Peace Education in A Postmodern World
Peace Education in A Postmodern World
Peace Education in A Postmodern World
PEABODY
JOURNAL
OF EDUCATION
Volume 71, Number 3, 1996
Editor's Introduction 1
[an M. Harris
OVERVIEW
Conflict-Resolution Skills Can Be Taught 12
Benyamin Chetkow- Yanoov
(Continued)
Australian Aboriginal Constructions of Humans, Society,
and Nature in Relation to Peace Education 84
John Synott
Editor's Introduction
Ian M. Harris
During the 1980s, critics throughout the world advanced many re-
form proposals to address perceived failures of public education. Con-
servatives argued that the way to improve schools was to teach basic
skills and impose national standards. These reform efforts harkened
back to traditional notions of schooling, urging teachers to try harder
to teach basic academic curricula. Champions of this "back to basics"
effort blamed the failure of schools on problems within schooling
institutions themselves. Public debates about school policy ignored the
negative impact of violence on the lives of young people.
At the same time, in many countries of the world, educators were
arguing for a different approach to education reform, peace education,
which addresses problems of violence that distract students from the
cognitive lessons they are supposed to master. A peace education strat-
egy for improving school productivity rests on three main assump-
tions: (a) Violence contributes to the poor performance of many
students; (b) for schools to improve, adults in school settings need to
address problems created by violence; and (c) anxieties that make it
hard for students to master traditional subject matter can best be ad-
IAN M. HARRIS is Professor in the Department of Educational Policy and Community Studies,
School of Education, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.
1
I. M. Harris
2
Editor's Introduction
the sources of violence in their lives, stimulate a desire for peace, and
provide skills needed to resolve conflicts nonviolently.
In a postmodern world, peace educators concerned about violent
conditions outside school challenge popular uses of violence in the
media and question the unflinching embrace of modernism at the core
of schooling. Schools committed to modern paradigms of growth cele-
brate the Industrial Revolution with its material well-being and tech-
nological control over nature. Education becomes a path to
enlightenment, which in most countries is tied to technological devel-
opment, material standards of living, expansion of freedoms, and per-
sonal wealth. In the modern world, where educational systems
produce human consumers tailored to fit an ever-expanding capitalist
economic system, progress is seen as synonymous with the highest
good. Textbooks praise inventions but ignore their unforeseen conse-
quences to both the environment and social systems. This push for
modernity has marginalized the contributions of women to social insti-
tutions, created nuclear weapons, stimulated human population
growth, depleted resources, devastated the environment, and polar-
ized the haves and have nots. At the same time that the forces of
modernity have created great comfort for millions of people on this
planet, other segments of society live in communities with such high
levels of violence that back to basic lessons on traditional school sub-
jects seem absurd.
Postmodern thinking calls into question a commitment to rapid-
scale technological changes that contributes to a culture of violence. It
underscores the negative impact of scientific advances on ecosystems
and human communities. Peace educators in the postmodern world
grapple with problems of violence that seem so overwhelming, argu-
ing that education must be life-centered. They point out how the world
view adopted by modernity is spiritually, environmentally, and so-
cially destructive. In the past decade, over 2 million children have been
killed in wars and millions more were physically disabled or psycho-
logically traumatized. To help youth counteract the negative effects of
modernity, promoters of peace education reforms in schools celebrate
the diverse forms of life on this planet and motivate students to en-
hance living systems. They teach that a person's relationship to the
environment ought to involve moral judgments and not just economic
considerations about profit. They give voice to women and people of
color who have been excluded from policy discussions carried out in
Western capitals. Postmodern peace educators are skeptical about the
ability of science and technology to provide solutions for the ecological
crisis, but believe that educators at all levels can change cultural values
3
I. M. Harris
away from the use of force to advance human interests toward follow-
ing the various tenets of nonviolence.
One postmodern form of peace education based on the work of the
Brazilian educator, Paulo Friere, helps adults name forms of violence in
their lives and identify ways to respond to the problems of structural
violence, where citizens are denied human rights, live in violent neigh-
borhoods/ and lack such basic essentials as health care, housing, food,
or shelter. Peace educators do not ignore the impact of social inequali-
ties on the way children learn. Supporters of peace education reforms
understand that children may not successfully complete their aca-
demic assignments until their security needs are met.
In a postmodern world, educational reformers adopting the goals of
peace education study all different forms of violence, both interna-
tional and domestic. Violence, in its broadest sense, includes physical,
psychological, and structural violence and can be caused by thoughts,
words, and deeds-any dehumanizing behavior that intentionally
harms another. Physical violence includes direct harm to others-juve-
nile crime, gang attacks, sexual assault, random killings, and physical
forms of punishment. Psychological forms of violence occur often in
schools and homes, diminishing a child/s sense of worth. Structural
violence comes from social institutions that deny certain basic rights
and freedoms, when citizens can/t get jobs that pay decent wages,
health care, social security, safe housing, or civil rights. Many problems
of violence come from a commitment to militarism to solve problems.
Environmental violence caused by destruction of natural habitats
threatens people/s security and creates fear about the future. Violence
at home, in the form of domestic abuse, sexual assault, and child
neglect causes students to have low self-esteem and to distrust adults.
At the end of the 20th century, students in peace education classes
study many different aspects of the complex nature of violence in the
modern world. At the international level, peace educators provide
insights about why countries go to war and how nations can resolve
disputes without using force. At the national level, they teach about
defense and the effects of militarism. How do countries provide for the
security of their citizens? What military arrangements contribute to
peace and security? In a postmodern world, peace educators attempt to
build a culture of peace by supplementing concepts of national security
based on high-tech weaponry with concepts of ecological security
based on reverential relationships to the natural environment. At the
cultural level, peace educators teach about social norms, like sexism
and racism, that promote violence. At an interpersonal level, they teach
nonviolent conflict resolution skills. At the psychic level, they help
students understand what patterns exist in their own minds that con-
4
Editor's Introduction
5
I. M. Harris
6
Editor's Introduction
(reading, writing, and arithmetic) that are considered basic to all learn-
ing endeavors. Although schools often seem powerless to counteract
the influence of media, parents, and peers who promote violence,
teachers who embrace peace education are trying to nurture in children
the seeds of compassion rather than hatred and revenge. In a postmod-
ern world, learning how to successfully resolve conflicts has become a
necessary condition for progress. Without these skills youth are in
danger of becoming thoughtless adults who contribute to further dete-
rioration of both the social system and the natural order.
Although these reforms have not been covered very widely in the
popular press and academic journals, this collection of articles will
indicate how educators have been applying insights from peace theory
at many different levels of schooling enterprises. At the macrolevel,
administrators use peace education strategies to create a cooperative
school climate. Thus, at a peaceful school, teachers have a high level of
trust with each other and meet on a regular basis to discuss school
problems. The administrative style would be inclusive, supportive of a
democratic community in which the contributions of all members are
valued. At the microlevel, peace education sets guidelines for
teacher-student classroom relationships based on the principles of
love and caring. Peace educators use a peaceful pedagogy to deempha-
size competition and to encourage cooperative learning. Peace educa-
tion also has a curricular component that provides important but often
neglected knowledge about struggles to achieve peace. All these differ-
ent forms of peace education have at their core a commitment to
nonviolence.
This issue of the Peabody Journal of Education, "Peace Education in a
Postmodern World," provides a comprehensive overview of the latest
developments in peace education reform. The articles in this issue were
collected at the Peace Education Commission sessions during the Inter-
national Peace Research Association conference held in Malta during
the fall of 1994. These articles by established experts in the field of
peace education from six different countries provide a unique over-
view of the current concepts and practices of peace education, discuss-
ing how educators in trouble spots like South Africa and Israel use
conflict resolution teaching strategies to help build a new social order
and to address long periods of violence and war. Not only does this
collection of articles represent a wide variety of peace education prac-
tices from different comers of the globe but it also represents different
academic perspectives. Several authors of these articles are psycholo-
gists; others are philosophers; one is a curriculum developer; one is a
community activist, promoting conflict resolution in South Africa; and
another is a social worker. This diversity of disciplines provides fasci-
7
I. M. Harris
8
Editor's Introduction
9
I. M. Harris
10
Editor's Introduction
References
11
Editor's Introduction
Brock-Utne, B. (1989). Feminist perspectives on peace education. London: Pergamon.
Harris, I. (1988). Peace education. Jefferson, NC: McFarland.