Guidance notes:
The following conversation was recorded as part of an ongoing project between NCID and PLEDG Projects to discover the essence of the inclusive paradigm. We put the conversation out in draft form to a small audience for feedback and were suprised to have many requests to publish it "as is"(1). We therefore decided to share it more broadly through this journal.

(Paul Cain)
I am trying to understand what the relationship and importance of "Peace" is for "Inclusive Education". UNESCO and others are saying inclusive education is an essential ingredient to building peace and eliminating discrimination.

"There have been many painful reminders in the past decade of the threat to peace and stability that occurs when exclusion takes over as a state philosophy and diversity ceases to be valued, as well as the enormous human and economic cost of such policies. The International Commission on Education for the Twenty-first Century argued in its report to UNESCO that, in adopting 'a regard for diversity' as a fundamental principle and in 'combating all forms of exclusion' from education, we can restore education to its 'central place as a melting-pot' contributing to social harmony (Delors et al., 1996). In the words of the President of the World Bank, '...the time has come to get back to the dream. The dream of inclusive development' (Wolfensohn, 1997, p. 18). An essential ingredient of the realization of that dream has to be inclusive education."

Inclusion in Education:
The Participation of Disabled Learners

(Darrell Wills)
A wise man once wrote,
"True peace is not merely the absence of some negative force- tension, confusion or war; it is the presence of some positive force- justice, good will and brotherhood". (Martin Luther King Jr). Peace is such a big dream because for 3,500 years of recorded history we haven't had a week go by without war somewhere in the world. We have developed a habit of thinking it is inevitable. Maybe that is so, however it is my belief that the pathway to peace is a worthy goal.

When I spoke to you about vision and clarity, you will recall that getting very clear about where you are going is pretty important to ever hoping to get there. Thus, even though it seems a long path from a world of war to a planet of peace, it is a worthwhile one. As was said by another wise one, the journey begins with the first step. Inclusionists are ideologues, for sure. But inclusionists are also pioneers, taking steps to build new pathways across landscapes of segregation.

As to the question of its 'practical application' let me say that there are certainly everyday applications to a pedagogy of peace. Peace is not just a good ideal, it is a good science. Developing the art and science of teaching children how to get along is certainly long overdue. In the dominating paradigm of the day, we are trying to label and drug children into compliance. We are blaming them, blaming their parents, blaming their genetics and everything except ourselves for "their bad behaviour" because our pedagogy of management and control doesn't work.

At a very practical level, if we answer the questions:
"Why does this child bully another?" and "Why does this child tease another?" with: "Because we've taught them to"
We are then open to seeing that an important and practical piece of the pedagogy of peace is teaching and guiding the children in our schools through love, caring and forgiveness instead of fear, hatred and punishment.

(Paul)
Can you give me an example?

(Darrell)
The dominant paradigm is looking at the problem of child behaviour as residing "within the child" and "the solution" as applying adult power and control to force the child to comply. Frankly, this tactic has never "worked" and yet we continue (I believe out of habit) in spite of the evidence. 

In a pedagogy of peace the unruliness of a child is merely defined as a typical human error. As all humans error we don't need to get overly surprised by a child who is making what amounts to a social error. Viewed in this "common sense" way, the adult is able to apply the long and well-known universal science of correcting errors.

For instance, we know that an error in academics is best dealt with straight away, replaced with the correct answer and will be replaced quickly if caught early and consistently. In the social realm it is equally important to focus on what we want to develop, not focussing on what we want to get rid of. If, for instance, we want to correct 2 + 1 = 5, we focus on 3 and demonstrate with visuals and other correct exemplars. Similarly, if a child hits others, our "correction" is not to stop bullying others, but to teach the child to be kind to others. So, to answer your question, "why teach kindness", my practical example says, because it is the right thing to do (moral decision) and the smart thing to do (technical decision).

Let me explain further. The art and science of teaching tells us that we can use inclusion in a practical way to teach social democracy. If we determine in "classroom democracy" that we believe it is socially responsible for bullied children to extend forgiveness and the bullying child to seek forgiveness (as would be promoted in a pedagogy of peace) the teacher would nurture this in her/his strategy. S/he may develop classroom democracy with (not for) the children, determining the sort of classroom they want to live in. From that point forward, the child who makes a social error of bullying another is guided by the teacher and peers to seek forgiveness (e.g. "say sorry"). The child may sit at their desk and think/write about how it feels to be (pushed/teased etc) but can rejoin the group when they decide to seek forgiveness and rejoin the group. Teachers guide and nurture peers to welcome the student back, therein completing the social lesson on seeking and giving forgiveness for our typical human error.

(Paul)
Isn't this just 'time out' by another name?

(Darrell)
The science, it is true, is very similar, however the purpose and the tactics are paradigms apart. Time-out, as it is mostly used these days, seeks to force, punish the child into submission. Teaching children to seek and give forgiveness models the development a peaceful social habit for all of the children.

(Paul)
What about kids with labels? I've read that you need special techniques for kids with autism, for instance.

(Darrell)
I have read and heard this too. It is simply not true. 

The science of different treatment says that if we treat people different, they will develop an image (self image, esteem) that they are different. Sociologists call this role circularity. The person believes they are different because we treat them that way. They then act different, which makes us think we should continue to treat them different. This creates resentment by peers and often feeds maladaptations – a secondary risk by all children who get labelled. I have always said if there is one thing a child at risk has special need for it is to be treated the same, (thus it is not a special need... just something rarely given).

You will recall that in, A World Without Special Needs: The Naked Truth(2), we unpacked the mythology of "specialness". In that chapter we discussed the reality of the rainbow of commonality shared in the human fabric that has been lost in the myth of 'special needs' and 'special treatments' that arose to meet them. There is simply no such thing as "special" needs". Thus to believe that there is a "special technique" that would teach peace to a labelled child that wouldn't apply to a peer, simply denies the reality of their humanness. Such a view denies the art and sciences that work with all humans. Those who would promote special techniques are merely attempting to breathe life into the dying myth of the dominant order.

(Paul)
If all children are welcomed, how is this a peace strategy?

(Darrell)
When you try to delineate the difference between 'kids with labels' or 'kids with disability' and so on, what you do is fall into the trap of the "us and them". When you say, "All are welcomed", you are basically going into 'moral coherency'. So you are saying that the moral coherent position is that we know what 'all means all', unfortunately in our world we don't believe that – 'all means all' – and so the response has to come back, "what part of all don't we understand?"

And one of the parts we haven't understood are children whose individual differences in the realm of the socially constructed theory that we have called 'disablement', and so it becomes a peace strategy at a child-to-child level when two children who would have in former worlds, in other words, pre 1986 in Australia, had been seen as better off separate but equal, or in the black/white world of America, separate educated but equal.

At a child-to-child level the very first thing is the physical opportunity for those two children to make peace with each other. You have to be in it to win it. You have to have an opportunity to develop a relationship for peace to ever be transacted. Separation is the prerequisite of war. The notion in the research of "us and them" creates the prerequisite of war. When it is 'us' we rarely war with each other, we may argue, but we rarely war with people who we believe are a part of 'us'.

It is only when we can label them as "them" that we can then devalue them and put them in some sort of socially constructed 'other' than human sort of conceptualization. So it is at the child-to-child level that creates that opportunity for them to become 'us'.

So it can be said that it is a peace step or strategy at a very practical level – you are creating an opportunity for a peace to exist between two groups of people who would not have formerly have had an opportunity to have a relationship let alone a peaceful one.

The second layer of it is more a technical one, and that is, if a society chooses to nurture peace then it develops a model of stratagem of child development that includes the nurturing and guidance of peace in and amongst children and adults. So there is the child-to-child, children-to-children, group-to-group, year-to-year, the grade 1s to the grade 2s, the grade 2s to the grade 3s, grade 7s to the grade 1s, and so on and so forth, that are nurtured.

There would be things that you would do that would create and transact peace that are oppositional to things that you do that transact war; such as competition and sports and some of the things and ways that we deal with and interpret those issues. If we are trying to create peace we are creating interdependence and we are creating cooperation and sharing, whereas if we are creating in a different paradigm, or we have a different belief and value system, we create competitiveness and fighting and interpret that. We don't see the playground as an opportunity to teach peace. We don't see that teaching 'welcoming' – so the first part of your question said – 'if all children are welcome' – welcoming is a taught and learned skill. We teach and guide children to be welcoming and to welcome one another.

And if it is a group of children - say a child whose arms and legs don't work and he/she moves around in an environment in a wheelchair and the group of children have never interacted with such a child – then the children – not the child in the wheelchair - are impaired. They are impaired in their understanding of, "how do I welcome this child in the wheelchair into my game of basketball? Because I look at him and don't see he his able to play with me because he has wheels and I have legs." And so he may need some guidance and nurturing to figure that out, and that's the technology of inclusion.

The pedagogy is this, we teach "us" by being "one of us". That is, emersion in the social, physical and curricular activities of the class. Being left out of any aspect that creates or strengthens this identification puts any child at risk of being "other" rather that "one of us".

Footnotes

1. "Congratulations - it makes terrific reading... it goes into my permanent file of 'articles which will always be relavant' and which is one I open and read often!" Jan later asked to publish in the newsletter of the Foundation for Social Inclusion. We also found it published in the journal Access 5 (5) of the Disability Employment Action Centre.
2. See Wills & Cain, Interaction. v16/4 '03. 32-34.

References

The Dakar Framework for Action
Education for All: Meeting our Collective Commitments
Adopted by the World Education Forum, Dakar, Senegal, 26-28 April 2000
UNESCO 2000

6. Education is a fundamental human right. It is the key to sustainable development and peace and stability within and among countries, and thus an indispensable means for effective participation in the societies and economies of the twenty-first century, which are affected by rapid globalization. Achieving EFA goals should be postponed no longer. The basic learning needs of all can and must be met as a matter of urgency.

28. The significant growth of tensions, conflict and war, both within nations and between nations and peoples, is a cause of great concern. Education has a key role to play in preventing conflict in the future and building lasting peace and stability.

58. Schools should be respected and protected as sanctuaries and zones of peace. Education programmes should be designed to promote the full development of the human personality and strengthen respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms as proclaimed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 26). Such programmes should promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, and all ethnic and religious groups; and they should be sensitive to cultural and linguistic identities, and respectful of diversity and reinforce a culture of peace. Education should promote not only skills such as the prevention and peaceful resolution of conflict, but also social and ethical values."

The Random Acts of Kindness Foundation
"An emphasis on kindness in a classroom or school creates a more positive school culture, where peace prevails so that learning can be fostered."   

"The Random Acts of Kindness Foundation was formed to inspire and facilitate the practice of kindness. Through the dissemination of ideas and the development of materials and programs, we have helped our kindness coordinators incorporate kindness into thousands of schools and communities. As people tap into their own generous human spirit and share kindness with one another, they discover for themselves the power of kindness to effect positive change. When kindness is expressed, healthy relationships are created, community connections are nourished, and people are inspired to pass kindness on. Established in 1995 as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, The Random Acts of Kindness Foundation is a resource for people committed to spreading kindness. We provide a wide variety of materials on our website, including activity ideas, lesson plans, project plans, teacher's guide, project planning guide, publicity guide, and workplace resources — all free of charge. The Foundation is privately held and funded. We accept no donations, grants, or membership dues. We do not provide financial assistance to individuals or organizations. The Foundation has no religious or organizational affiliations; we encourage the practice of kindness in all sectors of society. The emphasis of the Foundation is to create and strengthen communities by inspiring local coordinators, individuals, educators, schools, faith groups, service clubs, and other groups to share kindness with others and/or to participate in kindness activities. Our project ideas, website materials, and phone support are provided free of charge. Our website is: www.actsofkindness.org"

What Makes a Good Teacher: Children Speak Their Minds
UNESCO
"There is only one pedagogy... the pedagogy of love."
Federico Mayor, Director-General, UNESCO

The Associated Schools Project (ASP) Network
UNESCO
"The Associated Schools Project, created by UNESCO in 1953, is an international network of some 3,800 schools in 131 countries, which conducts pilot projects to promote education for peace, international understanding and co-operation. It aims at reinforcing the role of education in preparing children and young people to meet the pressing challenges facing humanity within the context of the planet's resources. It is designed to have a multiplier effect at the national level: the incorporation of ASP innovations into the mainstream of the education system and at the international level, information on ASP results is diffused for the benefit of all. Associated Schools are encouraged to establish links at the local and global level. ASP is global in perspective, future - oriented and human - value centred so that the space between the blackboard and the desk encompasses the horizons of the world."

The Quiet Peacemakers: A Tribute to Teachers
UNESCO
"Not for them the press conferences, photo opportunities, international awards nor congratulatory handshakes. Society reserves no form of recognition for the "quiet peacemakers" - those teachers who devote their energy to building or restoring peace through their work in the classroom. Far from the public eye, their peace-building efforts go largely unnoticed. Whether they come from conflict zones such as Algeria, Burundi, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Northern Ireland, Sri Lanka or so-called peaceful countries such as France, Italy or the United States, all have a vision of their mission as teachers. This mission is to provide children with the means to overcome centuries-old tensions. As the eight individuals in this brochure amply demonstrate, all over the world teachers are finding ways of showing children how to respect those who are different from themselves. In situations of armed conflict, ethnic rivalry or in disturbed urban enclaves, they are the ones who instill the values of peace and tolerance in their pupils. And this, of course, is how it should be, since education is the key to building peace in the minds of men, as UNESCO's Constitution affirms. "Tolerance you teach only by being tolerant," declares Azijada Borovac, the Bosnian teacher. It is above all through their example that these teachers influence their pupils."

Hope Magazine, Number 18, Spring 1999
Before Push Comes to Shove
Story of how Columbia High School addressed violence and hate at their school.

"At some point, some of the participants said we really should teach these non-violence skills to children, before violence became ingrained in them … "

The Resolving Conflict Creatively Program (RCCP)
"The Resolving Conflict Creatively Program (RCCP), a program of Educators for Social Responsibility (ESR), is a research-based K-12 school program in social and emotional learning."

Waging Peace in Our Schools (1998)
"The most prominent activists working in the fields of conflict resolution and emotional literacy argue that schools must educate the heart as well as the mind. This book, co-authored by Linda Lantieri, is a practical guide that is filled with stories, voices, ideas and advice, and presents teachers who use innovative techniques to create "peaceable classrooms" and student mediators who are changing the atmospheres of their schools."

Peace Tables
('Peace tables' teach pupils another way. In growing numbers, children resolve disputes. By Connie Langland, Inquirer Staff Writer, Philadelphia)
 
Most classrooms at Leary Elementary School in Warminster, Bucks County, have a "peace table," a place to settle lunch-line spats, playground tussles, and he said/she said squabbling.
Learning peacemaking skills is a priority for the school - as important as reading and math.
"We say, stop this fighting," said Britanny Shortall, a kindergartner.
"Or we shake hands," said classmate Tyler Whiteside.
These are skills some adults never learn. But children are - in growing numbers.
The Peace Center in Langhorne, which set up Leary's program, has helped more than 120 elementary, middle and high schools in Bucks County, Philadelphia and South Jersey to launch programs to diffuse tensions and enhance harmony.
Other groups, including Physicians for Social Responsibility, the Devereaux Foundation, which works with troubled children, and Creating the Peaceable Classroom are training teachers and students in antiviolence efforts.
 
The Peace Center: Education in Conflict Resolution and Violence Prevention
The Peace Center is located in Langhorne, Pennsylvania. We have been working for community peace and social justice since 1982. Our programs are designed to help reduce violence and conflict in our schools, homes and communities through a multicultural, community-based approach. We are dedicated to furthering peace by understanding and managing conflict in our community, our nation and our world. http://www.comcat.com/~peace/
 
Martin Luther King:
"Forgiveness is not an occasional act but a permanent attitude. He who is devoid of the power to forgive is devoid of the power to love."

Reference:  Wills, D (2004). On Peace and Inclusion: A Conversation on Peace and Inclusive Education with Darrell Wills. Interaction v.17 #2  p.6-12.
Reprinted with permission from the National Council on Intellectual Disability.

Site Map | Contact | ©1993- in:press