Towards a sustainable and holistic model of peace education: a critique of conventional modes of peace education through dialogue in Israel

Abstract

This article explores ways of improving peace education, placing emphasis on peace education programmes in Israel that use dialogue to foster mutual understanding and respect. This article offers a critical assessment of contemporary Israeli peace education initiatives, emphasizing that current peace education programmes in Israel have failed to significantly improve social attitudes between Arabs and Jews. Critiques of contemporary forms of peace education focus on their psychological and social contexts, and the ways in which the framing of peace education has substantive impacts on the likelihood of its success and its sustainability. Emphasis is placed on the importance of incorporating affective rather than primarily cognitive models for promoting coexistence; the importance of pursuing long-term peace education programming rather than the predominant short-term 'encounter group' model; and the need for a comprehensive social and political approach to peace education that extends beyond schools and embraces society as a whole.

Conflict, transition and education for ‘political generosity’: learning from the experience of ex-combatants in Northern Ireland

“…6 Moreover, as has been suggested in the context of coexistence programmes, schools do not act in a vacuum. The success of initiatives like 'Prison to Peace' is dependent on the development of a supportive societal culture and trans-generational engagement with the issues being explored (Bar-Tal 2004;Schimmel 2009) so that young people exploring these issues in school find receptive ears at home and in their communities.…”

Dialogue and Other ‘Men's Business’: Gender, Conflict and Multicultural Politics in the Diaspora

“…(Dovidio et al 2003: 17) Intergroup conflict can have good and bad outcomes, especially when topics discussed are controversial (Nagda 2006: 556), and in the case of deeply-rooted conflicts longer term behavioural and attitudinal change is typically hard to come by (Schimmel 2009). The emphasis on relationships and communication in intergroup can privilege more powerful groups, who tend to be the beneficiaries of 'bridgebuilding' efforts (Phillips et al 2013).…”

Education for Peace in the Mexican context

“…Indeed, Marc Howard Ross (2010, 184) has argued that they fail to give an adequate account of the role that institutions and practices can play in the achievement and maintenance of peace. Schimmel (2009) suggests an affective peace education model rather than a cognitive one, and identifies the need to develop a comprehensive social and political approach that attains a "ripple effect" or "transference" of peace education beyond the schools and towards society as a whole.…”