structures, and curriculum packages. Due to thecollaborative aspect of these education methods, students are inspired to work together tomaster important concepts and achieve shared goals. The repeated review of materials ﬁrst
through teacher presentation and then again through student-led team work, core ideas are
reinforced and mastered. The authors found that lessons on language rules and mechanics as― 138 ―Is Conﬂict Resolution Content Beneﬁcial and Appropriate for Use in University Level ESL Courses?

well as language skills class both beneﬁtted from opportunities to use authentic language(Shaaban & Ghaith, 2005).
Nejadghanbar and Mohammadpour (2012) introduced Interest-Oriented Student Team
Achievement Divisions (IOSTAD) as an improvement upon the commonly used STAD
technique of cooperative learning. The authors believe that grouping students based onshared interest would improve their energy and responsibility to the in the materials being
presented in class (Nejadghanbar & Mohammadpour, 2012). The study involved 25 highschool boys from Iran who were studying at the intermediate level on the Oxford Placement
test. The students were assigned to two groups, a STAD control group with 12 members,
and an experimental IOSTAD group with 13 members. The IOSTAD group members weregrouped according to their appreciation of a particular football team. The authors
hypothesized that being in a group with shared interests would further enhance the level of
support that the group members gave each other. The classes were all taught by the firstauthor of the paper, and were evaluated using ten standardized mid-intermediate reading
comprehension tests. The results of the study show that before the IOSTAD process wasused, there was not a signiﬁcant difference in student performance, but after the IOSTAD
process had been administered the experimental group showed a significant performanceincrease over the control group. The authors believe that by pinpointing the learners’
interests and grouping them accordingly in cooperative learning environments, there can besigniﬁcant increases in academic achievement (Nejadghanbar and Mohammadpour (2012).

SATISFACTORY SOLUTION DISCUSSION
Reviewing the literature that is available on the integration of content into university
level ESL programs, it is apparent that despite the success and widespread adoption in manyeducational environments in the United States, conﬂict resolution content has yet to be usedin an ESL environment on a large scale. If there are in fact programs in place, there doesn’t
seem to have been a lot of research conducted on them.
There are number of possibilities as to why conﬂict resolution content has not madeany significant inroads into the ESL teaching community. The first and most obvious
consideration is that as conflict resolution as a field is relatively new, and teaching ofEnglish as a second language is a very robust ﬁeld on its own, so there is a possibility that
ESL teachers simply haven’t been adequately exposed to these new ideas, or haven’t had the― 139 ―

愛知大学

言語と文化 No. 36

time, energy, or training to be able to integrate conﬂict resolution content into their courses
or curriculum.

Cultural Considerations
In any discussion of ESL teaching and learning environments, one must always
consider the influence of differing cultures and linguistic backgrounds. The conflict
resolution strategies and vocabulary that was used in my American graduate program of
Negotiation, Conflict Resolution, and Peacebuilding program seem to be very English
language oriented, with a strong North American culture and content bias. Perhaps it is thisformat that makes it more difﬁcult to successfully integrate our conﬂict resolution strategies
into an ESL program, which is by its very nature catering to students whose ﬁrst language
and culture are different from that of English speaking North America.
I believe that when teaching ESL using conﬂict resolution content, it will be necessary
to spend much more time than usual when introducing new vocabulary and concepts
because a large amount of the language used in the conﬂict resolution ﬁeld is unique, or atthe very least has a unique meaning or interpretation. This increased focus on description
and interpretation could also have the unintended consequence of introducing teachers’
biases and personal interpretations which may or may not agree with the social parametersof the society, or the social norms of the school in which the training occurs. This could not
only create an unreceptive environment for the conﬂict resolution based program, but for theteacher or teachers administering the program as well.

Integration of Conﬂict Resolution Content
As indicated previously, the literature available for this topic is limited at best. Without
widespread adoption of conﬂict resolution content based ESL programs, there will not beenough cases to support research, and ironically, without the research it may prove very
challenging to implement conﬂict resolution content into ESL programs. This dilemma leads
to the next logical question which is how can conﬂict resolution content be packaged in sucha way as to be readily accepted by teaching professionals and administrators alike?
The simple answer to the question of content distribution in ESL teaching environments
is teaching materials. Writing an ESL textbook which uses conﬂict resolution content would― 140 ―Is Conﬂict Resolution Content Beneﬁcial and Appropriate for Use in University Level ESL Courses?

be the easiest way to get the content into the hands of many teachers. Although, whenwriting a textbook another very important consideration would have to be marketability. The
writer and the publishing company would have to determine if using “conﬂict resolution” orsomething similar in the title would increase or decrease marketability.
It seems that many of the content-based ESL textbooks that are available rely heavily
on the content and not enough on ESL education, so the most important consideration formaterial or textbooks would be that they are firmly grounded in English as a second
language pedagogy, and the conﬂict resolution aspect would be secondary. As much of theliterature indicates, the most successful way to introduce conﬂict resolution materials into
an educational environment is by integrating them with mandatory courses and not trying toforce the content to stand alone. Perhaps when the concepts of conﬂict resolution become
mainstream and accepted as beneﬁcial to society, it will not be necessary for the content totake a backseat. For now, conﬂict resolution content is still on the fringe, and creating easy
to use, adaptable content that is very teacher friendly is the best possible way to introduce
the ideas to as many students as possible.

Conﬂict Resolution Content
Considering the content that would be appropriate for university level ESL courses, I
think that following a simpliﬁed and extended version of the workshop outlined by Raider,
Coleman and Gerson (2006) in chapter thirty-one of “The handbook of conﬂict resolution”,
would be a very good starting point. The overview of conﬂict would have to be far more
extensive and include a variety of vocabulary building and comprehension exercises. Thesefundamentals of conﬂict resolution would have to be mastered before any other topics could
be tackled. Different conﬂict resolution models, such as the dual-concern model could be
introduced, and case studies that use both competitive and cooperative conﬂict approaches
could be role-played and developed. The goal of the ﬁrst segment of course would be todemonstrate to the students the many positive possibilities for conflict resolution. Thesepossibilities could in turn become stimulus for increased English language acquisition.
The following units of negotiation basics and communication would not be as extensive
as the ﬁrst overview of conﬂict because the vocabulary would already be in place and thefocus of the classroom activities would be on the theory underlying the process. Time would
be spent on reframing and identifying the differences between needs and interests; as well as― 141 ―

愛知大学

言語と文化 No. 36

defining and identifying the five different communication behaviors. English language
activities could be constructed to compare the different vocabulary and syntax used when
attacking, evading, informing, opening, and uniting.
When creating the negotiation materials, role playing with partners would make a very
productive communication element to the course. Sharing stories and identifying issues
would expand descriptive language, and reframing is a very useful exercise for conﬁrming
true comprehension. I believe that the most challenging aspect of the negotiation role-plays
would be creating culturally appropriate cases for the students to work with. Hopefully by
the end of the program it might be possible to ask the students to create a role-play story asa writing assignment. I feel that this would be one of the better ways to establish that thestudents have fully grasped the materials that are presented to them in the program, and it
would also have the added beneﬁt of giving the course creators a more realistic idea of thechallenges and conﬂicts that the students believe are relevant.
Introducing culture based conﬂict to a non-English speaking ESL class should be oneof the easier aspects of this course development because the students in ESL classes arelikely already very aware of the existence of many other cultures and languages. Onceagain, role-plays of culturally difficult or sensitive situations would provide a goodframework for discussion and creative speaking. Considering that at this point the students
will have been exposed to the basic conﬂict resolution language and theory, approachingpotentially volatile cultural points will, if the training has been successful to this point,
result in far less difﬁcult or dangerous conﬂict than if the students had had no training at all.
It is at this point that materials created to garner an understanding of emotions and thepossible negative reactions, such as the defend-attack spirals, will truly become useful andinstructive. Having learned the vocabulary and possessing the conflict resolution basic
toolkit, the students will be able to share information, identify underlying interests, establish
shared interests, and change the atmosphere of conﬂicts from competitive to cooperative.
Although it will be difficult to quantify these positive traits in a staged case-study
environment, it will nevertheless represent a very good conﬂict resolution foundation that
could improve students’ social competence and could very easily be reinforced and built
upon in the future. All of this could be achieved while mastering new vocabulary, practicing
creative speaking and role-playing within a structured environment. This in turn should
satisfy many of the university ESL curriculum requirements.
As in almost any modern educational environment, an online component would be― 142 ―Is Conﬂict Resolution Content Beneﬁcial and Appropriate for Use in University Level ESL Courses?

necessary to distribute materials that could prepare or reinforce learning for students in the
program, students considering the program, or even those who have already graduated fromthe problem. Another benefit of online materials is that they can be easily modified toaccount for cultural or social issues, as well as be designed with speciﬁc curriculum goals inmind.

FUTURE ESL CONFLICT RESOLUTION PROGRAMS
The introduction of conﬂict resolution training to ESL programs in the university or
corporate system receives a range of support spanning from serious interest and adoption todisregard and avoidance. Attempting to create a course that could satisfy all time, ﬁnancial,
and bureaucratic needs and interests would be immensely challenging, if not impossible. I
have chosen instead to focus on a program that can be scaled in both English instructionlevel and student contact time.
The program will initially be run by a teacher trained in conﬂict resolution and theory,
but with the aim of creating a system that has enough support and a framework that could be
administered by any ESL teacher, with or without a conﬂict resolution background.
Course Outline
The proposed program will be designed with ﬂexibility in mind. The number of conﬂict
resolution elements and the time that is needed to implement them can be adjusted according
to the educator and curriculum needs. Initially the program will be introduced into aJapanese university ESL course. The typical Japanese university semester consists of 15classes of 90 minutes each, and a ﬁnal exam. The program will begin with a two and ﬁve
class option, and as the program develops it will expand to seven classes, and then 15
classes.
The course will be composed of two different English levels which cover the same
topics in all classes. As the content itself is rather advanced, this course would only beavailable to intermediate and advanced English learners. Using a program with twointerchangeable English levels will allow educators to switch English levels throughout thesemester, and in doing so work with the level that best matches their ESL curriculum goals,
or their students’ ability.
The focus of the program will be on self-awareness/mindfulness, constructive
controversy, conﬂict transformation, and integrated bargaining. In the two-class and ﬁve-

― 143 ―

愛知大学

言語と文化 No. 36

class programs the method of instruction will be guidance and not lecturing. Students will
be presented with games, thinking problems, and case studies which will be solved in acooperative learning environment. The seven and 15-class programs will begin in the samestyle of cooperative learning through case study and thinking problems, and then in thesecond half of the semester, students will be presented with multi-variable, complex casestudies, role-play exercises, and be introduced to the theoretical background for the practicalskills that they learned in the beginning of the program.
Program requirements
There are no specific funding or facility requirements for this program to be
implemented, although it will be necessary to have willing educators who are working
within a system that has the ﬂexibility necessary to implement the program.

Impact on subjects
In this program, the subjects would be students. If the conﬂict resolution aspects are
successfully integrated into a previously established ESL curriculum, then I believe that
there would be no negative effect on the students. Due to the flexibility of the program
elements, educators could choose the extent of integration that best suits their individual
program. In fact, the program could either be extended or reduced depending on how theinitial elements are received.
As the program would have to be administered by the teacher/educator, they would
need to review the materials prior to class, and manage class time to accommodate theconﬂict resolution elements. These requirements could place an increased burden upon theindividuals who are tasked to implement the program.

Program Goals
The goal of the program is not only to introduce conﬂict resolution in theory and inpractice, but through the cooperative analysis of case studies and constructive controversy
exercises students will develop their critical thinking, research, and logic skills. Although it
is difﬁcult to measure the efﬁcacy of conﬂict resolution training as a content element of an
ESL class, it is the author’s view that provided the English language training does not suffer
academically, learning such skills as critical thinking and constructive controversy will

― 144 ―Is Conﬂict Resolution Content Beneﬁcial and Appropriate for Use in University Level ESL Courses?

result in long-term beneﬁts in both social and academic forums.
REFERENCES
Allred, K.G. (2000). Anger and retaliation in conﬂict. In Deutsch, M. & Coleman, P.T. (Eds.), The
handbook of conﬂict resolution: Theory and practice. (pp.236-255). San Francisco, CA: JosseyBass.
Ann, F. (2003). The Jossey-Bass academic administrator's guide to conﬂict resolution. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
Ara, A., & Akter, S. (2013). Cooperative Learning for a Real Student-Centered Language Classroom.
Spectrum Journal of the Department of English University of Dhaka, 8/9, 199-208.
Bartos, O. & Wehr, P. (2002). Using Conﬂict Theory. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Bales, S. N. (2008). Fairness as a frame. Washington, D.C.: FrameWorks InstituteBodine, R. J., & Crawford, D. K. (1998). The Handbook of Conﬂict Resolution Education. A Guide to
Building Quality Programs in Schools. San Francisco, CA :Jossey-Bass Inc..
Deutsch, M. (2006). Justice and conﬂict. In M. Deutsch and P. T. Coleman (Eds.). The handbook of
conﬂict resolution: Theory and practice (2nd ed.). (pp. 43-68.) San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Erbe, N. (2003). Holding These Truths: Empowerment and Recognition in Action (an interactive casestudy curriculum for multicultural cultural dispute resolution). Berkley, CA: Berkeley Public
Policy Press.
Fisher, R. and Ury, W. (1991). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in (2nd ed.).
London: Penguin.
Girard, K., & Koch, S. J. (1996). Conﬂict Resolution in the Schools: A Manual for Educators. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Ghaith, G. M., & Yaghi, H. M. (1998). Effect of cooperative learning on the acquisition of second
language rules and mechanics. System, 26(2), 223-234.
Jacobs, G. M., & Cates, K. (2004). Global education in second language teaching. k@ ta, 1(1), 44-56.
Jalilifar, A. (2010). The effect of cooperative learning techniques on college students’ reading
comprehension. System, 38(1), 96-108.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Dudley, B. (1992). Effects of peer mediation training on elementary
school students. Conﬂict Resolution Quarterly, 10(1), 89-99.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (2006). Active learning: Cooperation in the college
classroom (3rd ed.). Edina, MA: Interaction Book Company.
Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., & Tjosvold, D. (2006). In M. Deutsch and P. T. Coleman (Eds.). The
handbook of conﬂict resolution: Theory and practice (2nd ed.). (pp. 69-91.) San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Jones, N. B. (1998). Comments on Tony Silva's “On the Ethical Treatment of ESL Writers”; A Defenseof Using Themes and Topics to Teach ESL/EFL Writing. TESOL Quarterly, 32(2), 338-342.
Jones, T. S. (2004). Conflict resolution education: The field, the findings, and the future. Conflict
resolution quarterly, 22(1-2), 233-267.

― 145 ―

愛知大学

言語と文化 No. 36

Kimmel, P. R. (2000). Culture and conﬂict. In M. Deutsch and P. T. Coleman (Eds.). The handbook of
conﬂict resolution: Theory and practice. (pp. 453-474.) San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kriesberg, L. (2003). “Us” versus “them”. In (Eds.) G. Burgess and H. Burgess Beyond intractability,
Boulder, CO: University of Colorado.
Lerner, H. (1993).The Dance of Deception. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers.
Littlejohn, S.W. & Domenici, K. (2007). Communication, Conflict, and the Management ofDifference. Long Grove, Il: Waveland Press.
Menkel-Meadow, C.J., Schneider A.K., & Love, L.P. (2006). Negotiation Processes for Problem
Solving. New York, NY: Aspen Publishers.
Nakamura, K. (2002). Cultivating global literacy through English as an International Language (EIL)
education in Japan: A new paradigm for global education. International Education Journal, 3(5),64-74.
Nejadghanbar, H., & Mohammadpour, L. (2012). On the Effect of Interest-Oriented Student Team
Achievement divisions on the Reading Comprehension Achievement of English as a Foreign
Language. Journal of Academic and Applied Studies, 2(11), 21-33.
Pruitt, D.G. & Kim, S.H. (2004). Social conflict: Escalation, stalemate, and settlement (3rd ed.).
New York, NY: McGraw Hill Companies, Inc..
Raider, E., Coleman, S., & Gerson, J. (2006). In M. Deutsch and P. T. Coleman (Eds.). The handbook
of conﬂict resolution: Theory and practice (2nd ed.). (pp. 695-725.) San Francisco, CA: JosseyBass.
Rothman, J. (1997). Resolving identity-based conﬂict in nations, organizations, and communities. San
Francisco. CA: Jossey-Bass, Inc..
Shaaban, K., & Ghaith, G. (2005). The theoretical relevance and efﬁcacy of using cooperative learningin the ESL/EFL classroom. TESL Reporter, 38(2), 14-28.
Schirch, L. and Campt, D. (2007). The Little Book of Dialogue for Difﬁcult Subjects. Intercourse,
PA.: Good Books.
Schellenberg, J. (1996). Conflict resolution, theory, research and practice. Albany, NY: State
University of New York Press.
Silva, T. (1997). On the ethical treatment of ESL writers. Tesol Quarterly, 31(2), 359-363.
Stevahn, L., Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., Green, K., & Laginski, A. M. (1997). Effects on highschool students of conﬂict resolution training integrated into English literature. The Journal ofsocial psychology, 137(3), 302-315.
Stevahn, L., Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Real, D. (1996). The impact of a cooperative or
individualistic context on the effectiveness of conﬂict resolution training. American Educational
Research Journal, 33(4), 801-823.
Tuan, L. T. (2010). Infusing cooperative learning into an EFL classroom. English Language Teaching,3(2), P64.
Ury, W. (1993) Getting Past No. New York, NY: Bantam Books
Vega, Q. C., & Tayler, M. R. (2005). Incorporating course content while fostering a more learner-― 146 ―Is Conﬂict Resolution Content Beneﬁcial and Appropriate for Use in University Level ESL Courses?

centered environment. College Teaching, 53(2), 83-88.
Warner Results Coaching. (2008). Critical thinking. Kingston Upon Thames, England.
Weston, A. (2009). A rulebook for arguments (4th ed.). Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company,
Inc.

― 147 ―