| Top

Realizing Democratic Ideals through Peace Education
by Joanna Klonsky

I became convinced of the need for a Peace Education course while organizing a student walk-out at my high school to protest the then-impending war with Iraq. As 499 of my classmates and I walked out of second period on a snowy morning last March, I realized that this was the first experience of activism or civil disobedience that most of us had ever had. Our suburban environment kept us comfortably removed from the conflicts in the Middle East and even from the perpetual gang warfare just a few blocks away on the west side of Chicago. We rarely discussed contemporary world events in our classes, which for the most part, stuck closely to a standard course outline. Our chief exposure to current events came from watching televised coverage, which we recognized rarely provided an unbiased stance.

The overwhelming feeling among the protesting students that day was the desire for access to truth, and for our voices to be valued. Why did we have to cut class to learn the day's lessons? The students should have had access to media analysis, current events and knowledge of effective political action right in our classrooms. In the weeks before the outbreak of the war, young people sought not only peace, but the intellectual tools to analyze the conflict from all sides; to think critically, to form opinions based upon solid information and to discuss and debate in an atmosphere that encouraged exploration, rather than blind acceptance of prevailing sentiment.

The state of Illinois mandates that every high school student take Consumer Education, Health Education and Driver Education in order to graduate. This is a case of misplaced priorities. While the life skills that those courses teach are certainly essential, young people in today's increasingly violent society also need to become skilled in analyzing and dealing with conflict. For this reason, a course in peace studies would be a positive addition to the curriculum.

Two recent watershed events have focused public attention on violence: the first, the 1999 Columbine High School shootings compelled school districts across the country to spend enormous sums upon “violence prevention” measures, such as metal detectors, pervasive use of security cameras, locker searches and armed police on campus. The fear of being another Columbine has caused public schools in inner cities and suburbs alike to become militarized zones. Surveillance gadgets may make schools feel safer, but real security depends on community, communication and empathy, as well as upon knowledge of how to defuse tensions and how to negotiate and mediate conflict. This is where a Peace Education class could make a substantial difference.

The next major event that drew focus to violence was, of course, September 11, 2001. The terrorist attack quite naturally provoked in many people a powerful desire to avenge the lives that were lost and to lash out at any scapegoat. In the weeks immediately after September 11 th , Muslim students in public schools were reportedly subject to attacks and intimidation. In the Chicago area, Muslim girls reported having their religious head-coverings grabbed and pulled off. Several local mosques were vandalized. Had peace studies classes been in place, students could have more constructively and rationally examined the roots of the attacks in class, first by trying to understand it, then by considering how best to respond.

A Peace Education course would not only equip students with skills for discourse and debate, but would also provide a safe space for and encourage dialogue, rather than mute it. A Chicago high school student recently received a ten-day suspension for attempting to assemble a group of students interested in anti-war actions. When asked for a reason for the suspension, the principal cited “disruption of the educational process.” What could be more disruptive to the educational process than being barred from entering a classroom for ten days?

Schools could benefit from creating a climate of engagement, attention to events and open, respectful discussion, rather than an atmosphere of silencing. Dr. Martin Luther King pointed out the vital role of a critical voice in society when he stated, “Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half-truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so we must see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood.” The availability of a Peace Education course would create an environment where everyone, even those with controversial views, would have the opportunity to speak freely on issues of peace and conflict, without fear of persecution.

“What is really needed to make democracy function is not knowledge of facts, but right education,” Mahatma Gandhi once wrote. In other words, simply memorizing facts is ineffective at creating a setting for social progress unless there is analysis and comprehension. A peace studies course should at least be on the menu of any well-rounded educational opportunity, just as military studies are included among today's high school course catalogues. Right now, students in the public school system in the United States have the option to receive a “war education,” but not peace education.

ROTC is a staple in many high schools, especially those serving low-income communities. Military recruiters are welcomed into student centers and cafeterias, while anti-war advocates are barred or suspended. Of course, ROTC is effective in instilling leadership qualities in its participants and many students sign up because of their heartfelt concerns about the future safety of the world. But, there is no reason why the military should be a student's only option in receiving such training. In schools that promote militarization, the students become militarized. A Peace Education course could compensate for this, allowing for an alternate opportunity for leadership and exploration of geopolitical issues. This is not only a matter of individual rights and choices, it is also a matter of balance and fairness within public institutions, which are as fundamental and influential in shaping our society as are public schools.

A Peace Education course would have to be carefully planned. Obviously, no particular doctrine could be imposed upon students. The teaching should encourage students to form their own conclusions. However, a distinction should be made between a Peace Education course and a class on peace and conflict. A Peace Education course would be focused on finding solutions to conflict other than war or violence. It would have to reach a deeper level of exploration, going beyond the clichéd conflict resolution and peer mediation training used in many schools, to a deep examination of the roots of conflict.

Perhaps the most important areas to be covered by such a course would be peace movements, social change and the effect that nonviolent thinkers and movements have had throughout history. One can imagine a peace studies course formatted as a laboratory science class in which, just as in a physics or chemistry class, students explore principles through experimentation, model-building and other forms of research. In this case, the “labs” might include field trips to the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C. These outings would encourage further exploration of the horrors of war, debate on the principles of just and unjust war, discussion of civilian casualties, the gathering of oral histories from survivors of wars of various types, collection of data about a particular conflict or region, such as the current tension between India and Pakistan and the opportunity to practice the art of mediation and negotiation.

Diplomacy and mediation in government could be a major unit of study, perhaps even having former or current government diplomats as guest speakers. For direct exposure to conflicts and a deeper understanding of what citizens in conflict countries experience, students could also make use of web-based discussion with youth in these countries. A curriculum based on discussion and experience, with a focus on understanding the need for a peaceful world, would certainly fill a void in today's standard course offerings.

If the cycle of violence at home and internationally is ever to be broken, we must make a change in how young people are educated. The recourse to violence is an old habit, but not an unbreakable one. What better place than the public school to take up this subject? In this nuclear age, the stakes are far too high to ignore this necessity. American educator John Dewey said it well, “The notion that the ‘essentials' of elementary education are the three R's mechanically treated, is based upon ignorance of the essentials needed for realization of democratic ideals. Unconsciously it assumes that these ideals are unrealizable.” Our public schools should be the breeding ground for critical thinking, for seeking of alternatives to a future of perpetual war and destruction and in the final analysis, for hope.

| Top

Teaching Peace, Beginning Now
by Bryn Horrocks

“Peace is not an absence of war, it is a virtue, a state of mind,
a disposition for benevolence, confidence, justice."
-Baruch Spinoza

In 1865, the Russian novelist Leo Tolstoy wrote the epic novel Voyna i Mir—War and Peace. The pairing of these two words has been almost formulaic since. Peace is most often defined as a noun in diametric opposition to war. In reality, peace is effective only as a verb, or a state of being. As Spinoza stated, “it is a virtue, a state of mind, a disposition for benevolence. . .” These traits are not something that can be legislated, imposed, or decreed. They are qualities of one’s character and being that must be planted as seeds in the minds and hearts of the young, and nurtured and developed into adulthood.

Teaching values that support and embrace the idea of peace should be part of a prolonged program, begun in the primary years, and continued and built upon through high school. This approach would instill, from the earliest years of character formation, the desire to pursue peace in every area of life. A child should be able to listen with tolerance to new ideas, debate with patience opposing views and live with forbearance among disparate values; not because this way of interacting is mandated and politically correct, but because it has been part of the child’s nature from the beginning.

Laudable efforts have been made in school districts to initiate programs that teach tolerance and peace, and punish bias and abuse. While these have improved the school environment, they do not necessarily change the character or belief systems of the population. One might adhere to certain principles out of fear of consequences, but not because of one’s own convictions. If schools are to produce young adults who will go on to be leaders who promote peace, they must begin early to build those values into the character and moral fiber of youth, not wait until character is molded and attempt to control behavior through imposed consequences. As David Borenstein said, “One cannot subdue a man by holding back his hands, lasting peace comes not from force.” (October 1999) Our youth should wish to reach for peace once their hands are free.

What would a program to teach peace look like? It should first provide an authentic and compelling impetus. Children and adults need to see that something is worthwhile, of value, and has application to their lives, if they are to commit to it. Teaching peace as an abstract and intangible principle may be a worthwhile intellectual pursuit, but is unlikely to provide the impetus for one to make it a part of one’s nature and habit. A teaching approach, which uses an interdisciplinary method to examine the benefits of pursuing peace and the consequences of conflict, would help young people to establish a habit of examining every aspect of their lives and to consider how choosing peace could affect them. This method of teaching, both interdisciplinary and authentic, has a proven track record. Its benefits are already embraced by educators which removes the additional step of having to convince teachers of its worth. Asking teachers to add the perspective of peace to their already established lessons is more likely to be successful than asking them to embrace yet another program on top of what they already teach.

Lessons of history could be greatly enriched with this approach. What were the consequences when leaders, both contemporary and historic, chose war and conflict? How might a decision to choose peace have changed those consequences? What other choices might have been possible? How might the lives of individuals and societies been different if leaders had chosen peace in each circumstance? Such questions could be applied to a vast spectrum of learning, from the conquests of the Roman Empire and its subsequent fall, to the Bay of Pigs and the Cuban missile crisis. Literature, too, is a rich arena for teaching peace. The same prompts and meta-cognitive processes can be used when teaching works of literature from The Iliad and The Odyssey to The Diary of Anne Frank. Students can use debate, response journals, simulations and story prompts to re-examine what they have read and offer an analysis of how the work might have looked if peaceful solutions had been found to the conflicts presented.

Even the disciplines of math and science could encourage students to examine the consequences of conflict. How have these disciplines been used to support conflict? How have they, or might they, be used to promote peace? While any study of human enterprise must realistically include a study of human conflict, it would be much more useful to also include a discussion of lessons that could be learned from those conflicts. An example might be a dialogue about World War II including Albert Einstein’s regrets about his contribution to the atom bomb. "I made one great mistake in my life... when I signed the letter to President Roosevelt recommending that atom bombs be made; but there was some justification - the danger that the Germans would make them." (Clark, pg. 752) In his later correspondence he wrote, "when the war is over, then there will be in all countries a pursuit of secret war preparations with technological means which will lead inevitably to preventative wars and to destruction even more terrible than the present destruction of life." (Clark, pg. 698)

A stimulating class discussion could be had around the question of “What could have been done to end World War II other than dropping an atomic bomb?” Establishing a school-wide commitment to include “teaching moments” in every discipline that examine the possibilities of pursuing peace would be a major step in instilling this approach as a part of the student’s natural thinking process throughout his or her life.

A second necessary part of a program to teach peace would be to teach skills. Believing in and embracing peace is a necessary first step, but knowing how to apply these beliefs in a practical way is crucial to real-life application. This approach would give “students the tools to constructively deal with the problems they encounter on both a personal and global level, as well as help them understand their responsibility for elevating the collective human experience.” (Waging Peace.org) Communication and responsive listening skills are an essential foundation to peaceful cohabitation with our fellow human beings. These are already established as learning standards in most states. Using existing programs such as language arts and communication classes to teach responsive communication skills, but emphasize the objective of promoting peace as the vehicle, would be most effective.

Mandating that all students complete a peer mediation course would also give them a way to practically apply a growing penchant for peace. School discipline procedures should include a student court, made up of students who have gone through mediation and communication training, to not only assign consequences for unacceptable behavior, but also to work with students as peer tutors to teach them the skills to solve conflict peacefully. It is well-established that students embrace principles modeled by peers faster than those imposed by adults. A crucial part of developing a school plan to promote peace would have to include student leaders who embrace, model, and propound the principles. A core of trained student volunteers on a steering committee for the development of any peace program would give it legitimacy for the rest of the student body and model peaceful processes for change.

A final component of a program to teach peace would be commitment. Teachers and students are constantly exposed to new theories, ideas, programs and mandates that flash and die. These are often imposed from the top down, unsupported and unsolicited. Veteran teachers know that they can ignore these programs and wait until they die a death of attrition. (Horrocks) Schools that are sincere in their desire to teach and promote peace education must commit to a long, involved and sometimes painful process. The process must include significant representation from the community, the staff, administration and students. All must have input from the beginning that is listened to and respected. The program must be fully supported, returning again and again to examine its efficacy and implementation. It will be most effective if it does not impose, but invites, does not add to, but integrates.

The effort needed may be Herculean, but the results well worth the struggle--results that ultimately reach far beyond the walls of the school into the community and the world. To ignore the need for this kind of program is to risk turning out a generation of youth who are not prepared to lead a world full of conflict. Again, Albert Einstein sums up this need, “The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it." We can do something about it. We need to begin now.

End Notes

“About Peace Education.” Waging Peace Website of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation. <http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/peaceedabout.htm> Accessed December 14, 2002.
Clark, Ronald. Einstein: The Life and Times. New York: Morrow, William and Co., 1972.
Kelly Horrocks (Educator). Ithaca City School District. Personal Interview December 14, 2002.

| Top

“Peace begins in the minds of men...”
By James McSpadden

“Since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the defences of peace must be constructed...” (UNESCO Preamble) When Archibald MacLeish of the United States provided these opening words for the preamble of the Constitution of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, he captured the goal and philosophy of peace education in one sentence. Peace education attempts to build “defences of peace” by providing students with the intellectual understanding of a peaceful society and lifestyle in the hopes that the “minds of men” will be turned toward non-violence rather than devastation. With global catastrophes such as the Middle East crises, terrorism, poverty, and hunger, peace education has become more relevant and imperative in the world since the inception of UNESCO in November 1945. (Meisler 222)

Despite the idealism of MacLeish's words and the devastation of war currently afflicting our world, many educational institutions still do not include peace activities, curricula, or courses. For example, at my high school in South Carolina instead of learning about peace, we focus on past military tactics in history and the pervasiveness of war in anthropology. Peace education seems lacking in academic subjects and in my school environment. Fights break out on campus and many students do not contribute to the community. My school, and many others around the world, could benefit from peace education courses that would awaken the desire for peace and, more importantly, provide the knowledge necessary for critical thinking and an enlightened atmosphere.

Peace education has an important history within the framework of international education. This form of teaching can trace its roots back to the educational philosophies of Maria Montessori, Paulo Freire, and others. (UN.org) For example, educator John Dewey wrote that education consists of people “consciously striving to educate their successors not for the existing state of affairs but so as to make possible a future better humanity.” (UN.org) Inspiring this dynamic change is fundamental for peace educators.

One example of an extraordinary peace education program is the Seeds of Peace organization. This group opened an educational summer camp for youth of Israel and Palestine in 1993; now, the attendees include teenagers from twenty-two belligerent states who come together in a spirit of peace. (Shaw 132) By providing an opportunity for young people to encounter those of warring states, this camp affirms its purpose: “Treaties are negotiated by governments. Peace is made by people.” (Seedsofpeace.org) Seeds of Peace has an outstanding track record, and the organization has inspired young people to live lives of awareness, compassion, and peace. This program provides a true paradigm of the success of peace education. If Seeds of Peace has had so much success internationally, then peace education within the established local education framework would, likewise, drastically advance the cause of peace. (Shaw 132)

Peace education is based on a general definition of peace that provides the context for academic discussion and learning. The Yamoussoukra Declaration aptly provided this:

Peace is reverence for life.
Peace is the most precious possession of humanity.
Peace is more than the end of armed conflict.
Peace is a mode of behaviour.
Peace is a deep-rooted commitment to the principles of liberty, justice, equality,
and solidarity among all human beings.
...peace is within our reach. (UNESCO)

Thus, following the tenets of this definition, an ideal peace education course at my school should outline peacemaking topics with a “four circle” approach. The “circles” should be the self, community, nation, and world; and each unit should reflect the peace issues in each sphere. For example, the personal circle would include discussions of individual mindsets compatible with the goal of a “culture of peace.” The detrimental nature of racism, xenophobia, and intolerance should be included to provide students with examples of incompatible constructs that destroy the advances of peace. Likewise, the other three circles should include issues relating to peace in their sphere.

The community circle could address care for the environment, the national circle might look at active citizenship, and the global circle could focus on alternatives to war. Any understanding about peace in the modern world would also be incomplete without review of the United Nations system designed to “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war” and promote peace in a plethora of ways. (Sarnoff 405) A thorough discussion of “peace heroes” such as Mohandas Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr., Nelson Mandela, and Jimmy Carter who devoted their lives to the cause of non-violence and compassion must also be in a good class on peace.

Everything in this ideal peace education course should provide the tools for a student to view the world critically. By learning about peace topics, students see an avenue other than violence and hate. The best peace education course is one that shows the route of peace not by forced indoctrination but by intellectual discussion and understanding.

If this type of peace education was instituted in my school, I feel confident that it would alter the school environment. Naturally, one goal of any peace program is to minimize superficial violent behavior. Perhaps peace education will result in fewer fights and less bullying, but this is not the real measure of success. Now, my high school's population has elements of ignorant racism, blind anger, and useless violence. For example, one day I sat in a restaurant with students involved with the Model United Nations program and was shocked to hear one younger delegate refer to minorities as “lazy” and use racial slurs. This girl was blinded by racism that is a part of her family life. A peace education course would force students like this girl to evaluate their thoughts and mental constructs about violence and intolerance in a critical light. Peace education will give students the intellectual material to transform their minds and the school environment if they choose to do so. An atmosphere of intellectual discussion and peace awareness could transform the ignorance of high school into a more positive, enlightened force.

Good peace education will transcend the students and school to the community. In the local community, the success of peace education cannot be judged solely by a decreasing number of violent crimes or an increase in volunteers. Peace education in the schools creates an informed, aware atmosphere in to the community as well. Ideally, local peacemaking and community service would thrive with these educational programs, but the community's “defences of peace” may only be the awareness that comes with peace education. Awareness can later become action, but awareness of peace is enough to spark some change. The awakening of a community's understanding of peace concerns is fundamental to building the global "culture of peace" to which peace education is dedicated (United Nations).

Moreover, once peace education is embraced by students, schools, and communities, it can begin to shape the world. Like the school and community, peace education can change the world with innovative thought processes and new information. Unfortunately, humanity still holds to the philosophy of Adolf Hitler: “Mankind has grown strong in eternal struggles and it will only perish in eternal peace.” (Freeman 209) Peace education can show that peace is a positive force that provides opportunities for development, learning, and life that do not exist in war. Mankind must reject the Hitleresque desire for struggle within the global community. Peace education strives to provide the critical thinking context that enables people to discover, on their own, that war, hate, and suffering is wrong and should be fixed. Within the global sphere, peace education can teach about conflict resolution and successes of the international community to provide the knowledge necessary to understand the framework of global peace. The peace consciousness instilled by peace education will gradually provide the mental basis for a global “culture of peace.” (United Nations)

Although war seems omnipresent in the modern world, this should not preclude the development of a comprehensive peace education program. United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan noted in his Nobel Peace Prize lecture, “Most nations have monuments or memorials to war, bronze salutations to heroic battles, archways of triumph. Peace has no parade, no pantheon of victory.” (“Kofi Annan”) Peace does, however, have new opportunities to make gains in the modern world. From the local school to the entire world, peace education can change the mindset of war, selfishness, death, and destruction that has plagued humans for too many centuries. By kindling the light of understanding, this form of education will light the fire of change. Pragmatist Richard Burton said in 1865, “Peace is the dream of the wise; war is the history of mankind.” (Freeman 211) Because of the goals of peace education starting locally, peace no longer has to be the dream of the wise; peace can be the future of humanity.
Works Cited

Freeman, Chas. W. Jr. The Diplomat's Dictionary. Washington: United States Institute of Peace, 1997.

“Kofi Annan-Nobel Lecture.” Nobel e-Museum. 26 May 2003. <http://www.nobel.se/peace/laureates/2001/annan-lecture.html>.

“Links and Resources: Next Steps.” United Nations Cyberschoolbus. UnitedNations. 15 May 2003. <http://www.un.org/cyberschoolbus/peace/frame4.htm>.

Meisler, Stanley. United Nations: The First Fifty Years. New York: Atlantic Monthly Press, 1995.

Preamble and Article 1 of the Constitution of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. UNESCO. 22 May 2003. <http://www.unesco.org/human_rights/hrpreamble.htm>.

Sarnoff, Irving. ed. International Instruments of the United Nations. New York: United Nations Publications, 1997.

Seeds of Peace: Empowering Children of War to Break the Cycle of Violence. 15 May 2003. <http://www.seedsofpeace.org/index.cfm?id=1>.

Shaw, Tucker. Peace. New York: Alloy Books, 2002.

"Teacher as Learner: Theory and Pedagogy." United Nations Cyberschoolbus. United Nations. 15 May 2003. <http://www.un.org/cyberschoolbus/peace/frame.htm>.

UNESCO. Culture of Peace Program. Yamoussoukro Declaration on Peace in the Minds of Men. Paris: UNESCO.