Reimagining nonviolence education through a spiritual and socio-political lens: proposal for a peace studies curriculum

• In Event: Peace education and community voice

Proposal

1.1 Introduction
The reduction of violence has been a long-term educational goal across the globe; this is evidenced by the elaboration of Sustainable Development Goal 4, target 4.7, particularly the “promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence” (SDG.org, n.d.))
The objective of this conceptual paper is to propose a framework for a school curriculum that centres nonviolence as its key approach, value, and goal. To support this proposal, we draw on a range of theories in the studies of peace, conflict, and (non)violence as outlined in section 3 that allow us to imagine what a nonviolent curriculum can look like.
2. Defining Violence

We need to understand violence from two different angles; one is conceptual (discussed in this section) and the other is relational (applied to our proposal for a curriculum for nonviolence in section 3). Conceptually, we primarily draw on the work of Johan Galtung (1969, 1990), whose taxonomy of violence categorizes it in its direct, structural, and cultural dimensions.

Direct violence requires both a perpetrator and a recipient of a violent act, which can be of a physical or psychological nature. While physical violence is more visible as it includes assault, aggression, or war, psychological violence is more subtle and less conspicuous in its execution and includes brainwashing, indoctrination, threats, and other tools “that serve to decrease mental potentialities” of a person (Galtung, 1969, p.169). Structural violence, according to Galtung (1969), occurs where there is no visible perpetrator and is instead embedded in existing structures and systems that result in harm, though it is not always possible to identify who is responsible. Examples of these can be found in uneven distribution of resources impacting access to healthcare and education for specific individuals or communities, resulting in unrealized potentials, or what Galtung describes as the “cause of the difference between the potential and the actual” (1969, p.168).

This paper stems from our belief that the social context has the potential to feed and nurture our seeds of violence in individuals and shape their responses. Our justification for proposing a nonviolence curriculum is anchored in the belief that nonviolence can be nurtured, cultivated, and serve as a springboard for both personal and social transformation.
3. Curriculum for Nonviolence
Our proposal approaches nonviolence education from three interdependent angles: inner/intrapersonal peace (peace with ourselves); interpersonal (peace with the people around us); and inter-group (peace between different communities and groups).

3.1. Inner/intrapersonal peace
We propose that in the first stage of a nonviolence curriculum, the development of intrapersonal peace should systematically provide space for students and teachers to develop two foundational practices: silence and stillness, and mindful awareness.
There is a wide range of activities that can support developing silence and stillness. For example, the practice of yoga—both asana (physical practice of yoga) and pranayama (breathing exercises)—leads to the reduction and quieting of the activities of the mind (Iyengar, 1993).
Mindfulness is a mainstay of contemplative literature, in education and outside. The word mindfulness has its roots in the Sanskrit word ‘smriti’, or remember. Thich Nhat Hanh expands on this to define it as “remembering to come back to the present moment” (1997, p.64). In other words, it is the act of being attentive to our thought activity, remembering to bring our full attention to this exact moment and experience it fully. This awareness of course requires development; we live in a world with a plethora of external stimuli drawing our attention away from our thought processes through sounds, images and activities that discourage reflection.
3.2. Interpersonal nonviolent relationships
Nonviolence in interpersonal relationships requires us to recognize and respect the humanity in other people, even those who we find different to ourselves. From the perspective of our paper, which aims to make curricular recommendations in the context of educational institutions, the interpersonal relationships we would like to focus on are specifically students-teacher and students-students.
Classroom nonviolence has a unique relational dynamic, in which interpersonal relationships amongst students and teachers lay the foundation for how that dynamic unfolds: members of the classroom spend several hours a day together, learn together, play together and are in constant interaction with one another. Additionally, as Devries at el., (2021) note, the teacher-student relationship has been historically a violent one, particularly towards the student who is often disempowered. Therefore, tools such as Marshall Rosenberg’s nonviolent communication (NVC) framework (2003), empathy development, contemplative, self-inquiry practices and teacher training on nonviolent approaches and practices play a key role in helping teachers and students understand each other’s differences and develop greater collective unity.

3.3. Inter-group nonviolent relationships
Concerning the integration of inter-group training into this curriculum, we suggest that intellectual encounter needs to happen together with bodily encounters involving forming a relational connection with a different community of people by physically or spatially connecting with them and gradually moving from connection to reciprocity to interconnection and then to friendship.
Intellectual encounter requires a focus on three aspects: i) leaving isolation of our own beliefs and worldviews, ii) incorporating new information about the Other into our mind, and iii) internalising the recognition and appreciation that all human beings have human rights—equal worth and dignity. This is where inner peace is important as it helps to open oneself up to contact, reduce negative emotions (e.g., anxiety, threat), and develop affective empathy (Everett, 2013). Curriculum and pedagogies can be built around learning about human rights and solidarity, developing religious and critical literacy, fostering interfaith and intercultural understanding.
This should be followed by creating spaces for bodily/spatial encounters with otherness and to form a relational connection with the Other (Standish, 2020). This may include arts-based activities such as co-creation with students of films, exhibitions, stories, and other media that focus on representing the Other and relationships with the Other in a positive light. For direct bodily/spatial encounter, the curriculum can draw on traditional peacebuilding activities including developing shared goals through structured inter-group dialogues and shared principles such as that human relationships are not a zero-sum game.

Authors

• Yulia Nesterova, University of Glasgow

• Gaston Bacquet, University of Glasgow