Teaching Students To Be Peacemakers
© Johnson & Johnson
David W. Johnson and Roger T. Johnson
University of Minnesota
60 Peik Hall
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455
Introduction
The authors spent several years of their childhood living on a farm in central Indiana. We grew up in a time when 
children were part of the economic unit of the family. We worked along side of our parents and grandparents. We 
learned about conflict through the ebb and flow of daily family life. Getting us up at five o'clock in the morning to 
milk the cows was a conflict. Getting us to go to bed at nine o'clock at night was a conflict. Deciding on who was 
going to clean the manure out of the barn and who was going to plow a field was a conflict. All day long, it was one
conflict after another. From that experience we grew up knowing how to manage conflicts relatively constructively. 
This is not true of many children, adolescents, and young adults today. They are not part of the economic unit of 
the family, they do not work along side of their parents, and they do not learn how to manage conflicts 
constructively through the ebb-and-flow of daily life. Their failure to learn how to resolve conflicts in constructive 
ways carries over into their lives as adults. Not only have "road-rage" incidents been increasing, in youth sports 
there has been a marked increase in the incidents of "side-line rage" where parents physically assault sports 
officials, each other, and children from opposing teams. Clearly, there is a need to train all children and 
adolescents in how to manage conflicts constructively.
After we left the farm, Roger went to the University of California at Berkeley for his doctorate in science education 
and David went to Columbia University for his doctorate in social psychology. In 1966 David became a faculty 
member of the University of Minnesota and began training teachers to:
	(a) use cooperative learning groups to enhance academic learning and positive relationships 
	among diverse students and
	(b) train students to resolve conflicts constructively. Shortly after Roger joined David on the 
	Minnesota faculty in 1969 the Cooperative Learning Center was formed.
The Cooperative Learning Center was formed to train educators to:
	(a) structure cooperation among students, among staff, and between students and staff,
	(b) resolve conflicts constructively, and
	(c) inculcate civic values.
The Cooperative Learning Center is a leading formulator, developer, and supplier of theory, research, and training
programs on cooperation, conflict resolution, and civic values. In this article we shall briefly describe our Teaching 
Students To Be Peacemakers Program (TSP) and a meta-analysis of the research we have conducted on its 
effectiveness.
Teaching Students To Be Peacemakers
The Teaching Students To Be Peacemakers Program is a 12-year spiral program in which each year students 
learn increasingly sophisticated negotiation and mediation procedures. It focuses on teaching all students how to 
value constructive conflict, engage in problem-solving and integrative negotiations, and mediate classmates' 
conflicts. The intent is to provide each student with at least twelve years of training in how to manage conflicts 
constructively and thereby significantly change the way they manage their conflicts for the rest of their lives. There
are seven phases in implementing the Peacemaker Program (Johnson & Johnson, 1995).
    	1. Create a cooperative context. When individuals are competing, they strive for a "win" in 
	conflicts. Disputants should recognize their long-term interdependence and the need to 
	maintain effective working relationships with each other (conditions that exist only in a 
	cooperative context). The easiest way to establish a cooperative context is through the use 
	of cooperative learning.
    	2. Teach students the desirability of conflicts when they are managed constructively. 
	Students are taught that (a) a conflict-free life is impossible and undesirable and (b) conflict 
	has many positive outcomes (i.e., laughter, insight, learning, and problem solving) when it is 
	managed constructively.
    	3. Teach students the problem-solving, integrative negotiation procedure. The purpose of 
	integrative, problem-solving negotiations is to ensure all parties achieve their goals while 
	maintaining or even improving the quality of their relationship. Students are taught a six-step 
	integrative negotiation procedure (describe what you want, describe how you feel, describe 
	your reasons for your wants and feelings, reverse perspectives, create three plans for 
	maximizing joint gain, choose one plan and agree).
    	4. Teach students the mediation procedure. The purpose of mediating is to facilitate 
	problem-solving negotiations among disputants. Students are taught a four-step procedure 
	(end the hostilities, ensure commitment to the mediation process, facilitate negotiations, 
	formalize the agreement).
    	5. Implement the peer mediation program. Working in pairs at first, mediators are made 
	available to help schoolmates negotiate more effectively. The mediator's role is rotated so 
	every student gains experience as a mediator. When all students become skillful mediators, 
	mediators may work alone.
    	6. Continue the training in negotiation and mediation procedures throughout the school year 
	to refine and upgrade students' skills. The easiest way to do this is to integrate the training 
	into academic lessons.
    	7. Reteach the negotiation and mediation procedures the next year at a higher level of 
	complexity and sophistication. This results in a spiral curriculum from kindergarten (or before) 
	through the twelfth grade.
Characteristics Of Studies
Over the past fourteen years we have conducted seventeen studies to examine the effectiveness of the Teaching 
Students To Be Peacemakers Program. In our research we have examined the impact of the Peacemaker Program
on a wide variety of variables, such as the degree to which the negotiation and mediation procedures were 
learned, retained, and applied, the attitudes toward conflict, and academic achievement and retention. We have 
recently conducted a meta-analysis on the results of our studies (Johnson & Johnson, 2000).
The results have considerable generalizability for several reasons. First, the studies have been conducted over a 
twelve year period (1988 to 2000). Consistent results over more than one decade strengthens the confidence in 
the results. Second, the studies have high external validity as they were all conducted in schools in actual 
implementations of the TSP Program.
Third, the studies have high internal validity. Eleven of the studies were carefully controlled and conducted field 
experiments. Participants were randomly assigned to conditions in four of the studies. In seven of the studies 
classrooms and/or controls were selected randomly from the school. In nine of the studies teachers were rotated 
across experimental and control conditions. Sixteen of the studies have been accepted in peer review journals and
the other study is submitted to a journal and under review.
Fourth, the participants were diverse. The studies were conducted in urban, suburban, and rural school districts. 
Participants varied from lower to upper middle class socio-economically and were from diverse ethnic, historical, 
and cultural backgrounds. In the urban schools, for example, almost all participants were from minority groups and 
in the suburban and rural schools almost all participants were Caucasian. Participants ranged from kindergarten to
ninth grade students. The studies were conducted in eight different schools that included elementary, middle, and 
high schools. The studies were conducted in two different countries (United States and Canada). The diversity of 
the participants increases the confidence educators can have in the effectiveness of the TSP Program. Fifth, 
there was some variation in the length of the studies. The training lasted from nine to fifteen hours in length. The 
programs were evaluated over a period of several months to a year.
Finally, the TSP Program is being implemented in schools throughout North America and in schools in Central and 
South America, Europe, the Middle East, Asia, and the Pacific Rim. Training materials, books, and relevant articles
have been translated into five different languages. The wide scale implementation in such a variety of cultures and
settings provides additional validation of TSP's effectiveness.
Results
The studies on the TSP Program may best be summarized within a meta-analysis. A meta-analysis statistically 
combines the results of a set of independent studies that test the same hypothesis in order to draw conclusions 
about the overall result of the studies. Meta-analyses usually involve effect-sizes. An effect size is the standardized
mean difference between the experimental and control groups or the proportion of a standard deviation by which 
an experimental group exceeds a control group. A rule-of-thumb is that any effect size 0.20 or higher is significant.
In our studies we found that in the schools participating in the studies, students tended to engage in conflicts daily.
In the urban schools studied, the vast majority of conflicts referred to mediation involved physical and verbal 
violence. In the suburban and rural schools studied, most of the conflicts reported centered on the possession of 
and access to resources, preferences about what to do, playground issues, and turn-taking. Only a few of the 
conflicts involved physical and verbal aggression. On the basis of these results, we can conclude that schools are 
justified in being concerned about the frequency and destructiveness of conflicts among students.
Before training, students generally managed their conflicts through trying to win by (a) forcing the other to 
concede (either by overpowering the other disputant or by asking the teacher to force the other to give in) or 
(b) withdrawing from the conflict and the other person. One of the teachers stated in her log, "Before training, 
students viewed conflict as fights that always resulted in a winner and a loser. To avoid such an unpleasant 
situation, they usually placed the responsibility for resolving conflicts on me, the teacher." Students seem to lack 
all knowledge of how to engage in problem-solving, integrative negotiations.
The TSP training did tend to result in students learning the negotiation and mediation procedures. Across our 
studies, over 90 percent of the trained students accurately recalled 100 percent of the problem-solving negotiation
and the mediation procedures. Up to a year after the training had ended, over 75 percent of students were still 
able to write out accurately all the negotiation and mediation steps. The average effect size for the studies was 
2.25 (n = 13) for the immediate post-test and 3.34 (n = 9) for the retention measures. These results indicated that 
the training was quite effective in teaching students the negotiation and mediation procedures.
Not only did students master the negotiation and mediation procedures, they tended to use them in actual conflict 
situations. Immediately after training, students applied the procedures almost perfectly (effect size = 2.16, n = 4) 
and were still quite good months after the training was over (effect size = 0.46, n = 3). On the three types of 
measures, students were able to apply the negotiation and mediation procedures to a variety of conflicts.
Not only did students apply the negotiation and mediation procedures, they tended to use them in non-classroom 
and non-school situations, including the playground, the lunchroom, the hallways, school buses, and at home. 
When students' behavior was coded on the Strategy Constructiveness Scale, the average effect size was 1.60 
(n = 12) on the post-test and 1.10 (n = 10) for on the retention test. When students' behavior was coded on the 
Two-Concerns Scale, the post-test effect-size was 1.10 (n = 5) and the retention effect size was 0.45 (n = 2). 
There were no significant differences between males and females in the strategies used to manage conflicts. 
Although the training took place in school, and focused on school conflicts, there were no significant differences 
between the strategies used in school and in the home. Students spontaneously wrote stories about using the 
negotiation and mediation procedures and presented skits in school variety shows involving the negotiation and 
mediation procedures; parents reported that students used the negotiation and mediation procedures and skills 
with their brothers and sisters, their neighborhood friends, and even their pets.
Following the TSP training, students were placed in a negotiation situation in which they could either try to win or 
maximize joint outcomes. Untrained students almost always strive to win. Most trained students, on the other hand, 
focused on maximizing joint outcomes (effect size = 0.98, n = 5).
In five of our studies, we integrated the Peacemaker training either into English literature units, history units, or 
general social studies units. While studying a novel, for example, students read and studied the novel while at the 
same time (a) learning the negotiation and mediation procedures and (b) using them in role plays to understand 
the dynamics among the major characters. The students were given an achievement test on the novel following 
the end of the unit and again several months later. The control condition, on the other hand, would spend all of 
their time studying the novel. The results of our studies indicated that the students who received the integrated 
training achieved significantly higher on the academic achievement and retention tests than did students who 
spent all their time studying the academic material without learning the conflict resolution procedures (effect size = 
0.88, n = 5). These results are important as they demonstrate that conflict resolution and peer mediation training 
can move from being an "add-on" program to being an intricate part of academic instruction.
We found that the TSP training resulted in more positive attitudes toward conflict. Untrained students uniformly 
had negative attitudes toward conflicts. After training, students had more positive attitudes toward conflict (effect 
size = 1.07, n = 5). Teachers and administrators and parents, furthermore, perceived the peacemaker program to 
be constructive and helpful. Many parents whose children were not part of the project requested that their children
receive the training next year, and a number of parents requested that they receive the training themselves so 
they could use the procedures within the family.
Finally, in our studies the number of discipline problems the teacher had to deal with decreased by about 60 
percent, and referrals to the principal dropped about 95 percent.
Overall, these findings provide considerable empirical validation of the effectiveness of the TSP Program and of 
conflict resolution and peer mediation training in general.
Conclusions
When we began training administrators, teachers, and students how to manage conflicts constructively in the 
1960s, we formulated our recommendations on thorough reviews of the literature in such areas as constructive 
conflict, defining issues, communication in conflict situations, perspective taking, integrative agreements, and 
creative problem solving. Each step of the integrative, problem-solving negotiation procedure was developed and 
refined according to research on that specific step. The resulting negotiation procedure is closely based on the 
theory and research in the field of conflict resolution. It is, however, a piecemeal approach as each step has its 
own supporting literature. In the 1980s, we saw a need to move from such piecemeal building of an effective 
negotiation procedure to holistic evaluations of the entire procedure used by young children to older adolescents. 
The intent, of course, was to verify that the TSP Program as a whole fosters the development of nonviolent, caring,
socially responsible, and conflict-competent children, adolescents, and young adults.
Over the past twelve years, therefore, we have carefully evaluated the effectiveness of the Teaching Students To 
Be Peacemakers Program as a holistic intervention. The results are quite encouraging. Students do tend to learn 
the problem-solving negotiation and peer mediation procedures, apply them in actual conflict situations, and 
transfer their use to non-classroom and non-school situations. When integrated into academic units, the 
negotiation and mediation training seems to increase academic achievement, thus creating the possibility that the 
training will be institutionalized within schools and be continuous throughout a person's schooling. Students begin 
to value conflict. While this research focuses on one specific conflict resolution and violence prevention program, 
the evidence for its success supports the use of all other conflict resolution and peer mediation programs that 
have similar elements.
References

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (1995). Teaching students to be peacemakers. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (2000). Teaching Students To Be Peacemakers: A meta-analysis. Paper presented at the Convention of the Society for 
the Psychological Study of Social Issues, Minneapolis, June.
References: Peacemaker Studies
1. Dudley, B., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (1996). Conflict-resolution training and middle-school students' integrative negotiation behavior. Journal 
of Applied Social Psychology, 26, 2038-2052.
2. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R., & Dudley, B. (1992). Effects of peer mediation training on elementary school students. Mediation Quarterly, 10, 89-99.
3. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R., Dudley, B., & Acikgoz, K. (1994). Peer mediation: Effects of conflict resolution training on elementary school students.
Journal of Social Psychology, 134, 803-817.
4. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R., Dudley, B., Mitchell, J., & Fredrickson, J. (1997). The impact of conflict resolution training on middle school students. 
Journal of Social Psychology, 137(1), 11-22.
5. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R., Cotten, B., Harris, D., & Louison, S. (1995). Using conflict managers to mediate conflicts in an elementary school. 
Mediation Quarterly, 12(4), 379-390.
6. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R., Cotten, B., Harris, D., & Louison, S. (2001). Peer Mediation In An Inner City Elementary School. Urban Education, 
36(2), 165-178.
7. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R., Dudley, & Magnuson, D. (1995). Training of elementary school students to manage conflict. Journal of Social 
Psychology, 135(6), 673-686.
8. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R., Dudley, B., Ward, M., & Magnuson, D. (1995). Impact of peer mediation training on the management of school and 
home conflicts. American Educational Research Journal, 32(4), 829-844.
9. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R., Mitchell, J., Cotten, B., Harris, D., & Louison, S. (1996). Conflict managers in an elementary school. Journal of 
Research in Education, 89(5), 280-285.
10. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R., Mitchell, J., Cotton, B., Harris, D., & Louison, S. (1996). Conflict managers in an elementary school. Journal of 
Educational Research, 89(5), 280-285.
11. 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, 801-823.
12. Stevahn, L., Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., Green, K., & Laginski, A. M. (1997). Effects on high school students of conflict resolution training 
integrated into English literature. Journal of Social Psychology, 137(3), 302-315.
13. Stevahn, L., Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., Laginski, A. M., & O'Coin, I. (1996). Effects on high school students of integrating conflict resolution 
and peer mediation training into an academic unit. Mediation Quarterly, 14(1), 21-36.
14. Stevahn, L., Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R., Oberle, K., & Wahl, L. (2000). Effects of conflict resolution training integrated into a kindergarten 
curriculum. Child Development, 71(3), 772-784.
15. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (2001). Peer mediation in an inner city elementary school. Urban Education, 36(2), 165-178.
16. Stevahn, L., Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R., & Schultz, R. (in press). Effects of conflict resolution training integrated into a high school social 
studies curriculum. Journal of Social Psychology,
17. Stevahn, L., Munger, L., & Kealey, K. (submitted for publication). First-year effects of teaching all students conflict resolution in a French 
Immersion elementary school. 

Please Read The Website Disclaimer!
Copyright 1986-2012, The Survival & Self-Reliance Studies Institute (SSRsi), All Rights Reserved
Site conceptualized, designed, created & maintained by MEG Raven
Snail Mail: SSRsi, PO Box 2572 Dillon, CO. 80435-2572