CHAPTER 9

PEACE EDUCATION PRAXIS Edward J. Brantmeier

Monisha Bajaj

Education for peace responds to the variegated forms of conflict and vio- lence found in a variety of contexts: homes, schools, communities, and na- tions. Although its foundation is rooted in the early 19th century, peace education emerged primarily during the post-World War 11 era, resulting in diverse definitions and constituencies worldwide. This chapter offers a summative review of the key concepts, orientations, and developments that define the scholarly terrain of peace education.

DEFINITION OF KEY CONCEPTS

Peace education is generally defined as educational policy, planning, ped- agogy, and practice that can provide learners-in any setting-with the skills and values to work towards comprehensive peace (Reardon, 1988).

'Iron- The areas of human rights education, development education, en\ ' mental education, disarmament education, and conflict resolution educa- tion are often included in a broader understanding of the multifaceted approaches to peace education. Despite different approaches, the holistic aim of peace education can be summarized as the achievement of "all hu-

Ediccoting A h u t Social ISSUPS ln the 20th and 21st Crnturir.r, pagcs 131)-1.59 , ,

Copyt-ighl O 2013 hv Inf'i)~.rnation Agc I'uhlishing ! All right< ol~rcp~.oduction in any li)rm I-csci-vcd. 139

i

140 . E J BRANTMEIER and M BAJAJ Peace Educat~on Prax~s . 141

man rights for all people(s)" (Toh, 2006, p. 15). As such, the conceptual categorizes different levels at which violence must be addressed. In her and theoretical alignment with universal values and rights, locally adapt- work on gender and peace education specifically (though applicable to ed and reconstituted, is an important component of the peace education all forms of violence), she identifies the "organized" level, referring to endeavor. state involvement or negligence to act despite knowledge of violent acts,

Other foundational elements of peace education include the beliefs that: and the "unorganized" level, highlighting violence that occurs in micro- structures, such as families and communities.

1. The process of education can impart in all students social "goods," Galtung (1990) also introduced the idea of "cultural violence," which in this case, the skills and values needed for peace and social justice. often occurs at the 'unorganized' level as per Brock-Utne's (1989) analy-

2. Once given the relevant information and experience, individual sis, to the field of peace education: "Cultural violence makes direct and students can be agents in promoting local, national, and interna- structural violence look, even feel, right-or at least not wrong" (p. 291). tional peace. Cultural violence is exhibited when cultural formations are used to legiti-

mate forms of violence, either direct or indirect. For example, in-group This does not mean that all peace educators believe such transformation norms that legitimize, reinforce, or perpetuate violence against individuals,

happens in all cases; rather, many speak of a "possibility" for transforma- groups, and people within a broader society could be considered cultural tion through education. violence. Assimilationist practices in schools, such as a culturally biased cur- Beyond these unifying concepts, much diversity exists among the politi- riculum that espouses the history and voice of dominant groups over those

cal, theoretical, and methodological orientations of scholars and practitio- who have been subjugated, could be considered a form of cultural violence. ners involved in peace education. The denial of minority representation in the curriculum, in the student A central problematique of peace education is the nature of violence. body, teaching staff, and leadership in diverse schooling contexts could also Comprehensive peace includes the oft-discussed domains of both "nega- be considered forms of cultural violence. A multicultural peace education tive" and "positive" peace that, respectively, comprise the abolition of di- approach attempts to examine the cultural violence of the past and the rect or physical violence and structural and cultural violence, constituted present; it urges the creation of more just and humane relationships and by systematic inequalities and social hierarchies that deprive individuals of social structures in schools, and it espouses the use of multiple narratives as their basic human rights (Galtung, 1969). The structural analysis of notions a means of valuing many truths rather than the unified and singular voice of negative and positive peace is one of the unifying concepts in the field of

peace education despite diverse perspectives of scholars and practitioners of dominant groups (Brantmeier, Aragon, & Yoder 2009). on the whats, hows, whys and wheres of the enterprise. Peace education is not just about the elimination of violence, although

On one level, peace education is a response to different forms of vio- that is a central tenet, but also about creating preventative structures and lence that emerge in distinct contexts. Direct violence can be understood conditions that better align educational policies, ~edagogies, and content as war between nations or groups within societies, fighting between indi- toward peace, social justice, and human rights principles. As such, peace viduals or groups, or domestic violence in the home. Indirect violence, education can be understood as a harmonizing, integrative force used to according to Galtung (1969), can be understood as structural and psy- establish both common ground and affirm diversity in plural contexts. It chological violence. Structural violence is understood here as political, can and should be used to promote positive change, beyond the absence of economic, environmental, and social arrangements that privilege some at direct and indirect violence: "Education for peace can generate new knowl- the exclusion of others. Psychological violence, such as bullying, intimida- edge paradigms, connective relationships, institutional processes, and so- tion, fear of violence, and inter-group tensions, is argued to be part and cia1 structures" (Brantmeier and Lin, 2008, p. xiv). parcel of structural violence. Galtung (1969) maintains, "The violence is In addition to being generative, the pedagogical concerns of peace built into the structure and shows up as unequal power and consequently education emerge as an important consideration. In this regard, Harris as unequal life chances. . . above all, the power to decide over the distribu- (2002) defined peace education as: "Teaching encounters that draw out tion of resources is unevenly distributed" (p. 171). Indirect violence, in- from people their desires for peace and provide them with nonviolent volves inequality and inequity given that limited resources are controlled alternatives for managing conflicts, as well as the skills for critical analysis and distributed by privileging some and excluding others' access, oppor- of the structural arrangements that legitimate and produce injustice and tunity, and choices in life. Peace education scholar Brock-Utne (1989) inequality" (p. 4) .

142 . E. J. BRANTMEIER and M. BAJAJ Peace Education Praxis . 143

Peace education needs to take place through peacefill means. Drawing peace, learning about the power of nonviolence, and discovering their own ". . . out from people their desires for peace" promotes the desire for peace truth and to appreciate the truths of others. Nonviolence education coun- which is necessary to cultivate the "soft" infrastructure of peacebuilding- teracts despair about the possibilities of peace, popular images of violence thoughtflll and emotional engagement to create sensible, peaceful futures. in the media, and focuses on all forms of violence (Harris, 1999, pp. 310). Examining nonviolent alternatives for managing conflicts, such as nonvi+ Not all forms of peace education are represented in this typo log^; howev- lent communication, active listening, and community reconciliation p r s er, what emerges from this exploration of various types of peace education cesses are essential; shifting interactions from "control-based" paradigms to is an linderstanding that there is a need for matching the goals of a particu- "needs-based" paradigms is essential to promote peacebuilding and recon- lar peace education approach with the forms of violence they add]-ess. The ciliation in communities riddled with violence (Davies, 2009). Peace educa- latter draws on Paulo Freire's (1970) exhortation that educators need to tion requires practical communication skills as well as critical thinking skills clearly understand the contexts in which they work, as well as the strategies to understand structures that reproduce various forms of violence. that might be used to achieve various forms of peace. A particular type of

peace education needs to be used in order to eliminate a pal-ticular form of violence found in a given context. To this end, peace education approaches

Doing Peace: Types of Peace Education need to be context-responsive, fluid, and dynamic given the multiple layers of complexity and opportunity in various forms of conflicts.

Harris (1999) describes various types of peace education that intend to eliminate various forms of violence. These types of peace education in- clude the following: global peace education, conflict resolution programs, Peace Education Practice violence prevention programs, development education, and nonviolence education (pp. 308-309). Exploration of the goals, strategies, and violence Peace education can occur in fol-ma1 or non-formal settings, such as addressed by these types of peace education truly expresses the transdis- communities, non-governmental agencies, after-school programs, summer ciplinary approach necessary to eliminate violence and achieve a vibrant, camps, or museums. The approaches that have been identified in schools sustainable peace. For example, global peace education aims to understand are as follows: the "direct" approach to having a separate class or assembly national systems, cultural knowledge, promote multicultural awareness, period for peace or human rights education; the "integrated" approach, and critically study nationalism; it addresses war, interstate rivalry, viola- wherein peace or human rights issues are infused in all subjects through the tion of human rights, ethnic conflicts, terrorism, and tribal warfare (Harris, revision of textbooks, learning goals, and lessons; and the "co-curricular" 1999, pp. 308-309). approach that includes clubs, after-school activities, summer programs, and

Conflict resolution programs address interpersonal violence and aim other initiatives outside of the academic curriculum (as discussed in Bajaj, to: provide mediation, conflict management and communication skills, 2012). In an ideal scenario, all three approaches would work in tandem to promote empathy, and assist individuals to understand conflict styles. provide a holistic orientation toward peace, hurnan rights, and socialjustice Violence prevention programs aim to: counter bias, promote education values. Given limitations of funding, time, and broad support from educa- about stereotypes and prejudice, assist individuals to understand the tional policymakers and administrators, those interested in peace educa- causes of violence, promote personal responsibility, foster socio-emotion- tion may have to start small and slowly scale up. a1 literacy, and raise awareness about the costs of violence (Harris, 1999, In discllssing "doing peace," readers may find it useful to engage with pp 308-309). examples that emerge from peace education scholarship as well as what we

Harris (1999) fiirther elaborates on types of peace education by de- have observed, researched, and participated in over the past decade. The scribing development studies. Development studies address inequalities in efforts described below refer to whole-school approaches, school-based health and wealth, structural violence, environmental destruction, lack of programs, and non-formal approaches, such as summer camps and adult freedoms, positive peace, and environmental destruction. The goals of de- education. velopment studies include ecological security, equitable development mod- The rise in small, alternative public and private schools across the globe has els, promotion of democracy, critical thinking, as well as strategic planning facilitated the introduction of peace issues into the curriculum and practice (Harris, 1999, pp 308-309). Finally, Harris describes nonviolence education of schools. M'hile it is beyond the scope of this chapter to provide a compre- as having the following goals: helping students comprehend the power of hensive review of such schools, we mention a few that have been previously

144 . E. J. BRANTMEIER and M. BAJAJ Peace Education Praxis 145

disrussed by peace education scholars. In her work on a NewYork City public In terms of non-formal education, peace education programs take a high school, peace education scholar Maria Hantzopoulos (201 1, Hantzo number of forms, from adult education groups to summer camps. The poulos and Tyner-Mulling, 2012) describes the school practices and peda- non-governmental organization, Tostan, in Senegal has utilized human gogy of Humanities Preparatory High School. She highlights the alternative rights education in community-based settings to raise awareness and seek restorative justice approach to school discipline, the comprehensive portfo alternatives to the practice of female genital cutting (Gillespie & Melching, lio based assessment evaluations as opposed to high-stakes examinations, the 2010). They note that efforts of outsiders have largely been unsuccessfi~l, school meetings and democratic decision-making processes, and the inten- but that after utilizing participatory methodology and introducing content sive courses that students can take related to human rights, peace studies, and on peace and human rights, community members devised strategies to cre- critical analysis of social inequalities.' Monisha Bajaj (2009, 2012) has looked ate new kinship networks in which uncut girls would still be considered at small (usually private, but often low-cost) schools in Zambia and India that marriageable. Seeds of Peace (which began in 1993 with Israeli and Pal- incorporate values of non-violence, social justice, and active citizenship into estinian youth and then expanded to include youth from India, Pakistan, project-based learning and participatory methodologies, which have resulted Afghanistan, Cyprus, the Balkans, and the United States) is a summer carnp in the creation of close-knit reciprocal bonds in these educational spaces. that has received considerable attention (and has been replicated through Peace education scholar Zvi Bekerman (2009), highlights the promises and programs internationally) that brings together youth from conflict areas to challenges of integrated bilingual (Hebrew-Arabic) schools in Israel that seek critically examine stereotypes, media, and historical constructions of con- to foster mutual understanding among students. While he notes that the dual flict (van Woerkern, 2004). The program boasts a network of over 5,000 par- teacher model of one Jewish Israeli and one Arab Israeli teacher per class has ticipants. Whether in schools, universities, or out-of-school settings, peace transformative potential for the individuals who must confront their stereo education is enacted, redefined, and adapted in myriad ways but tethered types daily, he also finds that adults (teachers and parents) often reify group together by the common goals of building respect for difference, engaging identities that students have not yet learned, undermining the broader social in nonviolent conflict transformation, and instilling values of peace and goals of such institutions (Bekerman, 2009). Bekennan also collaborates with

human rights. scholars from Cyprus, Northern Ireland, South MI-ica, and elsewhere to ex- amine peace education amidst ethnic conflict.

Several authors also provide examples of programs that operate within Emergent Trends: Critical Peace Education schools in collaboration with non-governmental organizations that seek to infuse peace and human rights issues into the school environment. Critical approaches offer peace educators and researchers the contextu- For example, Linda Lantieri and Janet Patti (1996) discuss the Resolving a1 and conceptual resources for understanding the structural impediments Conflict Creatively program that operates in thousands of U.S. schools

to advancing the possibility and promise of peace education in diverse that has led to nonviolent methods for addressing school conflicts. Glob- locales across the globe. Rather than status quo reproduction, critical ap- al Kids, a New York City non-profit, works in dozens of schools offering proaches in peace education and peace research aim to empower learners field trips and workshops and classes on global issues, human rights, and

peace issues for inner city high school students. In India, Bajaj has ex- as transformative change agents (Freire, 1970) who critically analyze power amined a human rights education program in thousands of schools that dynamics and intersectionalities among race, class, gender, ability/disabil- trains teachers, creates textbooks, and offers a three-year course on hu- ity, sexual orientation, language, religion, geography, and other forms of man rights to middle-school level students (Bajaj, 201 1) . In Colombia, stratification. a unique program, Aulas en Pm ("Classrooms in Peace," Chaux, 2007) Our own work in teacher education (Brantmeier 2007, 2011) and in- identifies primary school students who exhibit emotional problems or vio- ternational education (Bajaj 2008; 2009; 2010), respectively, has high- lent behavior and places them in intensive and integrated slnall group ses- lighted the role for critical theory in peace education research, namely: sio~ls with trained facilitators, enhancing the ability of schools to address developing empirical projects that-through design, implementation, and and transform such behavior. At the university level, many peace studies presentation-seek to be in "solidarity with a justice-oriented community, programs and initiatives exist across the globe: Turkey (Mandry, 2012), expos[ing] the forces that prevent individuals and groups from shaping the the former Yugoslavia (Wisler, 2010), Kenya (Macharia, 2004), and the decisions that crucially affect their lives" (Denzin & Lincoln, 2000, p. 282). United States (Ndura, 2007; McCarthy, 2008). Central to these projects is a dynamic and relational understanding of the

146 . E. J. BRANTMEIER and M. BAJAJ Peace Education Praxis 147

role of human agency in influencing structural forms of violence that limit Institutionalizing the Field of Peace Education the full realization of human rights by all people (s).

In our work, we query: Is all peace education by its very nature "criti- Over the past several decades, many gains have been made toward in- cal"? If so, what distinguishes "critical" peace education from "regular" stitutionalizing peace education into mainstream educational theory and peace education? What benefits might accrue from applying a critical lens practice. For example, the establishment of the UNESCO Peace Education to issues of peace and education? As a result of these questions, we co-ed- Prize, alongside the decade from 2001 to 2010 being named the "Interna- ited a special issue of the Journal ofpeace Education in 201 1 on the praxis, tional Decade for a Culture of Peace and Nonviolence for the Children possibility, and politics of critical peace education to further elucidate of the World," provided global momentum to local peace education en- the semantic shift we advocate towards critical peace education (Bajaj & deavors. In 2004, the Journal ofpeace Education was established through the Brantmeier, 201 1). Peace Education Commission of the International Peace Research Associa-

Scholars of critical peace education resist the forces towards regula- tion. The Journal ofpeace Education has provided a forum for the increased tion, universalization, and the development of rigid norms and standards generation and dissemination of empirical and theoretical research in the for what peace education ought to be; instead, we argue that contextual- field and for greater global scholarly engagement. Peace education special ized forms of peace education are those that are engaged in constant and interest groups of the American Educational Research Association and the meaningful conversation with other fields and traditions of critical inquiry. Comparative and International Education Society continue to legitimate Rooted in similar commitments to more just and equitable societies, such peace education as a field for robust inquiry, bringing together peace ed- counter-positioning can push peace education to be more flexible, respon- ucation scholars and educators to discuss the challenges and opportuni- sive, and relevant in discussions of educational policy, teacher education, ties of researching and doing peace. Established in 2007, a book series on and grounded practice within and beyond schools. "Critical peace educa- Peace Education with Information Age Publishing has resulted in five new tion" is pushed towards the particularistic, seeking to enhance transforma- books-with more books being written. These combined efforts have fur- tive agency and participatory citizenship, and open to resonating in distinct ther legitimated and institutionalized peace education as a meaningful and ways with the diverse chords of peace that exist across fields and cultures. relevant mode of teaching, learning, and academic inquiry.

Rather than tending towards the universal and si~nplifying peace edu- cation into a downloadable, one-size-fits-all template, critical peace edu- cation scholars raise a host of questions for the educator committed to Toward Closure critical inquiry:

The purpose of this brief overview and the select annotated bibliography What do critical approaches to education and social theory lend in that follows is to connect educators and researchers with notable literature terms of insights vis-A-vis the possibilities for peace, nonviolence, in the field of peace education. We acknowledge that both time and space and social justice in classrooms and beyond? constrain a thorough, exhaustive literature of the field of peace education M'hat possibilities and insights exist in the interstices of peace and interrelated subfields of education. Others have provided select bibli- education and critical pedagogy, anti-oppression and postcolonial ographies that may also be useful (Harris, 2009; Harris & Morrison, 2003; pedagogy, and/or critical multiculturalism in global contexts? Cannon, 2011). Limited space limits our addressing the ~ l e t h o r a of sub- * How can policy actors misuse peace language in ways that under- fields of education that either indirectly or directly connect to the primary mine the larger goals and promise of peace education? purpose of peace education-to promote nonviolent, alternative pathways How can peace educators better examine divergences between to alleviate and prevent various forms of violence situated in nested con- theory and practice? texts locally and globally. Be that as it may, the selection we have chosen to In what ways can local understandings of peace inform how global ef- highlight in the accompanying annotated bibliography (see below) touches forts overlay existing debates, tensions, and relationships of power? the surface of an ocean of conceptual bases and examples of practice in the

field of peace education that have emerged in the past several decades (and, Ultimately, a critical peace education is not about finding definitive an- most notably, the past decade). The annotated bibliography is organized

swers, but rather letting each new question generate new forms and pro- around scholarship that has contributed theoretical/conceptual/method- cesses of inquiry. ological rigor to the field in recent years. We also have chosen texts which

~~~~

\

148 E. J . BRANTMEIER and M. BAJAJ Peace Education Praxis 149

we expose our.undergraduate teacher education students, and graduate 21st century: A nau generation ofscl~olars (pp. 349-37.5). (;rcenwich, (ZT: Infor- student researchers to on a regular basis. Two sections, Theory and Praxis, rrration Age I'ul~lishing. conlprise the annotated bibliography. Both sections will be of interest to I{rdntmcicr, E. J . (2007). (:onnccting inner and orrrcr pcacc: Uuddhist ~nedi~a t ion educators, researchers, and perhaps activists; however, the praxis section in tcgratcd with pcacc education. Irfoctis Pax, l (2 ) . 120-1 57. will be of more interest to those interested in "doing peace." It is our hope 13t-antmcicr, E. J., 8c I,in, J . (2008). Introdrtclion: Toward I'orging a positive, trans- that the overview above and the resources below facilitate an introduction formalivc paradigm lor peace c d ~ i c a ~ i o n . In I, . .~.,l3rantniei~~, 8c (:. Hr~thn, (:. and deeper understanding for those interested in a field that we believe (Eds.), Tran,sform,in,g education for peace ( p p xiii-xviii.). (;rccnwich, (:T: Infor- holds tremendous promise and possibility for transformative educational n ~ a t i o r ~ Age 1'~rhlishing. scholarship and practice. Bran~mcicr, E. .I., Aragon, A., 8c Modcr, 13. (2009). M~il~icr l lu~ral pcacc education:

Enlpowcring prc-hcrvicc teachers toward a paradigm of social .j(rsticc beyond colorhlindncss. In E. Ndr~ra-0116draogo. 8c K. Ams~cr, (Eds.), B~~ildingcultztres

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT of peace: Tronsclisciplinary uoices of Itope and action (pp. 8-29). Englarld: (:am- bridge Scholars I'rcss.

13rock-Utnc, H. (1989). Fernirrist perspectives on peace and peace education. New York, We would like to thank Charlotte Haynes for her imporrant assistance with 1'c.t-gdlno~~ I'rcss. this chapter. (Zannon, S, (;. (201 1). Think, core, a& Teaching for a peacefi~l future. ((:harlot~c, N(Z:

1nli)rnlatiorl Age I'uhlishing. (:haux, E. (2007). Aulas ert Par A n ~ ~ ~ l t i c o m p o n c r i ~ program li)r the pro~notion 01. NOTE pcacelill t-clarionships and citizenship c o ~ ~ ~ p c ~ c n c i c s . Conflict Resolution Qztar-

terly, 25( 1 ), 79-86, 1. For an in-depth and in~cnsivc look a~ innowtivc puhlic schools in New York I)avics, J . (2009). Pm,entin,g and transforming societal ronjict: Partners in con/lict and

City that utilize social justice principles, please see Hant/0~011lo~, M. & A. partners in peocebuilding. L,cct~rrc conducted from Malaviya ( :cn~rc Sor I'cacc Tynct--M~rllings (201 2). Critical sniall scllools: Bqond privatization i.11 Nao York Kcsearch Ilanaras Hind11 Uuivcrsi~y, India. Octohct- 1.5. City ec-lucational re/orrri. (:har-lot~c, N(:: Inlomiation Age 1'1thlishing. I)en/irl, N. K., 8c I,incoln, \! S. ( 1998). The landscape of resenrcl~: Theories

and i ss~~es . Tho~lsand Oaks, (:A: SAGE 1'~lhlishcrs. Frcirc, 1'. (1970). Pedagogy ofthe oppressed. New I'ork, NY: (:ontinltr~rn. REFERENCES (;altung, 1 . ( 1969). Violence, peace, and peace I-cscarch. Journal of Peace Researcl~,

6 ( 3 ) , 167-191. I%ajaj, M. (2008). "(:riticaln pcacc education. In M. I<?j?j (Ed.), Encyclopedia ofpeace (;altllng, J. (1 990). (:ultrlr-a1 violence. Joi~rnal of Peace Researclr, 27(3), 29 1-305.

education (pp. 13.5-146). ( : h a r l o ~ ~ c , N.<;.: 1nli)rrnation Age I'uhlishing. (;illespie, I)., 8c Mclching, M. (2010). The TransSornia~ivc power ol'dcniocracy and I%+jaj, M. (2009). 1 have hig things planned lor my luturc: The li~nits a ~ ~ d possihilicics hllnlall righLs i n nonfi)rmal education: The case of Tostan. Adult Edz~cation.

of' 1ransli)t-n~ativc agency in %amhian schools. Carripare, 39(4), 5.5 1-.568. Quarterly 60(.i), 477-498. Ihj:!j, M. (2010). (:onjccl~u-cs o n pcacc education and (;andhian s~rldies: M c ~ h o d , Hant70po~~los, M. (201 1). Ins~i tu~ional izi t~g critical pcacc education in pr~hlic ins~ituriorial dcvelop~ncrr~, and globalization. Jountal of Peace Education, 7(1), schools: A case for coniprchcr~sivc irnplcmctlta~ion. Journal of Peace Ed~~mtiorr,

I3ajaj, M. (201 1). Scl~oolingfor social change: The rise and inlpact ofl~,w~rr,ari rights eduro- a(.?), 225-242. lion in Ir~dio. New York, NY: (:on~irluum I'uhlishing. H2u~tzoporllos, M., 8c Tyncr-Mrlllings, A. (201 2). Critical small scl~ools: Bqond priva-

fiajai. M. (2012). Human righu cduca~ion in small schools in India. Peace Rmrial~, tization in ,Vmr York Citr edltcational reform. (;harlo~tc, N(:: 1nli)rnia~ion Age 24( 1 ), 6-1 3. I'uhlishing.

I3aj+j, M., 8c Ilrantn~cicr, E. (201 1). In~roduction to the special issue or^ thc politics, Harris, 1. M. (2002). (:onccp~(ral ~lndcrpinnings of pcacc cduca~ion. In (;. SalonlOn praxis, and possihili~ics of' critical pcacc cdt~cation. Jounlal ofpeare EdrLcation, 8c 13. Ncvo (Eds.), Peace education,: The concept, principles, and practices around the 8(3), 22 1-224. (pp. 15-26). I,orldon, England: 1,awrcncc Erl hartn~ AssociaLes.

I3ckcrtnan, %. (2009). Identity vcrsrrs pcacc: Identity wins. Harr,ard E d ~ ~ c a t i ~ ~ a l Re- Harris, I . M., 8c Mot-rison, M. 1.. (2003). Peace education (2nd ed.). Jcfkrson, N(:: vim: 79( 1 ) , 74-83, McFarland 8c (:onipany

Ilnu~tn~cict; E. J. (201 I). Toward rnainstrcatning critical pcacc ctlucation ill U.S. Harris, I. M. (2009). A sclcct hibliogr.aphy li)r p a c e cdtlcarion, Peace &Y Cl~ange, teacher education. In (1. S. Malot~, 8c 13. I'orlilio, (Eds.), Criticalpedagogy in tile 34(4), 57 1-576.

152 . E. J. BRANTMEIER and M. BAJAJ Peace Education Praxis 153

is devolcd to analyses of slr~rctural o r cul~ural forms of violence. Norlcthc- less, llle book olTcrs numerous perspeclives on the psychology of war and thc hislorical and cul~ural glorilication of n~asculini~y. Focr~sing on he United

leaching pcace. A crilique of thc current violence-ridden schooling system, i~ States, Noddings furlhcr discusscs the dilTercnccs bctwccri palriotism and moves toward practical advice in regards to peacc pedagogy and auempts to cosnlopolitanisnl, arguing lhal the fornrcr can Icad lo cducalional systcms inspire readers toward a more hopeful fulurc. I'eace studies syllabi, an excel- foslcring hatrcd in ~irncs of war. She also discusses pacilisnl, war, and pcacc lenl bibliography, and a resource guidc are included. nrovcmcnts, a r g ~ ~ i r l g thal women's cxpcricnccs and val~rcs need to contribute

LO larger visions and conccplions of pcacc. Noddings concludcs by calling Howlctt, C. F., & Harris, 1. H. (2010). Books, not bombs: Teachingpeace since tile dawn of for a Illore inter-disciplinary approach lo American cducalion, arguing that

the republic. Charlotte, NC: Informalion Age Publishing. s ~ L l d c n ~ s should engage in the s t ~ ~ d y of war and peace iss~rcs bolh from an Wrictcn for pcacc scholars, practi~ioncrs, and st~rdenls, this hook traces the intcllcc~ual and cniolional pcrspcclive. historical development of peace education in thc Uniled States from incep lion through the early 21st century. Differing in focus from typical books on Riirra, C. (2008). Un,ited States foreign policy and the prospects for peace education. New pcace cduca~ion, this book examines the evolution of peace ideology that was York, NY: McFarland. in opposition LO war, and for the promotion of social.jus~icc by examining Mirra cxplorcs the corrclalion hclwccn militarism in U.S. foreign policy pcace education en'orts of he following individuals and institutions: Elihu a n d pcacc education. Tlrc a ~ r l h o r s i tua~cs pcace education practices amidst 13urrit1, Alfrcd Love, femalc peace educators at the Lakc Mohonk Confercnc- larger narratives and constr~rctions of peace and war anlids1 palriotism and cs, Jane Adams, Fannie Fern Andrews, Andrew Oarnegic, Edwin Ginn, I,ucia internalional rclalions. Mirra looks a1 U.S. foreign policy in hislorical pcr- Trlrc, Ames Mcad, Nicholas Murray Buller, John Ilewcy, the American Friends spcctive, critiq~ring ~ h c <:old L'ar policies of frec market expansion thro~rgh Servicc Commitlce, Brookwood Labor Collcgc, Merle Curti, Elisc Boulding, multi-nalional corporations at the cosl of a gcnuinc concern for human and I3etty Reardon. The book culminatcs in an examination of thc diffuse

security. H e argues for nonviolence as an ethic lhat should undcrpi11 U.S. nalurc of peace education in a nuclear world. Thc locus o n history-making forcigrl policy. The abuse of human r i g h ~ s as part and parcel of li)reign people and hisloric institu~ions highlights he imporlance of both individual policy arnidsl misinlormalion campaigns by government aclors is also dis- initiative and institutional cornmitmenl for promoting positive, peaceful cussed as a to peace education. Mirra f~r r lhcr tliscusscs the In- cia1 changc. terl~atiorlal C:riminal (Iourt as pcace cducalor in lhal it holds the ~ r o n r i s e lor a democratic and ~uliversal slandard-bearer dcspitc the United States' h4c(;lynn, C., 8c Uekcrman, %. (Eds.). (2007). Addressing ethn,ic conflict through peace ~ r ~ w i l l i n ~ n ~ s s lo adhere to ils jurisdiclion. T h e aullror u l ~ i n l a t e l ~ argucs education: Zntern,ational perspectives. New York, NY. Palgrave Macmillan.

McGlynn, C., Bckcrn~an, Z., Zembylas, M., 8c Gallagher, T. (Eds.). (2009). Peace edu- h)r nonvio]encc as a core value and "suggests thal a holislic cosmology of cation in conflict and post-conflict societies: Comparative perspectives. Two Volumes. Ilumili~y and empathy can rcfashiorl he United S~a lcs ' rolc in thc world" New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. (p. 138). In lernls o r classroom pracliccs, Mirra cnthraccs cri~ical pedagogy

and crilical analytical skills. Thcsc two volumes bring together comparative perspeclives on peacc cdu- calion in conflict settings across the globe. Drawing lessons from distincl contexts, thc volume cxamines co-cxistencc camps, integrated schools, and university-level pcace initiatives from diverse locales such as Israel, Cyprus, Northern Ireland, the Balkans, the Ilominican Republic, Burundi, and South Africa. Taken together, thc volumes o1Pcr insights into the challengcs to and Andrzcjcwski, J., I{altodano, M., 8c Syrncos, I.. (2009). Socialjustice, peace, and enr~iron,- possibililics for peacc cducation programs and policies lhat seek lo mitigale ,

mental educatiort,: Tran,sformative stavdards. New York, Nk:. Roullcdgc. ethnic lensions and promote reconcilialion in post-conflicl seltings. Wrillcn for rescarchcrs and educators, lhis book explores the linkages be-

tween and amongst socialjus~icc, peacc cducalion, and environmental edu- Noddings, N. (201 1). Peace education: Horu rue come to love and hate ruar. New York, NY: ca~ion . Scvcral 111o11ght-provoking essays cxplorc ~ h c concepts and practices

[:ambridge Universily Press. of trarlsformativc education. Edilors and authors appropriale the standards nlovclncrlt to criiique powcr, donrinalion, and oppression; and in doing so, lhcy envision lihcralion and the rig111 for all humans, species, and ccosyslems or, tttc planet to live and prosper. lnspired hy rllc Alaska Standards for <:ultur-

violence," s~rch as aggression, war, and militarism, and thus, little of the book ally liesponsive Sclrools, chapters include cxaniinalion of indigenous cultural

~ - -~ -~~ ~

I

154 . E. J. BRANTMEIER and M. BAJAJ Peace Education Praxis . 155

(;cvinson, S. Ham~nond, I)., 8c Thompson, P. ((2006). In,crease tlle peace: A program for lice cdr~cation ~l i rough the l'ramc\Jt)rk 01' rransl'orniativc standards. ending sclzool rriolence. I'or~sniouth, NH: Hcincr~iann Publishers.

blrittcn lor rniddlc and high school cducalors, this book provides DV1)- I%rantmcicr, E. J., ,ling, I,., 8c Miller, J. 1'. (20 1 1 ). Spirituality, r~l igion, and peace educa- based lessons to walk s t t~dcnts ~ h r o u g h thc tangled cnlotional responses and

tion. (:harlotlc, N(;: InlOrmaiion Age I'uhlishing. polenrial sOr posilivc change cncoun~ercd in con l l i c~ situations in schools. Writtcn li)r cduca~ors , students, and interested researchers, this hook ex- Sludcni and coniml~nity mcmhcr interviews and real world ~ o l c - ~ l a ~ i n g scc- plorcs cdlrcation l i ~ r inncr- and cornln~lnal pcacc througli vario~ls religious narios inviic teachers to engage ~ t ic i r s tudcno in skill dcvclopmcnt ~ h a r and wisdom ~raditions: (:onl'ucianism, Judaism, Islamic Sulis~n, (:hristianily, hOpcl.tllly will end and prevent various l'orms of violence prevalent in U.S. Q~~akcrisni , Hinduism, Tihcian I%uddhisni, and indigenous spir i tual i~~. ParL schools today. I1 01' the hook explores wisdoni Lraditions rooted in inncr exploration and c o n ~ c l l l p l a l i ~ ~ practices. ()vcrdll, a rango 01' topics arc cxplorcd: I)aoisnl and I.in,J., I%raritn~cicr, E.J., 8c B r ~ ~ h n , (:. (2008). Transformir~g education for pear^. Char- narrative inquiry, I:! Step I'rograms li)r I'cacc, (;andhi, deep ecology, and l o ~ t c , N(:: Inl'ormalion Age I'ublishing. niullicultural teacher education; and wisdom-based learning in teacher cdu- \?\rrillcn lor peace rescarchcrs and pcacc educators, his book conrains a cation. (:11lt~tral awareness and understanding arc li)stcrcd through an cxplo- c~)mhina t i~) l l of enlpirical s t ~ ~ d i c s r c l a ~ c d LO pcacc education ti)r cross-~~11- ralion via lhc insights ol'aurtiors who arc lypically practitioners (11' various lllral I~nderstanding as well as theoretical niusings on the challcngc:~ and traditions they write about. prolniscs of peace education. Various chapters f'ocl~s o n peace cduc:ation

elTorts in rhc li)llowing locales: the Unitcd Scales, China, Japan, ~ h c Israeli (:annon, S. G. (201 1). Thin,k, care, act: Teacl~in,gfor a peaceful jc tz tr~. (:harlot~c, N(:: a n d I>alcstinian colttext, (;crnlany, thc (:zcch Kcpublic, India, I'akis~an,

1nli)rniation Age Publishing. and (:anada. (:haplcrs in Par1 1 l'oc~ls on: photo-voice 111clhodo~ogy in an exchange helwcen lrliddlc school studcnls in the United SLdlcs (111diarla)

Wri~tcn l'or educators, (his book blends theory and practice w i ~ h a Socus o n and (:hilla; M\tslim exchange studcnrs i r ~ the United States-pos~ 9/11; praxis. The central argunicnl ol' this rcllcctivc hook is that teachers sho\lld in~crc t~ l tu ra l prol'cssional dcvc lo l~n~cnl l'or ~cachers; building cmpathy li)r advance ~ h c causes 01' peace education in their classroonis to promore a peace in a U.S. Midwcslcrn high school; a pcacc education aclion prc?jccl nlorc secure world hascd o n ,jus~icc and human rights chrougli conscious- [i)r lil'th graders; peace education l'or s t~ ldcn l ~cacl icrs in .lapan; pcacclul ness raising, caring,. and engaging in action toward change. The a ~ ~ t h o r [[ti- cOcxis~cncc in an Israeli alld I'alcstinian context; design conversation as a l i x s an crnpowcrnic~il model and provides alnplc and practical idcas 1'0r modc of pcaccbllilding; peacebuilding in cyberspace; and comparati\.c irllc- leaching pcacc at the primary, ~niddlc, and secondary Icvcls. (:tiaptcr topics grdlion of' the (:ulturc of' I'cacc I'rograni in India and,Japan. T h e rcniairiing incllrde: crirical thinking, media literacy, critical imagining, school sakty, cllaptcrs li)c\ls on : the polilics of'icachi~>g peace, the pi~l'alls and promises lilcrar~lrc li)r crnpalhy dcvclopmcnt, creating local and global caring coni- Ol'pcacc education cvalllation, rcconnccring c d ~ ~ c a t i o n Lo ils social purpos- munitics, cngagcd c i ~ i z e ~ ~ s l i i p projccrs, S L I I ~ C I I L govcr~ia~icc, dchalc, Model cs, integrating pcace education in milicary warl'arc training, and dcvcloping CTN, a n d orhcr social action projects. (lhap~erp conrain a p l c ~ h o r a ol'photo- a global ethic of love and reconcilialion. graphs that illustrate conccpts and practices in action. The hook inclttdes a very liclpl '~~l appendix hat includes all annocatcd bibliography ol'rcsollrccs l,anlicri, I,., & l'a~li,J. (1996). W a g i n g p p n c ~ i n our scl~oo1.s. l%oslon, MA: I%cacon I'rcss. l'or h o ~ h lcachcrs and s ludcn~s. Thcrc is also a l i s ~ ofpict l l rc hooks l'or peace Wrillcn [i)r cducalors, this book provides a li)undalion 1i)r a new visiorl Of and global awareness. cducalion based on tcachirlg peace and creating peaceable classrooms. Fo-

cused on teaching co~illicl resolution skills and creative incl~lsivc schooling Finley, 1,. 1,. (20 1 1 ). Br~ildirlg a peacefrtl society: Creative in,tegration of peace edr~catior,. '

cnvi ron~ncn~s r h a ~ value diversity and ct~ltural conipcrcncc, chapters explore <:harlotre, N(:: lnl'orniation Age I'uhlisliing. the possihilitics of pcacc pedagogy, mediation in schools, and pcacc in our b'rittc~i l'or ed~rcalors who work o u ~ s i d c the c.]assroom in suc11 cnlilics as conimunirics. the U.S. criminal,justice sysrcm, social services, o r others social i n s ~ i l u t i o n ~ , this book I ' ~ ~ ~ i d a n i e n ~ a l l y critiques doniinator n~odc ls that arc ranlpant in Tinlpson, \V. M., Rrant~ricier, E. .I., Kccs, N., (:avanagh, T, Mc(;lynn, C;., 8c ~ d u r a - these arenas. The central argument is r h a ~ pcacc cducat io~i nlrlst address OuCdraogo, E. (2009). 147 tips for tpaclting peace and r~conciliation. Madison, both structural a r ~ d institutional violence by qucslioning doniiria~or niodcls WI: Atwood I'uhlishing. and 1ransli)rming 1hcn1 into partnership models governed hy crcativily, col- For cdllcators, this hook atlcnlpts to provide practical, uscablc [caching laboration, a r ~ d cooperalion. T h e hook constitlrtcs hotti a criliquc and a call I i ) " p c ~ ) l l l c working toward peace and reconcilialion in schools lo action. and conlnlllni~y-bascd conlcxts. The various "tips" arc set O I I ~ 10 build bridg-

156 . E. J. BRANTMEIER and M. BAJAJ . Peace Education Praxis . 157

cs alllong pcacc cdrrcalors, pcacc scholars, and pcacc activists and they are education amidst a culture of violence. Editor Ian Harris Ilighlights rooted in the ~hcoretical and conccpcr~al world ol'pcace and reconciliation thal peace theorists identify ~ h r c c approaches to peace-"peace through cd~rcation. Shorl, pithy, and rich with personal conlnlcntary, lllc following slrength, and pcacc-building" (p. I ) . Hc notes that pcacc topics and nlorc arc explored through 147 uscable teaching strategies: l1n- through strenglh in a school conlext relies on thrcals of punish men^ to dctcr dcrstanding lhc licld of peace cducalion, seeing the i ~ ~ t c r c o n n c c t i o ~ l s a ~ n i d violence, whereas peacemaking and peacebuilding approaches lrsc ~ i o n v i c ~ crll~ural and hiotlivcrsity, understanding types and Sornls of conllict and re- lent coIr1mu~~ication skills to resolve conflicts in creative ways. As prcvcnta- storativc practices ainlcd at individrral and conlnlunal harmony, tlcvelop- tive and proaclivc stratcgics, pcacc education-roo~cd in peaccn~aking and ing en~otional inlelligcncc, building positive clinia~cs and tnrst, pron1oting peacebuildirlg-seeks to preempt conllicls from escalating inlo violencc. Thc creative engagement in pcacc and reconcilialion processes, building cur- a l l t h ~ ) r s in this issrle cxplorc vario~ls dimensions and cthical consider- ricrllrrm, and understanding c h a ~ i g c for the purpose of pronloting peace aliolls of peace education, ranging l iom thc impact of surveillance cameras to and rcconcilialion.

community building, and from teacher c d ~ ~ c a t i o n and teachers as legal actors lo utilizalion of lhc arts in pcacc cdr~cation.

Special Issues of Journals

Alonso, M.C. (Ed.). (2009). I'cace cducation [Special Issuc] . Peace and c l ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ , 34(4). Special Issue on I'cacc Ed~rcal io~l , Gucsl edited by bligucl(:. Alonso

The following films are ones we utilize in our higher education peace This special issric li)cuscs on peace education praclicc in university and education courses and may be of interest to those seeking multi-media re- school se l l ing~ with an emphasis o n peacc action a ~ ~ d practice. Articles cover issues of disarnramcnt, sus~ainal,ilily, g c ~ l d c r equity, applied ethics, solidarity, sources to use with learners. second language acquisition, and international solidarity projects in schools. T h e divcrsc cxpcricnces narraled in the collcction of articles highligllt the James, S., Koclowi~x, A. (Producers), & Janlcs, S. (1)irec~or). (201 1 ) . The Interrupters range ofwhat constitrrtcs pcace edrrcation and oflcr insighls inlo how to "do" C:hicago, 11,: Kartcmquin Films. peace education in addition to new ways o f ~ h i n k i n g a l ~ o u l ils role in the (pri- This film p r ~ l i l c s lhrcc "violence in~crruplers" who scck Lo r c d ~ ~ c c vioknce n~arily U.S.) educational system. in C:hicago, T h e lilm cclllcrs on he world ol' CeaseFire, an initiative slartcd by

the (:hicago I'rc!jec~ for Violcnce Prevention. T h e Violence lntcrruplcr pro- I$?j?j, M., 8c Rrantnlcier, E. J. (Eds.). (201 1 ) . Critical pcacc education [Special Is- granl was scarlcd in 2004 and ~ h c filni traces the work of individuals previously

s ~ e ] . Jomnal ofpeace Ed~ccatiorr 8(3) . involved in violcncc who now seek LO educate young men and wolncn about Thc purposc ofthis special issue is to givc voice LO thc various tensions, contra- the ncgalivc implications ol'violencc. dictions, and sites of learning r~ndcr-thcorizcd in pcace cduca~ion literature thus fir. T h e articles engage thcmcs of nonviolence, social jt~stice, empow- i Zinlblaist, J., Mochary, M. (Producers 8c 1)ircctors). (200.5). Favela Rising. New York, crmcnt, jlrsticc and capabilities, and indigenous ways of knowing. 1: qach ar- iW Sidc~rack Films. tick contributes insights into what peace cducalinn can learn from dill'crcnt

This lilm centers on the work ofAnderson Si, a comrnr~ni~y leader in Brazil, liclds and traditions as well as what it can on'cr. T h c settings incllltlc public who used to be a drug ~ralfickcr. Thc film dcmonstralcs how his organization dialogue, secondary schools in ~ h c United States andJordan, teacher train-

$ ((;rupo ( :ul t~~ral ASroKcggae) seeks to provide young people in the h c l a s ing workshops in Hawaii, and early childllood classroonls in New Zcaland. k with an awareness a b o ~ l l thcir cu l~urc , m~lsical training and community as an While ~ h c topics covcrcd range I'ron~ philosophical and dialogical inqlriry

to quali~ativc research in teacher training and classrooms to fran~cworks li,r , altcrna~ivc to drug-running and violence.

policy-sctti~lg, the threads t l ~ a l connect thcsc divcrsc picccs arc their produc- tive engagement with he politics, possibilities, praxis, peril, paradoxes, and Hccht, A. (Producers), Finc, S. (l)ircclor), 8c Finc, A. N. (Dircc~or) . (2007). War/ ~rltilnatcly, ~ h c promise, of pcacc ctlucation. i Dance. 1'0s Angclcs, (:A: Finc Filnls.

This lilm focuses 011 thrcc children who live in a r c f ~ ~ g c c camp in Northern Harris, I. M. (Ed.). (2008). Voices for pcacc: Educators respond to the Virgina Tccll Uganda alld arc par1 01' a musical group al lhcir school. Highlighting thc

sllootings [Special Issue] . Harr~ard Edlrcntional Rmiew, 77(3). violcnce caused by the 1,ord's Resistance Army, including thcir rccruitmcllt 01' In chis moderated synlposirrn~, pcacc educators respond to the Virginia Tech child soldiers, the film lraccs lhcsc young people's cxpcricnccs with healing, shootings through conceptual, analytical, and prac~ice-hascd rel lcct io~~s o n school, and their participation in a national nu~s ic conlpclition.

158 . E. J. BRANTMEIER and M. BAJAJ Peace Education Praxis . 159 a

Avni, R. (I'roducer), & Bacha, J. (Director). (2009). B Z L ~ T Z L S . Washington, 1).(:.: i;, ~ ~ ) ~ ~ l ~ AS,.^^^, tilc Solidarity rnovcmcllt in I'oland, and ttle dcnlocrac~ move- Jus t Vision. lricnt in Chile. This lilm showcascs the nonviolent resistance of the residents of the Palestin- ian town o f Butlrus during the early 2000s to resist thc building of a barrier (a wall) by Israeli security forccs inside their village, displacing families and de- online Curricular Resources stroying agl-icultural lands. Utilizing nonviolent stratcgics and cngaging the solidarity oS Israeli pcacc activists, the film demonstratcs a successful peacc pcacc l jcarning <:cntcr OP Indianapolis. [2012]. llctricvcd June 2.5, 2012, I‘r0m and justice eflhrt. ~lltp://~w~.pcacc~carning~cnter.o~g/h~~~~~

TIle pcacc lJcarning (:cntcr o r Intlia~lapolis provides pcacc education Pro- Ryan, C. (I1roducer & Director), Wcimberg, (;. (Producer & Director). (2008). So6 gl.aIn,llillg P ~ ) ~ - c~ i ldrc l l , and tccris in natural cnvironmcnts while Pro-

dims ofCon,science. Ncw York, NY PI3S/POV. nlOting nonviolence, untlcrsrandil~g oP din'crence, and lcatlcrship skills. This Lilm highlights the cxpericnces ofeight U.S. soldiers in the Iraq war, Pour oPwhom refilsc to kill based o n thcirconviction that killing is wrong. Thc lilm ~ ~ ~ i ~ ) ~ ~ ~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ t i ~ , ~ ~ l , Sciclltilic, and C ~ ~ l ~ ~ r r a l Organization (:ulturc of l'cacc. cxplorcs the morality oP war and killing, and thc inllucncc such bcliels have (2012). l<ctricvcd ~ , [ n c 2.5, 2012, Prorn: http://www3.~lncsc~).~)rg/i~c~/ on thcir livcs. hi^ website an overview OP what thc C:trlr~rrc ()I' l'cacc I'rograrn is,

as as signilicant rcsollrccs [or envisioning and implcmcnting Pcacc Pro- I,awrence, S. (l'roduccr), Luisa-Baml,ale, M., Brerrler, G. (Directors). (201 1 ). Sarah- grams at the local Icvcl.

bah. New York, IW Worncn Make Movies. . This lilnl follows Sisrcr Fa, a Scnegalese hip-hop artist, who was a survivor of xo te : ~h~~~ a r e far too many on-line resources available t o list he r e . We lcnialc genital cutting that occurred whcn she was a girl. She decides to use encouraSe you t o b e critical consumers of resollrces available. her celebrity and her music to scart a campaign to stop the prac~ice. Thc film P~llows her efforts, and shows how the arts can be a Sorcc for social activism and inspire change.

Mc(;innis, E. I. (Producer), & I'alos, A. 1.. (201 1). Precious Knorukdge. Dos Vatos P r e ductions, the Independent Telajision Senlice (ITVS), Arizona Public Media, and 1.atino P ~ ~ b l i c Broadcasting. This Lilnl discusses the successPul Mexican American Studies program in Tucson, Arizona high schools that have cngagcd at-risk youth with cultur- ally rclcvant pedagogy and contcnt. As thc program comcs under fire from educational administrators and policy makers for Postcring "ethnic chauvin- ism," the tcachers and stude~its stratcgize to light back. The film describes thc ongoing [at the timc oP this writing] struggle in which the statc orArizona banned ethnic studies and books such as I'aulo Frcirc's seminal Pedagogy of the Oppressed and Sandra Cisncro's award-winning classic The House on Mango Street, anlong many othcrs.

York, S. (Producer & Director). (1999). A Force More Poruerfid Washington, D.C.: , York/Zirnmcrman. This I)ook and film scrics narrates the hisiory of nonviolent social movcmcnts and thcir impact. The Lilrn scries prcscnb six short Lilms ofsuccessli~l nonvio- lcnr nlovcmcnts in thc twentieth ccntury ranging Prom the Danish rcsistancc to the Nazis, Gandhi's rolc in the I~idian s t r~~gg l e li)r Precdom, thc U.S. Civil Rights movcmcnt, thc boycotts that catalyzed the anti-Apartheid movement