Special Reports 10

INTRODUCTION MULTICULTURALISM AND PEACE STUDIES: A THEORETICAL DEBATE METHODOLOGY: DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS CONCLUSION, FINAL REMARKS AND RECOMMENDATIONS THEORETICAL REFERENCES

REjANE P. COSTA, ANA IvENICKI

MULTICULTURALISM AND PEACE STUDIES ExPANDING FRONTIERS TOwARD GEOPOLITICS AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS REJANE P. COSTA is Major at Brazilian army. She is currently assistant for the Center for Strategic Studies at War College, Ministry of Defense, in Brazil, as well as adjunct coordinator and researcher at the Laboratory for Society and Defense Studies. Her research interests are: multiculturalism, peace studies, military education and peacekeeping missions. She has produced and presented her work worldwide, in national and international academic settings.

ANA IVENICKI is a Professor in the Department of Educational Studies at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. She also is a Researcher for the Brazilian Research Council (CNPq). Her research interests are: multicultural and comparative education, teacher education, and institutional evaluation. She has widely published in national and international educational journals. She is the author of some books, among which: Canen, A. (2009), Teacher Education and Competence in an Intercultural Perspective: some reflections in Brazil and the UK, published by Lambert Academic Publishing.

INTRODUCTION

This special report seeks to examine how multicultural and peace education have been viewed in Brazilian and North American literature, as gleaned from both Brazilian research studies and the articles presented in Peace Education Special Interest Group (SIG) at American Education Research Association (AERA) Annual Meetings in the last five years (2010-2014).

It also shows research results presented in different international academic events such as International Council on Education for Teaching (ICET) 52º World Assembly & 7º Annual Border Pedagogy Conference 2007, International Peace Research Association (IPRA) Meeting 2008 and International Congress on Blue Black Sea Meeting 2008.

The argument is that the articulation of multiculturalism and peace studies has the potential to build fruitful dialogues to nurture peace in education and societies, chiefly if this perspective informs public policies in education about the need to enhance a multicultural understanding related to problematize stereotypes against those considered “different” from standard measures at school settings, either in military or civil education.

Amongst the disciplines represented by AERA members, psychology, statistics, sociology, history, economics, philosophy, anthropology, and political science are included (AERA web site); however, due to its scope, we consider relevant to promote dialogues with geopolitics and international relations, because geographic influences on power relationships impact not only the field of international relations, but also the field of education as well.

Therefore, this study seeks to capture contributions to the field, looking ahead to expanding frontiers, possibilities, challenges and promising directions which take into account the perspectives and contributions of geopolitics and international relations for the next century.

According to the United Nations , education is amongst the eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) . The eight Millennium Development Goals range from halving extreme poverty rates to halting the spread of HIV/AIDS and providing universal primary education, all by the target date of 2015. This is the outline agreed by all countries and leading development institutions.

They have galvanized unprecedented efforts to meet the needs of the poorest in the world.

The UN is also working with governments, civil society and other partners to build on the momentum generated by the MDGs and carry on with an ambitious post-2015 development agenda (UN web site).

So far, the results have shown that progress has been made towards achieving the Millennium Development Goals. Global poverty continues to decline. More children than ever are attending primary school. Child deaths have dropped dramatically. Access to safe drinking water has been greatly expanded.

Targeted investments in fighting malaria, AIDS and tuberculosis have saved millions (UN web site).

It seems the MDGs are making a real difference in people’s lives, and according to UN web site this progress can be expanded in most of the world’s countries by the target date of 2015 with strong leadership and accountability. After 2015, efforts to achieve a world of prosperity, equity, freedom, dignity and peace will continue vigorously.

With the conclusion of MDGs’ goals at the end of 2015, world leaders have called for an ambitious, long-term agenda to improve people’s lives and protect the planet for future generations. This post-2015 development agenda is expected to tackle many issues, including ending poverty and hunger, improving health and education, making cities more sustainable, combating climate change, and protecting oceans and forests (UN web site).

According to information available on UN web site, governments are in the midst of negotiating, and civil society, young people, businesses and others are also having their say in this global conversation. This way, world leaders are expected to adopt the agenda at the Special Summit on Sustainable Development in New York in September 2015.

From this perspective, we invite geopolitics and international relations to reflect upon education, looking ahead for challenges and opportunities to join efforts in order to promote partnerships and cooperation which contribute to overcome moral poverty and social inequalities towards achieving inclusion and; thus, peace.

The United Nations is in essence a multicultural organization that should respond to a variety of conflicts around the world, seeking to maintain security and peace. Amongst these conflicts we highlight the ones which are motivated by cultural components such as ethnical, religious and linguistic conflicts that should be addressed in different contexts so as to overcome prejudice and stereotypes that impede to mitigate violence in the contemporary world.

Departing from a post-colonial approach (HALL, 2003; PETERS, 2005), our research has been geared towards challenging monocultural curricula in educational policies and pedagogical practices, shedding lights on the relevance of promoting a culture of peace through investment in multiculturally oriented education professionals and organizations, embracing the military ones as well that although beyond formal educational patterns, feel the need today to be included in/by society standards in order to enhance dialogues related to the field of defense and security. It is worth mentioning that this field was very recently considered by government initiatives established between the Ministry of Defense and Ministry of Education in Brazil to foster civil and military Higher Education Institutions (HEI) cooperation, so as to promote democratic practices that embrace Brazilian society to take part in discussions related to defense and security.

Our methodological path was guided by qualitative investigation (DENZIN; LINCOLN, 2003), and thus we departed from civil and military educational organizations and how they cope with cultural plurality.

05/06 Our focus; therefore, relies on the limits and challenges of their practices and the potential they present to overcome such threats. Thus, we intend to present innovative theoretical and methodological approaches to meet demands these organizations have been facing to build more inclusive environments.

We will firstly present a discussion of multiculturalism and peace studies, emphasizing mainly categories, associated concepts and tensions pervading them. Thus, we intend to discuss the meanings and scopes of these concepts and their translation into the educational practices of the selected sources: a) Brazilian national curricular policies for foreign languages; b) a Brazilian military training center that prepares soldiers and civilians to deploy in peacekeeping missions; c) a civil Higher Education Institution that prepares educators in Brazil.

Secondly, we will bring a documentary analysis of source (a) to reflect upon cultural plurality conceived as a transversal theme in the Brazilian state level and some empirical experiences from the other sources which were observed through in-depth interviews and oral discourses held with institutional leaders and actors directly involved with civil and military educational policies as well as curricula and educational practices.

We will next explore AERA Annual Meeting Online Searchable Program[3] to calculate the summaries of papers presented during 20102014 which considered multicultural perspectives within peace education.Finally, we will point out explicitly and implicitly [4] multicultural categories presented, and finally we will shed lights on the potentials they seem to convey in terms of developing fruitful dialogues with peace studies in the scope of plural educational institutions, both civil and military.

Our aim is to analyze how multiculturalism has crosscut the AERA Peace Education SIG in the last five years in order to leverage more democratic practices in education and societies. That includes challenging the view that tends to oppose civil and military education, arguing that military curriculum has been challenged so as to cope with the tensions of hierarchal practices within a multicultural organization (COSTA; SCHIMITT; MORETO, 2012).

At this point, the main contribution we intend to oer relates to pinpointing emphases as well as gaps presented in the studies at SIG Peace Education during the mentioned period. We highlight the fact that studies in military education still beg for further dialogues with peace education, so as to strengthen the unveiling of curricular intentions, limits and capabilities that have guided soldiers’ preparation. This perspective is especially relevant today since the military has been facing new challenges and threats regarding the nature of conflicts and violence which dier from the paradigm that had guided the industrial war in the past (COSTA, 2013). Therefore, one of the challenges has been to prepare soldiers to cope with the multicultural dimensions of the missions nowadays.

The argument that pervades our study is that the dialogue between multiculturalism and peace studies would boost both areas and effectively contribute toward civil and military education that aims to reach more inclusive and peaceful environments in an increasingly multicultural and clashing world.

MULTICULTURALISM AND PEACE STUDIES A THEORETICAL DEBATE

The multicultural perspective that guides our work overcomes cultural contemplation (BANKS, 2004; CANDAU, 2008; CANEN; SANTOS, 2009) so as to reach postcolonial and postmodern approaches that seek to interpret differences within difference toward a more fluid, hybrid and transitory comprehension of identity construction (CANEN; PETERS, 2005; HALL, 2003).

As a result, we have built our argument on the main categories developed by the aforementioned perspectives such as: identity, difference, gender, race, ethnicity, class, religion, sex, inclusion and exclusion, universalism and relativism and their variations, according to the authors’ interpretations.

To approach multiculturalism we should firstly be aware of the polysemy of the term ‘multicultural’ and its different interpretations as well as the scientific and political approaches that outline this field today.

Multiculturalism in its folkloric, critical and post-critical approaches, according to authors such as Canen and Canen (2005) and Canen and Peters (2005) departs from the simply celebration of differences toward other steps that problematize the construction of

differences – the so called critical multiculturalism – and also incorporate post-critical/colonial/structural perspectives that realize the identity building as a continuum that emerges within intergroup relations and cultural hybridism processes which recognize differences within the difference.

According to Canen (2012) theoretical and methodological responses that crosscut borders are required so as to build dialogues and overcome universalistic and ethnocentric views. To understand this context as hybrid and mixed (CHARLOT cited in CANEN, 2012) is an alternative proposal to initiate a comprehension of this body of study that requires also hybrid and diversified responses, especially when thought within education.

Based on those ideas, in Brazilian literature, Canen (op cit) suggests that a multicultural curriculum should be understood beyond binary oppositions that impact on particular and universal speeches and views to understand and overcome the mechanisms(real and symbolic), processed inside that end up producing differences and prejudices.

The author points out, along with others, that the post-colonial multicultural perspective/ postmodern/post-structural (CHUEH, 2005; D'ADESKY, 2001; LEONARDO, 2005; McCATHY, 2005; MUNANGA, 2000; OLIVEIRA, 2006; PETERS, 2005; SISS, 2003; ZONINSEIN, 2006 apud CANEN, 2014) enables that curricula are designed and developed from continuous constructions and permanent negotiations that challenge xenophobic views. Consequently, Canen (2014) points out that the curriculum wishing to challenge xenophobia can benefit from postcolonial multiculturalism and whiteness studies because they go beyond diversity contemplation to question preconceived and exclusionary perspectives.

Likewise, Canen and Xavier (2012) report that updating teachers’ education in a multicultural perspective is also relevant to change school since it promotes awareness of education professionals for developing plurality and preparing for its incorporation into the Brazilian curriculum development. Oliveira (2012) points out the possibility of building an 'other’ thought on Brazilian social history through the education of ethnic and racial relations, as proposed by Brazilian Law10.639/03. This proposal is embedded by new interpretations of national identity, which is less ethnocentric, since it intends to expand the focus of the curriculum, rather than simply adding new elements that contemplate pluralities. In the same vein, Santiago and Marques (2013) highlight the emergence of the intercultural/multicultural perspective both in Brazil and in Latin America. They stress the need to overcome legislation acts that do not encourage the empowerment of excluded minorities, either in education or society. It is claimed that a multicultural/intercultural education project in Brazil is still a need since monocultural curricula continue to be predominant in schools, with little dialogue with the cultural context of the students.

Likewise, Candau (2012) emphasizes the relationship between culture(s) and education in Brazilian society and in the Latin American context in broad terms. It highlights the ideological context of migration flows and their impact on relations between different social groups belonging to different states, in the backdrop of Brazilian and Latin American plural ethnic and cultural society initially marked by slavery, subordination, violence and exclusion of the ‘other’.

In relation to gender diversity in Brazil, Bortolini (2008) focuses on sexual and gender issues in schools, challenging the hetero normative discourse and thinking pedagogical practices that are inter-related to different groups and individuals in the pursuit of a collective construction of a curriculum and a school routine that integrate the differences without giving up the construction of equality.

This brief discussion sought to broadly map the questions that have permeated the field of multiculturalism and education, so as to delve into the study of the categories presented in the Peace Education SIG at AERA 2010 to 2014, in terms of the extent to which multiculturalism has (or has not) impacted on peace studies.

In an attempt to summarize, multiculturalism is generally understood as a field that tries to provide answers for cultural diversity and challenges differences (CANEN; PETERS, 2005); mainly because this concept emerged neither into universities nor in academic settings. On the contrary, multiculturalism was born from the struggles of minorities for citizenship (CANDAU, 2004). However, this concept has been recently tensioned by post-colonial approaches for which identities are not pure, but in constant movement (CANDAU, 2008).

09/10

Thus, multiculturalism has been recently focusing on cultural hybridism that goes beyond folkloric perspectives that do not raise the reasons minority exclusion has occurred.

Another perspective brought by this concept is the impact of cultural diversity on organizations. In this direction, Canen and Canen (2005) shed lights on the tensions between organization identity, staff's plurality and the cultural environment where the organization operates. This is chiefly relevant to military organizations, mainly in the context of disparate cultural environments where soldiers operate today (COSTA, 2012).

We argue this perspective should also be considered when one analyzes the world within the context of geopolitics and international relations so as to embrace the plurality in a horizon that promotes cooperation amongst individuals, groups and Nations to achieve security, justice and freedom through integration rather than exclusion of the “other”.

Peace studies as multiculturalism have a tense, complex and intriguing definition since both are tensioned by different perspectives that guide to an inter, a multi/ transdisciplinar field of studies (WEIGERT, 1999), that seek to transform violence into peace.

Galtung (1969; 1990; 2005) is considered the pioneer of peace studies and according to this author; peace is conceived not just as the absence of conflict, but as cooperation amongst individuals/groups to achieve security, justice and freedom. In the 60’s Galtung (1969) emphasized the inequality and the concept of structural violence in peace studies, introducing the distinction between positive and negative violence. Later, in the 90’s, he brought the concept of cultural violence, allowing a multicultural debate (COSTA, 2009).

If during the Cold War, politicians and scholars supposed that conceiving peace as a means to dissuade by power was enough, today this definition demands a more inclusive perspective with participation and inclusion in decisions as well as more equality distribution of income and resources.

Therefore, peace studies are in favor of security, justice, equality and basic needs values and its objective is to understand peace and violence. Weigert (1999), based on the studies of Galtung presented a distinction between positive and negative violence. Positive peace considered as the absence of structural violence - social justice, whilst negative peace was considered simply the absence of war/conflict.

Galtung extended the concept of structural violence for those countries where poverty prevails as the result of political and social violence. His acknowledged transcend method (GALTUNG, 2006) conceives mediation and negotiation as a tool to solve conflicts peacefully. This allows transcending from negative to positive peace.

The author also distinguished three different types of justice: punitive, restorative and transitory, because according to him the concepts of peace studies are intimately related to the definitions of justice.

While the punitive justice relies on punishment, the restorative justice relies on individual and collectives actions to heal the damages and harm caused by conflicts.

(EGLASH, 1975 apud JACCOUD, 2005). The victim, the aggressor and the others affected must act collectively and actively in order to find the best solution to cure damages produced. Peaceful techniques of mediation must be used to get positive results and to reintegrate the victim and the aggressor socially. (PINTO, 2005)

While the conservative multiculturalism (McLAREN, 1997) might be associated to punitive justice due to the fact that minorities- victims- are submitted to the dominant culturesaggressors- since these are considered responsible for cultural shocks and conflicts; the critical multiculturalism (op cit) might be related to restorative justice because it understands the minority groups- victims- as the result of extensive social fights for identity construction against homogeneous and ethnocentric societies- aggressor.

According to Melo (2008, p.170), transitory justice “[...] functions in between a singular process of transition or peace consolidation, conditioned by political compromises and practical embarrassment in normal situations (NEWMAN, 2002, p.31).” Melo (op. cit.) points out that according to human security commission repot the transitory justice is one of the strategies that search the truths about the human rights abuses which occurred, obtains justice to the victims and penalizes the aggressors. Transitory justice focus on strategies that are used by the societies to overcome human rights violations they suffered in the past towards the construction of a more democratic, fair and peaceful future.

The connection between multiculturalism and peace studies should be highlighted at this point, so as to point out their similarities and common points.

Through the lens of the critical multiculturalism, power asymmetries may be revealed and reinterpreted within societies, so as to people find their own legal spaces- restorative justice.

Finally, the liberal humanistic multiculturalism (McLAREN, 1997) should be related to transitory justice because it believes on the possibility of overcoming and repairing social, cultural and economic inequalities through the intellectual equality among races- social strategy- to achieve democracy.

In practical terms, the recognized ethnic mix found in countries such as Brazil, for example, should allow a fertile field for reflections between universities and Brazilian educators, civil and military ones, extended to all those aware of the relevance of promoting bridges to minimize emerging ethnical, religious and cultural conflicts.

We argue that multicultural and peace education should contribute to incorporate in military educational system both: the Army’s cultural values and foundations along with postmodern needs. The importance of partnerships between Higher Education Institutions and the military could represent a fruitful avenue for both: for the Army [extended for other Armed Forces] because may be supported by academic research findings and the University, by enhancing its academic production through military personnel’s' practices. The possibility of fruitful cooperation would boost knowledge in the area and hopefully enhance peace and multicultural education in a deeply conflict-ridden and multicultural world.

This theoretical discussion sought to promote dialogical strategies to hearing and taking into account different "voices" in educational policies and practices which aim at celebrating cultural plurality and knowledge for equity.

We also intended to show that a dialogue between multiculturalism and peace studies has the potential to contribute with civil, military education and educators, offering alternative tools that undermine violence and work for peace in conflict-laden environments.

Moreover, building a culture of peace through inclusion as well as resources development that conceive the importance of multicultural and peace education to undermine social conflicts internal to societies would probably make future generations sensitive to values of tolerance, acceptance and respect in a peacebuilding perspective. . In the same direction, the recognized Brazilian multicultural society and diplomatic history in dealing with external conflicts can offer insights to peace studies because; although its socioeconomic disparities, Brazil is still recognized worldwide for its peace-oriented and diplomatic perspective in solving conflicts peacefully (HAGE, 2004).

METHODOLOGY DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

Methodology used in our research was geared to fostering a reflection on the need to articulate both concepts – multiculturalism and peace studies – from a broader perspective which embraces different educational settings – academic and non-academic, formal and non-formal – that have in common the intention to promote inclusion and mitigate moral poverty.

AERA Peace education SIG 2010-2014 The American Educational Research Association (AERA) founded in 1916 focus on improving the educational process by encouraging scholarly inquiry related to education and evaluation and promoting the dissemination and practical application of research results.

AERA has more than 25,000 members and they range from faculty, researchers, graduate students, and other distinguished professionals with rich and diverse expertise in education research.

They work in a range of settings from universities and other academic institutions to research institutes, federal and state agencies, school systems, testing companies, and nonprofit organizations. Based on their research, they produce and disseminate knowledge, refine methods and measures,

and stimulate translation and practical application of research results (AERA web site).

AERA has an international scope and; as a result, nearly 5% of members, representing over 85 countries, reside outside the United States.

Over 28% of AERA members are students. Approximately 6,500 are graduate students and 600 are undergraduate students. Over 74% of AERA members report that education is their primary discipline. As mentioned before, other disciplines represented by AERA members include psychology, statistics, sociology, history, economics, philosophy, anthropology, and political science (AERA web site).

In a preliminary version of a paper presented at AERA Annual Meeting 2010, we highlighted intentions and commonalities between multiculturalism and peace studies and how education research and organizations would benefit from this academic cooperation and partnership (COSTA; CANEN, 2010). In this direction, we analyzed the summaries of papers presented in the last five years (2010-2014) at AERA within Peace Education SIG in order to take in their possibilities to strengthen the cooperation we are seeking to foster between the aforementioned concepts, in the scope of multicultural and peace education.

In 2010, AERA Annual Meeting took place in Denver, Colorado under the theme Understanding Complex Ecologies in a Changing World. A total of 25 papers were presented at SIG Peace Education: 12 in roundtable sessions, 6 in paper sessions, and 7 in symposium sessions. It was noted that out of 25 papers, 3 presented explicit multicultural perspective, whereas 21 presented it implicitly.

This evidence alone shows the existing connection between multiculturalism and peace studies. In fact, the emerging categories highlighted in the 21 summaries drew into multicultural concerns such as stereotypes and prejudice, feminization and gender, inter-ethnic encounters, inclusive practices, differences, minorities, socio-cultural identity, color, acculturation, social disparities, race, class, and cultural studies.

Three studies showed explicit multiculturalism. Two were presented at roundtable sessions and one in a symposium session.

In the roundtable session, Costa and Canen’s paper (2010) aimed […] to analyze the state of art related to multiculturalism and peace education in Brazil, as gauged from the production of PhD theses and Master dissertations in the last years. It contends that multicultural and peace oriented education could benefit from increased partnerships between Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) and military organizations […].

(AERA web page, our marks).

While Brantmeier’s paper (2010) was “[…] a step toward building a flexible framework for multicultural peace education - one that would help foster culturally competent, inclusive, and self aware peace educators.” (AERA web page, our mark).

This paper explores notions of self re-education and self-identification, focusing not only on other human beings, but also all flora and fauna on planet earth. It suggests multicultural peace education efforts and implications for teacher education. (op cit, our mark).

There were two symposium sessions at Peace Education SIG 2010: The Complex Ecologies of Peace Education: Negotiating the Politics of Participation in Formal and the other, Nonformal Settings and Transdisciplinary Perspectives on Building Cultures of Peace. The latter one brought together scholars to discuss the contributions to an edited book project that was undertaken to address the UNs charge to develop values, attitudes, modes of behavior and ways of life to promote peace among individuals, groups and nations. Grounded in a firm belief that building cultures of peace calls for new critical questions to be raised and new partnerships engineered across ideological stances and disciplines, the project brings together scholars reflecting a broad perspective on the critical issues of peace and conflict resolution that pervade our world. (2010, AERA web page).

Brantmeier, Aragon and Yoder presented a study on Multicultural curriculum transformation in a foundations course initiated to encourage critical analysis toward forging culturally competent (Gay, 2000) future educators. This research explores the constraints and possibilities of multicultural curriculum transformation within the context of an introduction educational foundations course for predominately White pre-service teachers, a class taught from the perspective of a Latina and a white male professor. (2010, AERA web page, our mark).

15/16

The other papers all had implicit multicultural perspectives and the most expressive are listed below.

Roundtable sessions aimed at discussing the concern for social justice, equity and transformative action. A mutually-enhancing connection between human rights education, teacher education, Ghandian studies, multicultural education, and peace education was sustained from a local and global perspective.

In this scope, we point out Gross’ paper (2010) which aimed at exploring “[…] how stereotypes and prejudice practically operate in an intergroup encounter between people representing rival parties [Israeli Jewish and Arab students].” (AERA web page). The study analyzed their reactions to an exercise proposed which was called lemon exercise.

The study of Fuxman (2010) […] aims to contribute to the recent research by exploring one of the main obstacles to reconciliation: the ethos of conflict. Specifically, this study explores how socializing agents and personal experiences shape Israeli adolescents adherence to the Israeli ethos of conflict and how such adherence contributes to their willingness to compromise for peace. (op cit, AERA web page).

McGlynn and London’s research was presented in a paper session whose aim was to highlight the need to expand the vision of peace education by grounding the discourse and practices in socioculturally and ecologically diverse contexts. Therefore, their paper “[…] explores the notion of the school as a place where multiple and intersecting spheres of ‘difference’ come together, including religion, ethnicity, gender, ability/disability, socio-economic, and language.” (MCGLYNN; LONDON, 2010, AERA web page).

The analyses of the abstracts available on the site of AERA Annual Meeting 2010 led us infer that the main theoretical and methodological trends evidenced within Peace Education SIG focused mainly on critical multiculturalism (BANKS, 2004; CANDAU, 2008; CANEN; SANTOS, 2009) in an attempt to overcome cultural celebration and bring to discussion the categories which emerge mainly from the multicultural approach mentioned above such as: identity, difference, gender, race, ethnicity, class, religion, inclusion and exclusion, seeking to mitigate inequalities and social justice and achieve peace through education.

In 2011, AERA Annual Meeting took place in Louisiana, New Orleans under the theme Inciting the Social Imagination: Education Research for the Public Good. A total of 26 papers were presented at SIG Peace Education: 10 in roundtable sessions, 4 in paper sessions, 11 in symposium sessions, and 1 in a business meeting. It was noted that out of 26 papers, only 1 presented explicit multicultural perspective, whereas 21 presented it implicitly. The others did not work with multicultural approaches Once more, we call attention to the fact that a very expressive number of papers had the potential to dialogue with multicultural categories. This evidence confirms our argument concerning the existing connection between multiculturalism and peace studies.

The rising categories highlighted in the 21 summaries discussed multicultural concerns such as class, race, discrimination, stereotypes and prejudices, color, gender, feminism, crosscultural tolerance, human rights, equity, stereotypes, inclusion, social justice, indigenous people, ethnic groups, global and local, cultural diversity among others not less relevant to a multicultural perspective. Roundtable sessions focused on international applications in Higher Education, responsive positioning in peace education and urban applications and praxis considerations in peace education.

The only paper that focused on explicit multiculturalism was presented at a roundtable session. “[...] The theory and methodology of this research were anchored by the critical and postcolonial multiculturalism (MCLAREN, 1997, 2000), which was enlarged when associated with the peace studies (GALTUNG, 1990, 2005) […].” (COSTA, 2011, our mark). […]. This work revisits the Brazilian national curriculum for foreign language […] due to the relevance given to the transdisciplinarity of the theme cultural plurality in the national curriculum today, which highlights the commitment to fostering education public policies, curricular and pedagogical practices that emphasize inclusion, challenge of marginalization and a democratic access to schooling.

(COSTA, 2011, AERA web page).

Some works that although did not mention multicultural/ism, but seemed to have the potential to promote fruitful connections with the field are presented as follow.

Once more Gross’ paper (AERA 2011) entitled Combating Stereotypes and Prejudices in a Higher Education Conflictual Venue: a case study was presented. His work was already showed when the summaries of Peace Education SIG in AERA Annual Meeting 2010 were analyzed due to the relevance of its multiculturally implicit context which explores how stereotypes and prejudice operate within culturally rival parties.

The paper of Job (2011), Our World Cracked Open": Positioning of Educators During 9/11, analyzed how teachers positioned themselves in classroom during the events of 9/11. Different choices affected how their students incorporated it into their world understanding, pointing out the role of teachers during a crisis and how they can create agency toward peace in students when they may feel uncertain themselves. “The author incorporates her own experiences during both 9/11 and teaching in Israel during the Lebanon War as a narrative to frame her inquiry.” (op cit, AERA web page). Baily’s and Shaklee’s work (2011) shed lights on teachers in urban schools and their struggle to ensure the success of their students while trying to understand the multifaceted challenges facing students. Through a survey of the field the authors […] further research in peace education is a pivotal base through which urban teachers set the conditions for learning and a climate of positive regard while also providing a framework for urban students to engage in a world where the global is becoming the local and students are often ill-prepared for that notion.” (BAILY; SHAKLEE, 2011, AERA web page)

17/18

Paper sessions worked on research description addressing the understanding of students about peace and its antecedents in their changing world. It was identified in the studies students’ notions of peace and processes in schools and communities of multiple nations for the advancement of peace through formal and informal education. Contextually responsive pedagogy was carried out in the studies examined.

What Does Peace Mean? Kindergarteners Share Ideas (SUNAL, KELLEY; SUNAL; 2011), Pieces for Peace: Using Impromptu to Build Musical and Cross-Cultural Understanding (DOWNTON; PEPPLER, 2011), Uganda’s Road to Peace: Using Video Games to Teach Complex Values (BARAB, PETTYJOHN, SALEH, SEWELL; HASELTON; 2011) and Creating a Hopeful Future Through Community-Based Peace-Building in Burundi and Sierra Leone (NDURA-OUEDRAOGO; MAULDEN, 2011) were the papers presented at the referred sessions.

The work of music to develop cross-cultural understanding brought findings which suggest that youths’ shared constructive activity helped develop cross-cultural tolerance and build intuitive musical understanding (DOWNTON; PEPPLER, 2011).

Also, Ndura-Ouedraogo and Maulden’s study revealed through interviews, observations, participant observation, and document analysis To illustrate a symposium session, we highlight the paper of Gacasan (2011) due to the attention given to growing diversity in workforce.

It proposed that Organizations must move away from strategies to ‘manage diversity’ and lean toward a more inclusive ‘culture of diversity’. However organizations insist on investing millions of dollars in training that is still based on management theories versus pedagogies grounded in sociological and cultural educational theories.” (op cit, AERA web page).

Amongst the main theoretical and methodological trends discussed in this event were whiteness theory, African studies and women, gender studies, imperialism, and neo-colonialism, addressing oppression in diverse contexts. For the first time, in the period analyzed, a study entitled The Brazilian National Curriculum for Foreign Languages Revisited Through a Multiculturalism and Peace Studies Approach (COSTA, 2011), addressed the postcolonial multiculturalism according to the perspectives of authors such as Canen (2014), Canen (2012), Canen and Canen (2005), and Canen and Peters (2005), since this perspective conceives the differences within the difference, and so understands the identity construction as hybrid, fluid and transitory.

Summaries analyzed on the site of AERA Annual Meeting 2011 proved that theoretical and methodological trends evidenced within Peace Education SIG that year focused on implicit multiculturalism, as occurred in 2010. We argue that these studies have the potential to forge peace studies and; thus, promote peace education which was simply implicitly addressed in connection with critical multiculturalism.

Whilst Canen and Canen (2012) argued that […] peace education in a multicultural perspective could help imbue Higher Education curriculum development for peace. It contends that dimension should not be limited to a separate discipline in the way of an add-on to curriculum, but rather be part of the syllabuses not only in human and social sciences but also in the so-called “hard sciences” linked to technological areas. (AERA web page).

In 2012, AERA Annual Meeting took place in Vancouver, British Columbia under the theme Non Satis Scire: To Know is not Enough. A total of 23 papers were presented at SIG Peace Education: 9 in roundtable sessions, 10 in paper sessions and 4 in symposium sessions. It was noted that out of 23 papers, 2 presented explicit multicultural perspective, whereas 12 presented it implicitly. Once more, we emphasize that a considerable amount of papers worked with multicultural categories. It strengthens our argument about the connection between multiculturalism and peace studies.

Cavanagh (2012) discussed the Western countries changes in post 9/11 era, as well as schools’ since “Both are dominated by cultures that support war and violence. [and] As a result, schools have become sites of violent behavior (Morrison, 2003).” Results and findings showed that amongst the themes that emerged from the analysis of the data collected at a New Zealand school were:

The multicultural categories the 21 summaries focused were: inclusion x exclusion, cultural awareness, diversity, difference, social conditions, cultural interactions, identity, the “other”, inequities class, social change, social justice and whiteness.

The research studies with explicit multicultural perspectives were Canen and Canen’s paper (2012), entitled Peace Education in a Multicultural Perspective: Illustrating Possibilities in a Higher Education Institution presented in a roundtable session and Cavanagh’s paper (2012), in a symposium session entitled Creating Peaceful and Nonviolent Schools in the Midst of a Culture of War and Violence.

(a) Evidence of western culture values supporting war and violence in schools […]

3) Racism and privilege 4) Imposition of the dominant culture 5) Adversarial relationships (b) Alternative ways to create a culture of peace and nonviolence in schools.[…]

3) Respect biculturalism/multiculturalism 4) Be aware of power differences […] (CAVANAGH, 2012, AERA web page, our mark).

Amongst the roundtable sessions presented, the work of Verwoord (2012), Building Peace Through Quilt Making: participatory artistic quilt making for supporting peace building among youth in grades 4-7 called our attention for the artistic component emphasized.

The study was composed of ethnographic observations, participatory artistic quiltmaking on inclusion and exclusion, and interviews.

19/20

Analysis of the data revealed [that] The participatory component contributed to group development, a sense of inclusion, and the connecting of personal experiences to inclusion and exclusion. The quiltmaking process fostered a shift in perspective about others, […]. These outcomes demonstrate peacemaking and peacebuilding.” (op cit, AERA web page).

In a paper session, Ingenthron’s research presented that […] precepts of critical pedagogy lead to confronting and breaking through mythologizing ideologies [and] the significance of critical whiteness studies for understanding the relationship between peoples in the United States and Israel-Palestine; and [show that] interdisciplinary approaches and methodologies bring to light multiple dimensions of the Israel-Palestine conflict. (2012, AERA web page).

The content for a course on Israel-Palestine was analyzed from these theoretical assumptions such as whiteness studies that implicitly present multicultural perspectives when, for example, highlight the need to overcome mythologizing ideologies that contribute to support differences between people.

We can notice that multiculturalism was explicitly mentioned this time, validating that a link between peace studies and multiculturalism should empower perspectives toward valuing social justice and challenging prejudices.

A partial conclusion let us infer that theoretical and methodological approaches considered in Peace Education SIG 2012 evidenced an implicit connection with multiculturalism chiefly with its critical approach. The papers we have examined so far privileged a critical multicultural perspective although not overtly mentioned.

This has led us to infer that a postcolonial/ modern approach to multiculturalism has not come even implicitly to contribute to peace studies/education so far.

In 2013, AERA Annual Meeting took place in San Francisco, California under the theme Education and Poverty: Theory, Research, Policy, and Praxis. A total of 24 papers were presented at SIG Peace Education: 9 in roundtable sessions, 11 in paper sessions and 4 in symposium sessions. We figured out that out of 24 papers, 2 presented explicit multicultural perspective, whereas 16 presented it implicitly. More than half of the papers developed multicultural categories which validate our argument concerning the link between multiculturalism and peace studies. Amongst the multicultural categories the 24 summaries developed were: immigrant parents’ religion, inclusion, marginalized voices, human rights, silent minority, feminism, colonialism, inequity, “sameness”, silences differences, the “other”, discrimination and exclusion.

Two works carried out explicit multiculturalism. They were presented at roundtable and paper sessions. In the first, we highlight the study of Rajuan and Bekerman (2013) that sought to […] investigate how teachers of the Integrated Bilingual Schools in Israel construct their school culture in relation to various outside pressures […]. It was found that teachers perceive themselves as primarily pedagogical experts with a shared vision of multiculturalism and coexistence to the detriment of scholastic achievements […]. (op cit, AERA web page, our mark).

In the latter, we pinpoint the paper of Canen, Costa and Canen (2013) aimed to “[…] to discuss how a multiculturally oriented curriculum could promote educational inclusion and peace, thus mitigating the effects of educational and moral poverty in military and in civil educational institutions.” (2013, AERA web page, our mark).

Roundtable sessions brought a relevant discussion on Amerasians in Okinawa between US military fathers and Okinawan mothers (IDE, 2013). “The purpose of the paper is to discover the voice of a silent minority in peace education, and to develop a theory of peace education more inclusive than current alternatives […].” It addresses relevant questions such as: “what are the foundational problems that drive Amerasians to suffer as a silent minority? [and] How can Amerasians take a moderate course about the discussion on peace?” (IDE, 2013, AERA web page).

In a paper session, our study calls attention to the work of Cassidy (2013), whose provoking title Understanding of Community to Include Difference as a Foundation for Peace in Schools bring the discussion of “sameness” within community basis, which “[…] silences differences, expects conformity, and inherently excludes the “Other”.” (2013, AERA web page).

In the symposium session papers assumed that Given their close connections with children and youth, it is certainly understandable that teachers across many nations have struggled diligently for peace. This panel will provide insights into four such endeavors undertaken during the first decades of the 20th Century.

Henrietta Rodman, a NYC teacher, was active in the New York Woman’s Peace Party against militarization of schools in the 1910s. Julia Grace Wells, University of Wisconsin, travelled to Europe in 1914 as part of an international delegation attempting to end WW1. Following that debacle, both the National Union of Women Teachers in Britain, and an international committee of teacher unionists, continued to struggle for peace. While seemingly unsuccessful at the time, all four endeavours provide lessons for contemporary struggles.

(AERA 2013, Previous Annual Meetings web page).

As a result, these papers approached critical multiculturalism since categories such as feminism, women’s equality, religious beliefs, freedom and colonialism openly aroused.

Carter’s (2013) objective was to show “[…] the role of New York City teachers’ involvement in the WWI-era peace movement and the subsequent assault on their academic freedom as seen through the political activities of Henrietta Roman” (AERA web page).”

21/22

McLean (2013) hoped “[…] to enhance our understanding of women’s international peace activism, in particular, as it relates to Wales’ transnationalism, mobility, spiritual beliefs and her identification with the peace movement” (AERA web page). Smaller (2013) attempted “[…] to explore the role of teachers and teacher unions in their quest to achieve world peace and understanding during the 1920s and 1930s” (AERA web page). Goodman (2013) intended “To explore the relationships between the women’s movement, the peace movement, internationalism, anti-fascism and education during the inter-war period in the NUWT [The National Union of Women Teachers]”. (AERA web page).

According to one of the paper sessions Understanding needs that conflict evidences is a crucial component of peace education and other work to eliminate poverty. Conceptions of peace are contextually and culturally shaped. This session features analysis of students’ though processes and those of educators whose pedagogy this panel will describe.

(AERA 2013, Previous Annual Meetings web page).

In this scope, Cassidy (2013) explored that Community is generally understood as formed upon “sameness”. This conception silences difference, expects conformity, and inherently excludes the “Other”. As long as community is understood in terms of exclusion of difference—violence, discrimination, and poverty will be perpetuated. Education is an important context for youth to learn that community and difference are interdependent to foster a culture of inclusion and peace.

(AERA web page).

We noticed that in 2013, similar to 2010, 2011 and 2012 Peace Education SIG, the linkage between peace studies and multiculturalism in its critical perspective continued to be evident

and; thus, reinforces that these theoretical frameworks have much to contribute to peace education.

In 2014, AERA Annual Meeting took place in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania under the theme The Power of Education Research for Innovation in Practice and Policy. A total of 15 papers were presented at SIG Peace Education: 10 in paper sessions and 5 in roundtable sessions.

This time, out of 15 papers, 14 implicitly approached multicultural perspectives. The main categories with multicultural potential were: inclusion, social inequality, religion, people of color, racial groups, minorities, diversity, social justice and popular culture; however, we realized that there was no evidence of explicit multiculturalism in 2014.

In paper sessions, Edwards (2014) presented in his study “Implications […] for practitioners, facilitators, administrators, and researchers of Intergroup Dialogue. […].”, and offered “[…] some foundational suggestions for a broader discussion on interfaith, intercultural, and interethnic dialogue as a peacebuilding tool in other contexts, both in the United States and around the world.” (op cit, AERA web page).

Meanwhile, an exploratory survey study presented by Shammas (2014) about teaching an American Ethnic Studies course to Palestinian students from Al Azhar University in Gaza City illustrated an implicit multicultural approach whose “[…] main objectives of the study were to determine if learning about the historical struggles of people of color in the United States compel Palestinian students to identify with other racial groups in the United States.” (op cit, AERA web page). Also, “[…] various democratic and inclusive dialogic pedagogies that encourage interdisciplinary students to engage in dialogue about conflict and diversity.” (PARKER, 2014, AERA web page) were presented by Parker (2014) who assumes that Multimodal, dialogic pedagogies, such as circle processes, cooperative learning, critical thinking exercises, and interdisciplinary teams, are used to engage students in learning about peacebuilding and conflict resolution, within the context of diversity. (op cit).

In roundtable sessions McLean (2014) “[…] analyzed the approach that one magazine used in Canadian schools in the 1950s and 1960s to depict peace, diversity, social justice and conflict.” (AERA web page).

There was also a business meeting; however, there were no papers presentation.

As part of the SIG business meeting gathering, special presenters will provide a visual map of all current volumes in a book series on peace education and encourage participants to submit new book proposals. Participants will then take a "gallery walk" to visit with authors/editors of volumes in the book series who will discuss the innovations in their work. This interactive session will encourage collaborative networking and future innovations in the field of peace education.” (AERA, 2014, Previous Annual Meetings web page).

It is evident that in 2014, multiculturalism, although implicit, has one more time led the scene in Peace Education SIG. Out of 15 papers presented, only one had no multicultural perspective (see graphics below), whilst the others worked with categories that emerge within the critical multiculturalism, thus seeking to overcome social injustices to contribute to peace building departing from school settings.

When we delved into the analysis of the data presented during the period studied and look ahead to possibilities, challenges, promising directions and limitations to overcome for the next century to capture contributions to the field of peace education in the commemoration of the Centennial of American Educational Research Association, we reach some findings and results.

Firstly, the limited number of papers presented in 2014 within Peace Education SIG; secondly, that there was no paper with explicit multicultural dimensions.

Our study points out that it seems Peace Education SIG is looking forward to work under categories directly related to peace, such as violence, conflict resolution, mediation, negotiation, reconciliation, restorative justice, restorative practices, culture of care, justice and peace, non-violence, peace education, concept of peace, humanitarian law and militarism. Although the majority of the summaries analyzed are permeated by implicit multicultural perspectives, it seems the SIG is trying to outline its field, what we consider positive. However, this argument is a gap our study did not intend to confirm, but it leaves a door open for other findings.

Therefore, our argument that multiculturalism and peace studies have the potential to develop partnership to strengthen the field of

Source: the authors

peace education stays valid since out of 15 papers presented in 2014, 14 had implicit multicultural perspective developed. Moreover, in previous study (COSTA, 2009; COSTA; CANEN, 2007; 2008a; 2008b; 2008c), it was highlighted that an articulation between multiculturalism and peace studies can enhance a multicultural peace education.

As noticed before, intentions and similarities, as well as related categories between multiculturalism and peace studies lead to the conclusion that education research and organizations, either civil or military ones would benefit from an academic cooperation and partnership in times of globalization, multicultural workforce and on-going emerging cultural conflicts.

We claim that an academic effort to embrace all educational organizations, formal or nonformal, public or private ones interested in urging forward governmental initiatives and public policies in education to work toward inclusion and peace at schools settings should be the target in contemporary world.

For example, in previous work we had demonstrated that “syllabuses in technological areas such as engineering could enhance the understanding of the meaning of multicultural organizations” (CANEN; CANEN; COSTA, 2014).

This should be extended to military curricula that have also been seeking for educational research findings to support and guide their educational practices to support soldiers to cope with cultural challenges and threats demanded by the operational scenarios today.

In this context, we feel the need to leverage fruitful dialogues between multiculturalism and peace studies, mainly after the analysis of the graphic underneath where we can notice that it seems Peace Education SIG is moving toward excluding other contributions to the field.

In this direction, we infer that Multicultural/ Multiethnic Education: Theory, Research, and Practice SIG will be probably embracing studies whose intention would have been aimed at looking for connections with peace studies and peace education.

Brazilian civil and military educational discourses In our methodology path we translated the meanings and scopes of multiculturalism and peace studies into curricular practices and educational policies of educational institutions in Brazil such as: national curricular policies for foreign languages, a military training center and a civil Higher Education Institution.

A documentary analysis of Brazilian national curricular policies for foreign languages promoted reflection on how cultural plurality has been conceived as a transversal theme in Brazilian state level, whilst empirical experiences from the other sources were observed through in-depth interviews and oral discourses held with institutional leaders and actors directly involved with civil and military educational institutions.

The research of Brazilian national curricular policies for foreign languages revealed the prevalent categories in this document such as discoursive engagement, social construction of meaning, social and interactive view of language and learning.

The study of English language in a multicultural perspective highlighted the discussion on the transdisciplinarity of the theme cultural plurality in the Brazilian national curriculum. This discussion aimed to contribute to public education policies and to practices committed to valuing diversity, social inclusion and a culture of peace in time of crisis. It also pointed out improvements, limitations and opportunities presented in Brazilian national curriculum to deal with a multicultural peace oriented approach (COSTA, 2011). It placed emphasis on the criteria for the inclusion of foreign languages in Brazilian national curriculum, such as social responsibility, social justification and relevance of teaching and learning a second/foreign language (COSTA, 2001).

Since this curricular policy is currently in use in Brazil, we believe it was appropriate to revisit it in order to promote new dialogue and new perspectives. The theme cultural plurality proposed in Brazilian educational policies and practices is important because education in Brazil takes place in a multicultural environment surrounded by lack of respect for dierences. In this sense, our research highlighted the multicultural approach used in Brazilian national curriculum for foreign language through the lens of critical multiculturalism (MCLAREN, 2000; ZEUS, 2005), and associated with the peace studies (GALTUNG, 1990; 2005). As a result, the study called attention to asymmetrical power relations, construction of dierences and colonization of discourses in linguistic environments. It stressed the need to struggle against structural and cultural violence in school settings (GALTUNG, 1990) and the need to search for positive peace (op cit, 2005).

The critical revolutionary and post-colonial multiculturalism (MCLAREN, 1997; 2000) as already said, points out asymmetrical power relations from which cultural dierences emerge and seeks to promote the decolonization of linguistic constructions implanted in the language by prejudices and stereotypes.

These constructions reflect Western colonial perspectives and are registered in metaphors and other symbolic images what had been pointed out by Galtung (1990) as a mechanism of legitimizing cultural violence which will be shown in the empirical experiences presented underneath.

The data collected showed that even though a multicultural perspective is incipient within Brazilian pedagogical and curricular practices, there are trends evidenced in the discoursive source analyzed for working towards plurality.

25/26

We consider it a significant progress, particularly when the novelty of the theme and the doubts, mistrusts and discussions surrounding it are taken into account.

The national curriculum for foreign languages talks about The coexistence between boys and girls in the culture of the foreign language [...] the rights achieved by women in other countries, the organization of minorities (ethnic and non-ethnic) in other parts of the world [...] the issue of sexual orientation in other countries (BRASIL, 1998, p.73).

It also points out that “when someone uses a language, he or she does it from a place historically, culturally and institutionally located, which is defined in the multiple marks of his/her social identity and in light of political values and beliefs” (BRASIL, 1998, p.35).

In this direction, the national curriculum recognizes that In a multicultural country like Brazil, it is not constructive to work in classroom with a view that excludes much of the Brazilian population from the usual child representations in the pedagogical discourse (it also includes his/her representations in didactic material): white, catholic, medium class, speaker of an homogeneous variety [...] (BRASIL,1998, p.48).

This document emphasizes that “language is central to the determination of human relations and the individual social identity. This is the reason why it reaffirms the right to be culturally and linguistically different" (BRASIL, 1998, p.48).

These examples demonstrate that this curriculum attempt to instill educational practices that value cultural plurality. However, it leaves gaps because values technical approaches and focuses on content disconnected from cultural aspects.

This is seen in the discourse below: The goal is to involve the student in the construction of meaning from the beginning [fifth and sixth grade], with less focus on the systematic knowledge of the foreign language. In the fourth period [seventh and eighth grades) systematic knowledge of a foreign language may be increased, since the student will have developed the ability to engage in a foreign language (BRASIL, 1998, p.72).

At this moment, we question whether it is possible to consider that all students in the fifth and sixth grades have acquired the maturity or ability to develop a systematic knowledge or whether the development of more complex structures might contribute to school failure.

We also question whether it would not be more appropriate to guarantee that those students who are excluded early from the foreign language education process (many students enter the labor market before completing primary or even entering high school) have the opportunity to learn a foreign language from the point of view of their sociocultural environment. Wouldn't be more useful for these students to be exposed to activities that aim to promote reflection on and discussion of topics that work towards citizenship and broaden students' knowledge, rather than working toward the development of a systematic structure of the foreign language?

It seems that the national curricular discourse conceives that all students have a determined and prior knowledge that enables them to delve into foreign language systematic structures in a specific grade without considering the individualities and cultural backgrounds of the students.

Although the curriculum seems to be oriented towards a multicultural perspective, it changes its discourses and practices and in effect leans toward technical and homogeneous approaches. This approach considers students' differences chronologically and does not take into account their cultural differences.

The analysis of the discourse in the Brazilian national curricular policy for foreign languages has shown that there is the potential for multicultural practices which celebrate diversity and peaceful relations between peoples. At the same time, the analysis shows that cultural dimensions are not stressed enough in the curriculum and if they were, it would strengthen public education policies as well as promote curricular and teaching practices sensitive to the inclusion of differences, the elimination of inequalities and the construction of a culture of peace in educational environments (COSTA, 2001; 2011).

In the scope of the military, a study developed

by Costa and Canen (2008a) evidenced a perceived need for multicultural training in military schools. Actually, only recently the military has been considering the importance of working toward contemplating cultural dimensions in its educational system (COSTA, 2013).

[…] Army commanders know that critical shaping actions often occur prior to the urban operation in the form of professional education and training. […] which include- […] Multicultural understanding.

Brazilian and foreign military interviewees seem to understand cultural issues in broader terms, closer to local and national values. They seem to get close to Carter’s (2013) multicultural and contextual awareness knowledge inherent to peace oriented curriculum standard and to conceive culturally diverse identities in rather an essentialized approach opposed to fluid, hybrid and transitory identity construction approach (BEKERMAN et all, 2009). […]. We have a discipline called cultural awareness, and certainly it helps expand it beyond the borders of Brazil […] (leader a, 2012).

The following excerpts illustrate the way a multicultural curriculum has been perceived by three military instructors and peacekeepers interviewed who had a previous history of deployment in contexts marred by diversity and conflicts: Our instructions are based on training modules United Nations Core Pre-Deployment Training Module (CPDM). It has all framework information. We have a discipline called cultural awareness, and certainly it helps expand it beyond the borders of Brazil and CCOPAB has been a disseminator of these ideas (leader a, 2012).

Several instructors mention a concern with culture, the cultural context where soldiers will be performing their activities. For instance, in negotiating class we emphasize that aspect and what makes it much easier are the communication skills. But if I were to include a subject, it would be more focused on cultural issues of that country, which makes things much easier [...].

27/28

I would emphasize cultural history of the country [...] and give some tips that may be followed by those who are there, in the mission. [...] I would particularize the dimension of cultural awareness (leader b, 2012).

Those patrolling, a great deal have a lot of interaction with the local population and they will need to be culturally aware of the surroundings, particularly when it comes to whom they speak to, for example, [in some contexts] male soldiers should not approach women or speak to women […] so it is very important that those people doing that job have cultural understanding of what they can and cannot do […] however it is difficult to talk about a cultural training while the soldiers are in basic training and you do not know where they are going to. I suppose there are like general lessons you could teach them, based on trying to get soldiers to be more open to other experiences or develop their understanding about the existence of other cultures, about accepting different ways of working and different ways of living, but I think it would be difficult to teach them immediately about a culture of a particular country, because you know, they may go or not go there (leader c, 2012).

These interviewees seem to understand the development of sociocultural aspects in broader terms, closer to local and national values. In that sense, they seem to get close to Carter’s (2013) aforementioned multicultural and contextual awareness knowledge and dispositions inherent to peace oriented curriculum standards. At the same time, they seem to conceive those culturally diverse identities in rather an essentialized approach, as opposed to the fluid, hybrid and transitory identity construction approach espoused by authors such as Bekerman et all (2009).

However, it seems that a multicultural dimension has been in the limelight. The fact that the referred Center has recently evolved into Brazilian Peacekeeping Operations Joint Center had proved it. The initiative of re-naming and re-modeling the Center with the armed forces working together in a multicultural-like structure seems to make the point that the tendency and demands of military missions have really changed today. This is due to the fact that avoiding conflicts among people rather than states (SMITH, 2008) requires multidimensional and multicultural approaches (MOSKOS et all 2000), which should be reflected in multicultural educational practices and policies. Also, as claimed by some of the instructors and peacekeepers interviewed, cultural awareness, negotiating and communication skills have been pinpointed as crucial for that new army role, which could arguably be pointed as stepping stones towards cultural awareness and peace oriented curriculum perspective.

In the context of Brazilian civil Higher Education Institution (HEI) there have been challenges to rethink curriculum in human and in so-called hard sciences, not only to prepare future professionals to deal with cultural diversity and promote peace in schools and organizations, but also to nurture social, ethnic and racial inclusion in higher educational contexts which had been hitherto a remote dream for poverty stricken populations.

Canen and Canen (2012) have argued that professional development geared towards generating a culture that values plural voices and helps combat bullying against those perceived as the other can mitigate exclusionary eects which attain minorities and poorly represented groups in decision making spaces at universities and other non-academic organizations, thus transforming those arenas in favor of plurality and the challenge of moral poverty (CANEN; CANEN, 2008).

Based on the above, the following excerpts illustrate the way two leaders of a HEI seem to perceive the need for multicultural curricula as a way to lighten envy in these institutions.

They seem to perceive envy as the main reason for institutional conflicts and absence of peace and both linked it to a competition dimension inherent in contemporary organizations..

At the same time, they pointed out that the referred issue has not been either recognized or adequately faced by organizations and posited that their organizations have not been adequately prepared to deal with it.

Leader 1, for instance, claimed that “envy is more powerful in high echelons of HEI than in lower ones, it gets mixed with competition, but people do not use that taboo word, what they do is try to disqualify the others�.

29/30

In the same way, leader 2 also perceived envy as directly linked to competitive rather than collaborative climate and it has arguably prevailed in HEI lately: the quest for scientific involvement has been dwindling […], there is a relentless fight for resources […]. That really scares me because envy is a result of that continuing growing process that leads to competition and to the abandoning of humanistic values […]. (leader 2, 2012).

To promote peace and lessen deleterious effects of envy as moral poverty institutional trait, the interviewees stressed the pivotal role of the HEI curriculum, so as to prepare leaders to competently turn institutions into multicultural and peaceful organizations, as illustrated in the following excerpt of leader 2: Curriculum in any area of HE should have the contribution of educators, even if they are not specialists in specific areas. It should convey the notion of the fragility of the constructed world, it helps students to construct and deconstruct their views, and it gives the real dimension of human beings with all their smallness, diminishing the propensity for envy […]. (op cit) Therefore, from the life narratives, the need for HE curricula to more strongly incorporate disciplines that could better equip students to value cultural plural views and problematize their own could be perceived as an axe for a multicultural curriculum.

It is noteworthy that while in military institution the focus of the narratives seems to be on a multicultural curriculum that could raise cultural awareness in relation to peoples with different cultural values, in the HE the leaders seem to perceive a multicultural and peace oriented curriculum as crucial to combat envy as a source of moral poverty and conflicts.

Furthermore, whilst in military discourses identity seems to be perceived in a rather essencialized way present in dichotomies such as we and the others, it has been regarded in a more fluid and transitory way in the discourses of the leaders from the referred HE. In either way, the relevance of embedding curricula in a multicultural peace oriented perspective in civil and military settings could be gleaned and it is hoped that future research deepen the ways it turns into a real driving force in both scenarios.

CONCLUSION FINAL REMARKS & RECOMMENDATIONS

We consider the present time very promising for fostering multicultural projects in either civil or military educational institutions, so as to overcome monocultural curricula toward raising intercultural studies and nurturing multicultural attitudes in education public policies and practices, either in Brazil, North America and elsewhere.

Multiculturalism in the military arena should represent possibilities of coping with the tensions hierarchical organizations have been facing to address the demands of multicultural organizations in contemporary contexts.

This should be surely translated into educational practices that seek to prepare war fighters competent enough to cope with the challenges operational scenarios require today such as interoperability, civil-military relations, and joint combination work. Thus, warfighters should be able to use intercultural approaches, negotiation and mediation strategies amongst others related.

In this direction, we point out that studies we already presented at Peace Education SIG sought to show the needs a military educational institution presented to cope with the demands of contemporary operational scenarios.

Future contributions should be toward investigating Peace Education SIG listening to its

Chairs as well as its Board members in order to know their motivations and intentions for the future. In the same direction, we recommend to analyze other SIG that produce work on peace studies such as International Peace Research Association (IPRA) to figure out its main theoretical and methodological trends for the field as well as its connection with multicultural perspectives.

It is worth mentioning that the analyses were made from the summaries available at the Annual Meeting Online Searchable Program on AERA site. It was not our intention to verify full papers on the Online Paper Repository , chiefly because it is a volunteer decision of the authors to upload them. However, we are aware that this procedure may reveal other theoretical and methodological perspectives.

Therefore, we suggest that other researches fill this gap in order to bring to light other relevant information that may consolidate this study.

Recommendations to the field would include the need to embrace military academies, their motivations and resistances to operate in multicultural and clashing societies through cooperation with civil Higher Educational Institutions that should overcome militarization criticisms to join eorts that seek to provide defense, security and; thus, peace for societies.

BANKS, J. A. (Ed.) (2004), Diversity and Citizenship Education: global perspectives. San Francisco. USA: Jossey-Bass.

BEKERMAN, Z; ZEMBYLAS, M.; MCGLYNN, C. (2009), Working toward the de-essentialization of identity categories in conflict and post conflict societies: Israel, Cyprus, and Northern Ireland, Comparative Education Review, v. 53, n. 2, p. 213-234.

Bortolini, A. (2008), Diversidade sexual e de gênero na escola: uma perspectiva interrelacional e intercultural. In: Bortolini, A. (Org.), Diversidade sexual e de gênero da escola: educação, cultura, violência e ética. Rio de Janeiro: Pró-Reitoria de Extensão, UFRJ, p.

26-51.

BRASIL. (1998), Ministério de Educação e Cultura. Parâmetros curriculares nacionais: Terceiro e quarto ciclos do ensino fundamental: Língua estrangeira. Brasília: Secretaria de Educação Fundamental.

CANDAU, V. M. F. (2012), Sociedade multicultural e educação: tensões e desafios. In: CANDAU, V. M. F. (Org.), Didática crítica e intercultural: aproximações. Petrópolis. Ed. Vozes, p. 19-54.

CANDAU, V. M. (2008), Multiculturalismo e educação: desafios para a prática pedagógica. In: MOREIRA,A. F. B.; CANDAU, V. M. (Orgs.), Multiculturalismo: diferenças culturais e práticas pedagógicas. Petrópolis: Vozes, v. 1, p. 13-37.

sidade, Niterói, n. 11, p. 89-98, jan./jun.

Canen, A. (2012), Currículo e multiculturalismo: reflexões a partir de pesquisas realizadas. In: SANTOS. L. L. DE C. P.; FAVACHO, A. M. P. (Orgs.), Políticas e Práticas Curriculares: desafios contemporâneos. Curitiba: Ed. CRV, p. 237-250.

CANEN, A.; CANEN, A. G.; COSTA, R. P. (2014), Higher education and the preparation of multicultural global citizens: the case of a technological curriculum. In: POPOV, N.; WOLHUTER, C.; ERMENC, K. S.; HILTON, G.; OGUNLEYE, J.; CHIGISHEVA, O. (Orgs.), Education s role in preparing globally competent citizens. 1st ed Sofia: Bulgarian Comparative Education Society, v. 1, p. 296-302.

CANEN, A. G.; CANEN, A. (2012), Challenging envy in organizations: multicultural approaches and possibilities, Business Strategy Series (in press).

CANEN, A. G.; CANEN, A. (2008), Multicultural leadership: the costs of its absence in organizational conflict management, International Journal of Conflict Management, v. 19, p. 419.

CANEN, A. G.; CANEN, A. (2005), Organizações multiculturais. Rio de Janeiro: Ciência Moderna.

CANEN, A.; PETERS, M. A. (2005), Editorial: Issues and dilemmas of multicultural education: theories, policies and practices, Policy Futures in Education, v. 3, n. 4, p. 309-313.

CANDAU, V. M. (2004), Sociedade multicultural e educação: tensões e desafios. In: Candau, V. M. F. (Org.), Didática crítica e intercultural: aproximações. Petrópolis. Ed. Vozes, p. 19-54.

CANEN, A.; SANTOS, A. R. dos (Orgs.) (2009), Educação multicultural: teoria e prática para professores e gestores escolares. Rio de Janeiro: Ciência Moderna.

CANEN, A. (2014), Currículo para o desafio à xenofobia: algumas reflexões multiculturais na educação, Revista Conhecimento e Diver-

CANEN, A.; XAVIER, G. P. de (2012), Gestão do currículo para a diversidade cultural: discursos circulantes em um curso de formação

THEORETICAL REFERENCES continuada de professores e gestores, Currículo sem Fronteiras, v.12, n. 2, p. 306-325.

CARTER, C. (2013), Standards for peace education. In: HARRIS, I.; MORRISON, M., Peace education, 3rd ed London: McFarland, 2013.

COSTA, R. P. (2013), The revolution in military affairs in the scope of military education. In: MINCHEV, D.; BAEV, J.; GROEV, K. (Orgs.), Technology and Warfare. 1st ed. Sofia: Urch Alma/Sofia University Press, v. 1, p. 323-335.

COSTA, R. P. (2009), Multiculturalismo e estudos para a paz: articulação possível no preparo e no emprego de militares para missões de paz. Rio de Janeiro, 2009. Thesis (Doctorate in Education)-Faculty of Education, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro.

Available at: < http://www.educacao.ufrj.br/ppge/ppgeteses-2009.html>. In: 3 Mar. 15.

COSTA, R. P. (2001), O ensino do inglês em uma ótica multicultural. Rio de Janeiro, 2009.

Dissertation (Master in Education)-Faculty of Education, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Available at: < http://www.educacao.ufrj.br/ppge/ppge-teses-2009.html>. In: 11 Mar. 15.

COSTA, R. P.; CANEN, A. (2008a), Multiculturalism and peace studies: the case of education for peacekeeping forces in Brazil, Journal of Stellar Peacemaking, v. 3, n. 3. At: <http://74.127.11.121/peacejournal/volume_index/9/v3n3a5.html>. In: 27 Oct. 2014.

COSTA, R. P.; CANEN, A. (2008b), Multiculturalism and peace studies: the need of a dialogue in/for multicultural/ peace education.

Paper presented at the International Peace Research Association 2008 Global Conference, 2008, Leuven. Building Sustainable Futures - Enacting Peace and Development.

COSTA, R. P.; CANEN, A. (2008c), Multiculturalism and peace education: possible connections to improve military and civil education.

Paper presented at the International Congress on Blue Black Sea: new dimensions of security, energy, economy and education, 2008, Sakarya. International Congress on Blue Black Sea: new dimensions of security, energy, economy and education.

COSTA, R. P.; SCHIMITT, V. G. H.; MORETO Luís Neto (2012). Desvendando a administração em ambientes militares. Paper presented at the XVII Congreso Internacional del CLAD, 2012, Cartagena de Indias, Colombia. XVII Congreso Internacional del CLAD sobre la reforma del estado y dela administración pública.

DENZIN, N.; LINCOLN, Y. (2003), Handbook of Qualitative Research. New York: Sage Publications.

GALTUNG, J. (2005), Peace studies: a ten point primer. Conference in Nanjing University, Nanjing, China, At: <http://www.oldsite.transnational.org/SAJT/forum/meet/200 5/Galtung_PR_Primer.html>. In: 27 Oct. 2014.

GALTUNG, J. (1969), Violence, peace and peace research, Journal of peace research, v.

6, n. 3, p. 167-191.

GALTUNG, J. (1990), Cultural of violence, Journal of Peace Research, v. 27, n. 23, p.

291-305.

HALL, S. (2003), Da diáspora: identidades e mediações culturais. Belo Horizonte: Editora: UFMG. HAGE, J. A. A. (2004), Caráter nacional e diplomacia brasileira, Caderno de Estudos da UNIFEOB, São Paulo, ano 3, n. 5, p. 40-72.

JACCOUD. M. (2005), Princípios, tendências e procedimentos que cercam a justiça restau-

rativa. In: SLAKMON, C.; DE VITTO, R. C. P.; PINTO, R. S. G. (Eds.), Justiça Restaurativa.

Brasília: Ministério da Justiça e Programa das Nações Unidas para o DesenvolvimentoPNUD.

possibilidades. Petrópolis: Vozes, p. 15-33.

McLAREN, P. (1997), Multiculturalismo Crítico. São Paulo: Cortez, 1997.

WEIGERT, K.M. (1999), Moral dimensions of peace studies: a case for service-learning. In: WEIGERT, K.M.; CREW, R. J. (Orgs.), Teaching for Justice: concepts and models for servicelearning in peace studies. Washington DC: American Association for Higher Education, p. 9-22.

MELO, R. B. C. L. de. (2008), O processo de institucionalização das operações de paz multidimensionais da ONU no pós-guerra fria: direitos humanos, polícia civil e assistência eleitoral. Orientadora: Mônica Herz. Rio de Janeiro, 2008. Tese (Doutorado em Relações Internacionais)- Instituto de Relações Internacionais, PUC, Rio de Janeiro.

SMITH, R. (2008), The utility of force: the art of war in the modern world. New York: Vintage Books Edition, 2008.

PAPERS CONSULTED AT THE AMERICAN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION ONLINE SEARCHABLE PROGRAM

MOSKOS, C. C., WILLIAMS, J. A., SEGAL, D. R. (2000), The postmodern military: armed forces after the Cold War. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

AERA 2013, previous meetings Available at :< http://www.aera.net/EventsMeetings/AnnualMeeting/PreviousAnnualMeetings/tabid /10213/Default.aspx>. In: 20 Mar. 2015.

OLIVEIRA, L. F. de (2012). Perspectiva e emergência de construção de uma análise decolonial: conclusões? In: História da África e dos Africanos na Escola: desafios políticos, epistemológicos e identitários para a formação dos professores de História. Rio de Janeiro: FAPERJ/Imperial Novo Milênio, p.263-325.

AERA, 2014, previous meetings Available at: < http://www.aera.net/EventsMeetings/AnnualMeeting/PreviousAnnualMeetings/tabid /10213/Default.aspx>. In: 20 Mar. 2015.

PETERS, M. A. (2005), Education, post-structuralism and the politics of difference. In: CANEN, A.; PETERS, M. A. (Eds.), Policy Futures in Education, v. 3, n. 4, p. 436-445.

BAILY, S.; SHAKLEE, B. D. (2011), Urban Teaching: A Place for Peace Education. Paper presented at the 2011 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association New Orleans. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

PINTO, R. C. G. (2005), Justiça restaurativa é possível no Brasil? In: SLAKMON, C.; DE VITTO, R. C. P.; PINTO, R. S. G. (Eds.), Justiça Restaurativa. Brasília: Ministério da Justiça e Programa das Nações Unidas para o Desenvolvimento- PNUD.

BARAB, S. A.; PETTYJOHN, P. K.; SALEH, A.; SEWELL, B; HASELTON, M. (2011), Uganda’s Road to Peace: Using Video Games to Teach Complex Values. Paper presented at the 2011 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association New Orleans.

Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

SANTIAGO, M.; AKKARI, A.; MARQUES, L. P., A. (2013), Os caminhos do interculturalismo no Brasil. In: Educação intercultural: desafios e

BRANTMEIER (2010), Multicultural Peace Education: Integrating Gandhian and Deep Ecological Norms in Teacher Education.

Paper presented at the 2010 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Colorado. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

BRANTMEIER, ARAGON AND YODER (2010), Multicultural Peace Education: Empowering Preservice Teachers. Paper presented at the 2010 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Colorado. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

CANEN, A.; CANEN, A. G. (2012), Peace Education in a Multicultural Perspective: Illustrating Possibilities in a Higher Education Institution. Paper presented at the 2012 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Vancouver. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

CANEN, A.; COSTA, R. P.; CANEN, A. G. (2013), Cultural Challenges to Identity Building: Tensions in Civil and Military Educational Leadersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Narratives. Paper presented at the 2013 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association San Francisco.

Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

CARTER, P. A. (2013), Henrietta Rodman and the Peace Movement: New York City Teachers in the World War I Era. Paper presented at the 2013 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association San Francisco. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

CASSIDY, K. (2013), Understanding Community to Include DiďŹ&#x20AC;erence as a Foundation for Peace in Schools. Paper presented at the 2013 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association San Francisco.

Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

CAVANAGH, T. (2012) Creating Peaceful and Nonviolent Schools in the Midst of a Culture of War and Violence. Paper presented at the 2012 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Vancouver. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

COSTA, R. P. (2012), The Potential of Research to Improve Military Education and Serve the Public Good. Paper presented at the 2012 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Vancouver. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

COSTA, R. P. (2011), The Brazilian National Curriculum for Foreign Languages Revisited Through a Multiculturalism and Peace Studies Approach. Paper presented at the 2011 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association New Orleans. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

COSTA, R. P.; CANEN, A. (2010), Multicultural Peace Education in Brazil: State of Art and Partnerships Between Military and Civilian Education. Paper presented at the 2010 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Colorado. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

DOWNTON, M; PEPPLER, K. A. (2011), Pieces for Peace: Using Impromptu to Build Musical and Cross-Cultural Understanding. Paper presented at the 2011 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association New Orleans. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

EDWARDS, S. (2014), Intergroup Dialogue and Religious/Spiritual Identity: Addressing Faith Privilege, Conflict, and Marginalization in U.S. Higher Education. Paper presented at the 2014 Annual Meeting of the American

Educational Research Association Pennsylvania. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

FUXMAN, S. (2010), Socializing Agents and Personal Experiences as Predictors of Israeli Adolescents Understanding of Conflict and Peace. Paper presented at the 2010 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Colorado. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

GACASAN, K. (2011), Resistance to AntiRacist Curriculum: Diversity Management Versus Diversity Education. Paper presented at the 2011 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association New Orleans. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

GOODMAN, J. (2013), Peace, Anti-Fascism, and Empire: Activism in the National Union of Women Teachers (1920-1939). Paper presented at the 2013 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association San Francisco. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

GROSS, Z. (2010), Combating Stereotypes and Prejudices in a Higher-Education Conflictual Venue: A Case Study. Paper presented at the 2010 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Colorado.

Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

IDE, K. (2013), Lost in Peace Education: U.S. Diplomacy and Amerasian Educational Rights. Paper presented at the 2013 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association San Francisco. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

INGENTHRON, E. T. (2012), Teaching About Israel-Palestine in the United States: An Inter-

disciplinary Approach. Paper presented at the 2012 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Vancouver.

Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

JOB, J. (2011), Our World Cracked Open: Positioning of Educators During 9/11. Paper presented at the 2011 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association New Orleans. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

MCGLYNN, C.; LONDON, T. D. (2010), Beyond Integrating Catholics and Protestants: Leadership for Inclusion in Integrated Schools in Northern Ireland. Paper presented at the 2010 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Colorado. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

McLEAN, L. (2013), Continuous Mediation Without Armistice: Julia Grace Wales as a Transnational Peace Activist and Educator, 1900-1950. Paper presented at the 2013 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association San Francisco. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

McLEAN, L. (2014), World Trouble Spots as New Year Begins: Teaching About War and Peace in the 1950s and 1960s. Paper presented at the 2014 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Pennsylvania. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

NDURA-OUEDRAOGO, E.; MAULDEN, P. A. (2011), Creating a Hopeful Future Through Community-Based Peace-Building in Burundi and Sierra Leone. Paper presented at the 2011 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association New Orleans. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

PARKER, C. (2014), Conflict Resolution Practices in Diverse Contexts: Exploring Interdisciplinary Professionals’ Experiences With Conflict and Diversity. Paper presented at the 2014 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Pennsylvania. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

RAJUAN, M.; BEKERMAN, Z. (2013), Pedagogy of Peace in the Integrated Palestinian-Jewish Schools in Israel: Personal or Political? Paper presented at the 2013 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association San Francisco. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

SHAMMAS, D. S. (2014), Empowering University Students Under Siege: Teaching American Studies Overseas. Paper presented at the 2014 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Pennsylvania.

Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

SMALLER, H. (2013), International Teacher Unions and the Struggle for Peace: The Hermann-Jordan Plan, 1923-1937. Paper presented at the 2013 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association San Francisco. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

SUNAL, C. S.; KELLEY, L. A.; SUNAL, D. W. (2011), What Does Peace Mean? Kindergarteners Share Ideas. Paper presented at the 2011 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association New Orleans. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

VERWOORD, R. E. M. (2012), “Building Peace” Through Quilt Making: Participatory Artistic Quilt Making for Supporting Peace Building Among Youth in Grades 4-7. Paper presented at the 2012 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Vancouver.

Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

www.moderndiplomacy.eu