INTRODUCTION

MULTICULTURALISM AND PEACE STUDIES: A THEORETICAL DEBATE

METHODOLOGY: DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

CONCLUSION, FINAL REMARKS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

THEORETICAL REFERENCES

MULTICULTURALISM AND PEACE STUDIES ExPANDING FRONTIERS TOwARD GEOPOLITICSAND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

REJANE P. COSTA is Major at Brazilian army. She is cur-rently assistant for the Center for Strategic Studies at WarCollege, Ministry of Defense, in Brazil, as well as adjunctcoordinator and researcher at the Laboratory for Societyand Defense Studies. Her research interests are: multi-culturalism, peace studies, military education andpeacekeeping missions. She has produced and pre-sented her work worldwide, in national and interna-tional academic settings.

ANA IVENICKI is a Professor in the Department of Edu-cational Studies at the Federal University of Rio deJaneiro. She also is a Researcher for the Brazilian Re-search Council (CNPq). Her research interests are: multi-cultural and comparative education, teacher education,and institutional evaluation. She has widely publishedin national and international educational journals. Sheis the author of some books, among which: Canen, A.(2009), Teacher Education and Competence in an Inter-cultural Perspective: some reflections in Brazil and theUK, published by Lambert Academic Publishing.

REjANE P. COSTA, ANA IvENICKI

This special report seeks to examine how mul-ticultural and peace education have beenviewed in Brazilian and North American liter-ature, as gleaned from both Brazilian researchstudies and the articles presented in Peace Ed-ucation Special Interest Group (SIG) at Ameri-can Education Research Association (AERA) Annual Meetings in the last five years(2010-2014). It also shows research results presented in dif-ferent international academic events such asInternational Council on Education for Teach-ing (ICET) 52º World Assembly & 7º AnnualBorder Pedagogy Conference 2007, Interna-tional Peace Research Association (IPRA)Meeting 2008 and International Congress onBlue Black Sea Meeting 2008. The argument is that the articulation of mul-ticulturalism and peace studies has the poten-tial to build fruitful dialogues to nurture peacein education and societies, chiefly if this per-spective informs public policies in educationabout the need to enhance a multicultural un-derstanding related to problematize stereo-types against those considered “different”from standard measures at school settings, ei-ther in military or civil education.

Amongst the disciplines represented by AERAmembers, psychology, statistics, sociology,history, economics, philosophy, anthropology,and political science are included (AERA website); however, due to its scope, we considerrelevant to promote dialogues with geopoli-tics and international relations, because geo-graphic influences on power relationshipsimpact not only the field of international rela-tions, but also the field of education as well.Therefore, this study seeks to capture contri-butions to the field, looking ahead to expand-ing frontiers, possibilities, challenges andpromising directions which take into accountthe perspectives and contributions of geopol-itics and international relations for the nextcentury.

According to the United Nations , educationis amongst the eight Millennium Develop-ment Goals (MDGs) . The eight Millennium De-velopment Goals range from halving extremepoverty rates to halting the spread ofHIV/AIDS and providing universal primary ed-ucation, all by the target date of 2015. This isthe outline agreed by all countries and lead-ing development institutions.

INTRODUCTION

They have galvanized unprecedented effortsto meet the needs of the poorest in the world.The UN is also working with governments,civil society and other partners to build on themomentum generated by the MDGs and carryon with an ambitious post-2015 developmentagenda (UN web site).

So far, the results have shown that progresshas been made towards achieving the Millen-nium Development Goals. Global povertycontinues to decline. More children than everare attending primary school. Child deathshave dropped dramatically. Access to safedrinking water has been greatly expanded.Targeted investments in fighting malaria,AIDS and tuberculosis have saved millions (UNweb site).

It seems the MDGs are making a real differ-ence in people’s lives, and according to UNweb site this progress can be expanded inmost of the world’s countries by the targetdate of 2015 with strong leadership and ac-countability. After 2015, efforts to achieve aworld of prosperity, equity, freedom, dignityand peace will continue vigorously.

With the conclusion of MDGs’ goals at the endof 2015, world leaders have called for an am-bitious, long-term agenda to improve peo-ple’s lives and protect the planet for futuregenerations. This post-2015 developmentagenda is expected to tackle many issues, in-cluding ending poverty and hunger, improv-ing health and education, making cities moresustainable, combating climate change, andprotecting oceans and forests (UN web site).According to information available on UN website, governments are in the midst of negoti-ating, and civil society, young people, busi-nesses and others are also having their say inthis global conversation. This way, world lead-ers are expected to adopt the agenda at theSpecial Summit on Sustainable Developmentin New York in September 2015.

From this perspective, we invite geopoliticsand international relations to reflect upon ed-ucation, looking ahead for challenges and op-portunities to join efforts in order to promotepartnerships and cooperation which con-tribute to overcome moral poverty and socialinequalities towards achieving inclusion and;thus, peace.The United Nations is in essence a multicul-tural organization that should respond to avariety of conflicts around the world, seekingto maintain security and peace. Amongstthese conflicts we highlight the ones whichare motivated by cultural components such asethnical, religious and linguistic conflicts thatshould be addressed in different contexts soas to overcome prejudice and stereotypesthat impede to mitigate violence in the con-temporary world.Departing from a post-colonial approach(HALL, 2003; PETERS, 2005), our research hasbeen geared towards challenging monocul-tural curricula in educational policies and ped-agogical practices, shedding lights on therelevance of promoting a culture of peacethrough investment in multiculturally ori-ented education professionals and organiza-tions, embracing the military ones as well thatalthough beyond formal educational patterns,feel the need today to be included in/by soci-ety standards in order to enhance dialoguesrelated to the field of defense and security. Itis worth mentioning that this field was veryrecently considered by government initiativesestablished between the Ministry of Defenseand Ministry of Education in Brazil to fostercivil and military Higher Education Institutions(HEI) cooperation, so as to promote demo-cratic practices that embrace Brazilian societyto take part in discussions related to defenseand security.Our methodological path was guided by qual-itative investigation (DENZIN; LINCOLN, 2003),and thus we departed from civil and militaryeducational organizations and how they copewith cultural plurality.

Our focus; therefore, relies on the limits andchallenges of their practices and the potentialthey present to overcome such threats. Thus,we intend to present innovative theoreticaland methodological approaches to meet de-mands these organizations have been facingto build more inclusive environments.

We will firstly present a discussion of multicul-turalism and peace studies, emphasizingmainly categories, associated concepts andtensions pervading them. Thus, we intend todiscuss the meanings and scopes of theseconcepts and their translation into the educa-tional practices of the selected sources: a)Brazilian national curricular policies for foreignlanguages; b) a Brazilian military training cen-ter that prepares soldiers and civilians to de-ploy in peacekeeping missions; c) a civilHigher Education Institution that prepares ed-ucators in Brazil.

Secondly, we will bring a documentary analy-sis of source (a) to reflect upon cultural plural-ity conceived as a transversal theme in theBrazilian state level and some empirical expe-riences from the other sources which were ob-served through in-depth interviews and oraldiscourses held with institutional leaders andactors directly involved with civil and militaryeducational policies as well as curricula andeducational practices.

We will next explore AERA Annual MeetingOnline Searchable Program[3] to calculate thesummaries of papers presented during 2010-2014 which considered multicultural perspec-tives within peace education.Finally, we willpoint out explicitly and implicitly [4] multicul-tural categories presented, and finally we willshed lights on the potentials they seem toconvey in terms of developing fruitful dia-logues with peace studies in the scope of plu-ral educational institutions, both civil andmilitary.

Our aim is to analyze how multiculturalismhas crosscut the AERA Peace Education SIG inthe last five years in order to leverage moredemocratic practices in education and soci-eties. That includes challenging the view thattends to oppose civil and military education,arguing that military curriculum has beenchallenged so as to cope with the tensions ofhierarchal practices within a multicultural or-ganization (COSTA; SCHIMITT; MORETO, 2012). At this point, the main contribution we intendto offer relates to pinpointing emphases aswell as gaps presented in the studies at SIGPeace Education during the mentioned pe-riod. We highlight the fact that studies in mil-itary education still beg for further dialogueswith peace education, so as to strengthen theunveiling of curricular intentions, limits andcapabilities that have guided soldiers’ prepa-ration. This perspective is especially relevanttoday since the military has been facing newchallenges and threats regarding the natureof conflicts and violence which differ from theparadigm that had guided the industrial warin the past (COSTA, 2013). Therefore, one ofthe challenges has been to prepare soldiers tocope with the multicultural dimensions of themissions nowadays.The argument that pervades our study is thatthe dialogue between multiculturalism andpeace studies would boost both areas and ef-fectively contribute toward civil and militaryeducation that aims to reach more inclusiveand peaceful environments in an increasinglymulticultural and clashing world.

05/06

The multicultural perspective that guides ourwork overcomes cultural contemplation(BANKS, 2004; CANDAU, 2008; CANEN; SAN-TOS, 2009) so as to reach postcolonial andpostmodern approaches that seek to interpretdifferences within difference toward a morefluid, hybrid and transitory comprehension ofidentity construction (CANEN; PETERS, 2005;HALL, 2003).As a result, we have built our argument on themain categories developed by the aforemen-tioned perspectives such as: identity, differ-ence, gender, race, ethnicity, class, religion,sex, inclusion and exclusion, universalism andrelativism and their variations, according tothe authors’ interpretations.To approach multiculturalism we should firstlybe aware of the polysemy of the term ‘multi-cultural’ and its different interpretations aswell as the scientific and political approachesthat outline this field today. Multiculturalism in its folkloric, critical andpost-critical approaches, according to authorssuch as Canen and Canen (2005) and Canenand Peters (2005) departs from the simply cel-ebration of differences toward other stepsthat problematize the construction of

differences – the so called critical multicultur-alism – and also incorporate post-critical/colo-nial/structural perspectives that realize theidentity building as a continuum thatemerges within intergroup relations and cul-tural hybridism processes which recognize dif-ferences within the difference.

According to Canen (2012) theoretical andmethodological responses that crosscut bor-ders are required so as to build dialogues andovercome universalistic and ethnocentricviews. To understand this context as hybridand mixed (CHARLOT cited in CANEN, 2012) isan alternative proposal to initiate a compre-hension of this body of study that requiresalso hybrid and diversified responses, espe-cially when thought within education.

Based on those ideas, in Brazilian literature,Canen (op cit) suggests that a multiculturalcurriculum should be understood beyond bi-nary oppositions that impact on particularand universal speeches and views to under-stand and overcome the mechanisms(real andsymbolic), processed inside that end up pro-ducing differences and prejudices.

MULTICULTURALISM AND PEACE STUDIESA THEORETICAL DEBATE

The author points out, along with others, thatthe post-colonial multicultural perspective/postmodern/post-structural (CHUEH, 2005;D'ADESKY, 2001; LEONARDO, 2005; McCATHY,2005; MUNANGA, 2000; OLIVEIRA, 2006; PE-TERS, 2005; SISS, 2003; ZONINSEIN, 2006 apudCANEN, 2014) enables that curricula are de-signed and developed from continuous con-structions and permanent negotiations thatchallenge xenophobic views. Consequently,Canen (2014) points out that the curriculumwishing to challenge xenophobia can benefitfrom postcolonial multiculturalism and white-ness studies because they go beyond diversitycontemplation to question preconceived andexclusionary perspectives.

Likewise, Canen and Xavier (2012) report thatupdating teachers’ education in a multicul-tural perspective is also relevant to changeschool since it promotes awareness of educa-tion professionals for developing plurality andpreparing for its incorporation into the Brazil-ian curriculum development. Oliveira (2012)points out the possibility of building an 'other’thought on Brazilian social history throughthe education of ethnic and racial relations, asproposed by Brazilian Law10.639/03. This pro-posal is embedded by new interpretations ofnational identity, which is less ethnocentric,since it intends to expand the focus of the cur-riculum, rather than simply adding new ele-ments that contemplate pluralities. In thesame vein, Santiago and Marques (2013) high-light the emergence of the intercultural/mul-ticultural perspective both in Brazil and inLatin America. They stress the need to over-come legislation acts that do not encouragethe empowerment of excluded minorities, ei-ther in education or society. It is claimed thata multicultural/intercultural education projectin Brazil is still a need since monocultural cur-ricula continue to be predominant in schools,with little dialogue with the cultural contextof the students.

Likewise, Candau (2012) emphasizes the rela-tionship between culture(s) and education inBrazilian society and in the Latin Americancontext in broad terms. It highlights the ideo-logical context of migration flows and theirimpact on relations between different socialgroups belonging to different states, in thebackdrop of Brazilian and Latin American plu-ral ethnic and cultural society initially markedby slavery, subordination, violence and exclu-sion of the ‘other’.

In relation to gender diversity in Brazil, Bor-tolini (2008) focuses on sexual and gender is-sues in schools, challenging the heteronormative discourse and thinking pedagogi-cal practices that are inter-related to differentgroups and individuals in the pursuit of a col-lective construction of a curriculum and aschool routine that integrate the differenceswithout giving up the construction of equal-ity.

This brief discussion sought to broadly mapthe questions that have permeated the fieldof multiculturalism and education, so as todelve into the study of the categories pre-sented in the Peace Education SIG at AERA2010 to 2014, in terms of the extent to whichmulticulturalism has (or has not) impacted onpeace studies.

In an attempt to summarize, multiculturalismis generally understood as a field that tries toprovide answers for cultural diversity andchallenges differences (CANEN; PETERS,2005); mainly because this concept emergedneither into universities nor in academic set-tings. On the contrary, multiculturalism wasborn from the struggles of minorities for citi-zenship (CANDAU, 2004). However, this con-cept has been recently tensioned bypost-colonial approaches for which identitiesare not pure, but in constant movement (CAN-DAU, 2008).

Thus, multiculturalism has been recently fo-cusing on cultural hybridism that goes be-yond folkloric perspectives that do not raisethe reasons minority exclusion has occurred. Another perspective brought by this conceptis the impact of cultural diversity on organiza-tions. In this direction, Canen and Canen(2005) shed lights on the tensions betweenorganization identity, staff's plurality and thecultural environment where the organizationoperates. This is chiefly relevant to military or-ganizations, mainly in the context of disparatecultural environments where soldiers operatetoday (COSTA, 2012).

We argue this perspective should also be con-sidered when one analyzes the world withinthe context of geopolitics and internationalrelations so as to embrace the plurality in ahorizon that promotes cooperation amongstindividuals, groups and Nations to achieve se-curity, justice and freedom through integra-tion rather than exclusion of the “other”. Peace studies as multiculturalism have atense, complex and intriguing definition sinceboth are tensioned by different perspectivesthat guide to an inter, a multi/ transdisciplinarfield of studies (WEIGERT, 1999), that seek totransform violence into peace. Galtung (1969; 1990; 2005) is considered thepioneer of peace studies and according to thisauthor; peace is conceived not just as the ab-sence of conflict, but as cooperation amongstindividuals/groups to achieve security, justiceand freedom. In the 60’s Galtung (1969) em-phasized the inequality and the concept ofstructural violence in peace studies, introduc-ing the distinction between positive and neg-ative violence. Later, in the 90’s, he broughtthe concept of cultural violence, allowing amulticultural debate (COSTA, 2009).

If during the Cold War, politicians and scholarssupposed that conceiving peace as a meansto dissuade by power was enough, today thisdefinition demands a more inclusive perspec-tive with participation and inclusion in deci-sions as well as more equality distribution ofincome and resources.

Therefore, peace studies are in favor of secu-rity, justice, equality and basic needs valuesand its objective is to understand peace andviolence. Weigert (1999), based on the studiesof Galtung presented a distinction betweenpositive and negative violence. Positive peaceconsidered as the absence of structural vio-lence - social justice, whilst negative peacewas considered simply the absence ofwar/conflict.Galtung extended the concept of structural vi-olence for those countries where poverty pre-vails as the result of political and socialviolence. His acknowledged transcendmethod (GALTUNG, 2006) conceives media-tion and negotiation as a tool to solve con-flicts peacefully. This allows transcending fromnegative to positive peace. The author also distinguished three differenttypes of justice: punitive, restorative and tran-sitory, because according to him the conceptsof peace studies are intimately related to thedefinitions of justice.

09/10

While the punitive justice relies on punish-ment, the restorative justice relies on individ-ual and collectives actions to heal thedamages and harm caused by conflicts.(EGLASH, 1975 apud JACCOUD, 2005). The vic-tim, the aggressor and the others affectedmust act collectively and actively in order tofind the best solution to cure damages pro-duced. Peaceful techniques of mediationmust be used to get positive results and toreintegrate the victim and the aggressor so-cially. (PINTO, 2005)

According to Melo (2008, p.170), transitoryjustice “[...] functions in between a singularprocess of transition or peace consolidation,conditioned by political compromises andpractical embarrassment in normal situations(NEWMAN, 2002, p.31).” Melo (op. cit.) pointsout that according to human security com-mission repot the transitory justice is one ofthe strategies that search the truths about thehuman rights abuses which occurred, obtainsjustice to the victims and penalizes the ag-gressors. Transitory justice focus on strategiesthat are used by the societies to overcomehuman rights violations they suffered in thepast towards the construction of a more dem-ocratic, fair and peaceful future.The connection between multiculturalismand peace studies should be highlighted atthis point, so as to point out their similaritiesand common points.

While the conservative multiculturalism(McLAREN, 1997) might be associated to puni-tive justice due to the fact that minorities- vic-tims- are submitted to the dominant cultures-aggressors- since these are considered re-sponsible for cultural shocks and conflicts; thecritical multiculturalism (op cit) might be re-lated to restorative justice because it under-stands the minority groups- victims- as theresult of extensive social fights for identityconstruction against homogeneous and eth-nocentric societies- aggressor.

Through the lens of the critical multicultural-ism, power asymmetries may be revealed andreinterpreted within societies, so as to peoplefind their own legal spaces- restorative justice.Finally, the liberal humanistic multiculturalism(McLAREN, 1997) should be related to transi-tory justice because it believes on the possi-bility of overcoming and repairing social,cultural and economic inequalities throughthe intellectual equality among races- socialstrategy- to achieve democracy.

In practical terms, the recognized ethnic mixfound in countries such as Brazil, for example,should allow a fertile field for reflections be-tween universities and Brazilian educators,civil and military ones, extended to all thoseaware of the relevance of promoting bridgesto minimize emerging ethnical, religious andcultural conflicts.

We argue that multicultural and peace educa-tion should contribute to incorporate in mili-tary educational system both: the Army’scultural values and foundations along withpostmodern needs. The importance of part-nerships between Higher Education Institu-tions and the military could represent afruitful avenue for both: for the Army [ex-tended for other Armed Forces] because maybe supported by academic research findingsand the University, by enhancing its academicproduction through military personnel’s' prac-tices. The possibility of fruitful cooperationwould boost knowledge in the area andhopefully enhance peace and multiculturaleducation in a deeply conflict-ridden andmulticultural world. This theoretical discussion sought to promotedialogical strategies to hearing and takinginto account different "voices" in educationalpolicies and practices which aim at celebrat-ing cultural plurality and knowledge for eq-uity.

We also intended to show that a dialogue be-tween multiculturalism and peace studies hasthe potential to contribute with civil, militaryeducation and educators, offering alternativetools that undermine violence and work forpeace in conflict-laden environments.

Moreover, building a culture of peace throughinclusion as well as resources developmentthat conceive the importance of multiculturaland peace education to undermine socialconflicts internal to societies would probablymake future generations sensitive to values oftolerance, acceptance and respect in a peace-building perspective. . In the same direction,the recognized Brazilian multicultural societyand diplomatic history in dealing with exter-nal conflicts can offer insights to peace studiesbecause; although its socioeconomic dispari-ties, Brazil is still recognized worldwide for itspeace-oriented and diplomatic perspective insolving conflicts peacefully (HAGE, 2004).

Methodology used in our research wasgeared to fostering a reflection on the need toarticulate both concepts – multiculturalismand peace studies – from a broader perspec-tive which embraces different educational set-tings – academic and non-academic, formaland non-formal – that have in common the in-tention to promote inclusion and mitigatemoral poverty.

AERA Peace education SIG 2010-2014The American Educational Research Associa-tion (AERA) founded in 1916 focus on improv-ing the educational process by encouragingscholarly inquiry related to education andevaluation and promoting the disseminationand practical application of research results. AERA has more than 25,000 members andthey range from faculty, researchers, graduatestudents, and other distinguished profession-als with rich and diverse expertise in educa-tion research.They work in a range of settings from univer-sities and other academic institutions to re-search institutes, federal and state agencies,school systems, testing companies, and non-profit organizations. Based on their research,they produce and disseminate knowledge, re-fine methods and measures,

and stimulate translation and practical appli-cation of research results (AERA web site).AERA has an international scope and; as a re-sult, nearly 5% of members, representing over85 countries, reside outside the United States.Over 28% of AERA members are students. Ap-proximately 6,500 are graduate students and600 are undergraduate students. Over 74% ofAERA members report that education is theirprimary discipline. As mentioned before,other disciplines represented by AERA mem-bers include psychology, statistics, sociology,history, economics, philosophy, anthropology,and political science (AERA web site).

In a preliminary version of a paper presentedat AERA Annual Meeting 2010, we highlightedintentions and commonalities between mul-ticulturalism and peace studies and how edu-cation research and organizations wouldbenefit from this academic cooperation andpartnership (COSTA; CANEN, 2010). In this di-rection, we analyzed the summaries of paperspresented in the last five years (2010-2014) atAERA within Peace Education SIG in order totake in their possibilities to strengthen the co-operation we are seeking to foster betweenthe aforementioned concepts, in the scope ofmulticultural and peace education.

METHODOLOGYDATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

In 2010, AERA Annual Meeting took place inDenver, Colorado under the theme Under-standing Complex Ecologies in a ChangingWorld. A total of 25 papers were presented atSIG Peace Education: 12 in roundtable ses-sions, 6 in paper sessions, and 7 in symposiumsessions. It was noted that out of 25 papers, 3presented explicit multicultural perspective,whereas 21 presented it implicitly.

This evidence alone shows the existing con-nection between multiculturalism and peacestudies. In fact, the emerging categories high-lighted in the 21 summaries drew into multi-cultural concerns such as stereotypes andprejudice, feminization and gender, inter-eth-nic encounters, inclusive practices, differ-ences, minorities, socio-cultural identity, color,acculturation, social disparities, race, class,and cultural studies.

Three studies showed explicit multicultural-ism. Two were presented at roundtable ses-sions and one in a symposium session. In the roundtable session, Costa and Canen’spaper (2010) aimed

[…] to analyze the state of art related to mul-ticulturalism and peace education in Brazil,as gauged from the production of PhD thesesand Master dissertations in the last years. Itcontends that multicultural and peace ori-ented education could benefit from increasedpartnerships between Higher Education Insti-tutions (HEIs) and military organizations […].(AERA web page, our marks).

While Brantmeier’s paper (2010) was “[…] astep toward building a flexible framework formulticultural peace education - one thatwould help foster culturally competent, inclu-sive, and self aware peace educators.” (AERAweb page, our mark).

This paper explores notions of self re-educa-tion and self-identification, focusing not onlyon other human beings, but also all flora andfauna on planet earth. It suggests multicul-tural peace education efforts and implica-tions for teacher education. (op cit, our mark).

There were two symposium sessions at PeaceEducation SIG 2010: The Complex Ecologies ofPeace Education: Negotiating the Politics ofParticipation in Formal and the other, Nonfor-mal Settings and Transdisciplinary Perspec-tives on Building Cultures of Peace. The latterone brought together scholars to discuss thecontributions to an edited book project thatwas undertaken to address the UNs charge todevelop values, attitudes, modes of behaviorand ways of life to promote peace among in-dividuals, groups and nations. Grounded in afirm belief that building cultures of peace callsfor new critical questions to be raised and newpartnerships engineered across ideologicalstances and disciplines, the project brings to-gether scholars reflecting a broad perspectiveon the critical issues of peace and conflict res-olution that pervade our world. (2010, AERAweb page).

Brantmeier, Aragon and Yoder presented astudy on

Multicultural curriculum transformation in afoundations course initiated to encouragecritical analysis toward forging culturally com-petent (Gay, 2000) future educators. This re-search explores the constraints andpossibilities of multicultural curriculumtransformation within the context of an intro-duction educational foundations course forpredominately White pre-service teachers, aclass taught from the perspective of a Latinaand a white male professor. (2010, AERA webpage, our mark).

The other papers all had implicit multiculturalperspectives and the most expressive arelisted below.

Roundtable sessions aimed at discussing theconcern for social justice, equity and transfor-mative action. A mutually-enhancing connec-tion between human rights education,teacher education, Ghandian studies, multi-cultural education, and peace education wassustained from a local and global perspective.In this scope, we point out Gross’ paper (2010)which aimed at exploring “[…] how stereo-types and prejudice practically operate in anintergroup encounter between people repre-senting rival parties [Israeli Jewish and Arabstudents].” (AERA web page). The study ana-lyzed their reactions to an exercise proposedwhich was called lemon exercise. The study of Fuxman (2010)

[…] aims to contribute to the recent researchby exploring one of the main obstacles to rec-onciliation: the ethos of conflict. Specifically,this study explores how socializing agents andpersonal experiences shape Israeli adoles-cents adherence to the Israeli ethos of conflictand how such adherence contributes to theirwillingness to compromise for peace. (op cit,AERA web page).

McGlynn and London’s research was pre-sented in a paper session whose aim was tohighlight the need to expand the vision ofpeace education by grounding the discourseand practices in socioculturally and ecologi-cally diverse contexts. Therefore, their paper“[…] explores the notion of the school as aplace where multiple and intersecting spheresof ‘difference’ come together, including reli-gion, ethnicity, gender, ability/disability,socio-economic, and language.” (MCGLYNN;LONDON, 2010, AERA web page).

The analyses of the abstracts available on thesite of AERA Annual Meeting 2010 led us inferthat the main theoretical and methodologicaltrends evidenced within Peace Education SIGfocused mainly on critical multiculturalism(BANKS, 2004; CANDAU, 2008; CANEN; SAN-TOS, 2009) in an attempt to overcome culturalcelebration and bring to discussion the cate-gories which emerge mainly from the multi-cultural approach mentioned above such as:identity, difference, gender, race, ethnicity,class, religion, inclusion and exclusion, seek-ing to mitigate inequalities and social justiceand achieve peace through education.In 2011, AERA Annual Meeting took place inLouisiana, New Orleans under the theme In-citing the Social Imagination: Education Re-search for the Public Good. A total of 26papers were presented at SIG Peace Educa-tion: 10 in roundtable sessions, 4 in paper ses-sions, 11 in symposium sessions, and 1 in abusiness meeting. It was noted that out of 26papers, only 1 presented explicit multiculturalperspective, whereas 21 presented it implic-itly. The others did not work with multiculturalapproaches Once more, we call attention tothe fact that a very expressive number of pa-pers had the potential to dialogue with mul-ticultural categories. This evidence confirmsour argument concerning the existing con-nection between multiculturalism and peacestudies.

15/16

The rising categories highlighted in the 21summaries discussed multicultural concernssuch as class, race, discrimination, stereotypesand prejudices, color, gender, feminism, cross-cultural tolerance, human rights, equity,stereotypes, inclusion, social justice, indige-nous people, ethnic groups, global and local,cultural diversity among others not less rele-vant to a multicultural perspective. Round-table sessions focused on internationalapplications in Higher Education, responsivepositioning in peace education and urban ap-plications and praxis considerations in peaceeducation.

The only paper that focused on explicit multi-culturalism was presented at a roundtablesession. “[...] The theory and methodology ofthis research were anchored by the criticaland postcolonial multiculturalism(MCLAREN, 1997, 2000), which was enlargedwhen associated with the peace studies (GAL-TUNG, 1990, 2005) […].” (COSTA, 2011, ourmark). […]. This work revisits the Brazilian nationalcurriculum for foreign language […] due tothe relevance given to the transdisciplinarityof the theme cultural plurality in the nationalcurriculum today, which highlights the com-mitment to fostering education public poli-cies, curricular and pedagogical practices thatemphasize inclusion, challenge of marginal-ization and a democratic access to schooling.(COSTA, 2011, AERA web page).

Some works that although did not mentionmulticultural/ism, but seemed to have the po-tential to promote fruitful connections withthe field are presented as follow.Once more Gross’ paper (AERA 2011) entitledCombating Stereotypes and Prejudices in aHigher Education Conflictual Venue: a casestudy was presented. His work was alreadyshowed when the summaries of Peace Educa-tion SIG in AERA Annual Meeting 2010 wereanalyzed due to the relevance of its multicul-turally implicit context which explores howstereotypes and prejudice operate within cul-turally rival parties.The paper of Job (2011), Our World CrackedOpen": Positioning of Educators During 9/11,analyzed how teachers positioned themselvesin classroom during the events of 9/11. Differ-ent choices affected how their students incor-porated it into their world understanding,pointing out the role of teachers during a cri-sis and how they can create agency towardpeace in students when they may feel uncer-tain themselves. “The author incorporates herown experiences during both 9/11 and teach-ing in Israel during the Lebanon War as a nar-rative to frame her inquiry.” (op cit, AERA webpage). Baily’s and Shaklee’s work (2011) shedlights on teachers in urban schools and theirstruggle to ensure the success of their stu-dents while trying to understand the multi-faceted challenges facing students. Througha survey of the field the authors

[…] further research in peace education is apivotal base through which urban teachersset the conditions for learning and a climateof positive regard while also providing aframework for urban students to engage in aworld where the global is becoming the localand students are often ill-prepared for thatnotion.” (BAILY; SHAKLEE, 2011, AERA webpage)

Paper sessions worked on research descrip-tion addressing the understanding of stu-dents about peace and its antecedents in theirchanging world. It was identified in the stud-ies students’ notions of peace and processesin schools and communities of multiple na-tions for the advancement of peace throughformal and informal education. Contextuallyresponsive pedagogy was carried out in thestudies examined.

What Does Peace Mean? KindergartenersShare Ideas (SUNAL, KELLEY; SUNAL; 2011),Pieces for Peace: Using Impromptu to BuildMusical and Cross-Cultural Understanding(DOWNTON; PEPPLER, 2011), Uganda’s Roadto Peace: Using Video Games to Teach Com-plex Values (BARAB, PETTYJOHN, SALEH,SEWELL; HASELTON; 2011) and Creating aHopeful Future Through Community-BasedPeace-Building in Burundi and Sierra Leone(NDURA-OUEDRAOGO; MAULDEN, 2011)were the papers presented at the referred ses-sions.

The work of music to develop cross-culturalunderstanding brought findings which sug-gest that youths’ shared constructive activityhelped develop cross-cultural tolerance andbuild intuitive musical understanding(DOWNTON; PEPPLER, 2011).Also, Ndura-Ouedraogo and Maulden’s studyrevealed through interviews, observations,participant observation, and document analy-sis To illustrate a symposium session, we high-light the paper of Gacasan (2011) due to theattention given to growing diversity in work-force.

It proposed thatOrganizations must move away from strate-gies to ‘manage diversity’ and lean toward amore inclusive ‘culture of diversity’. Howeverorganizations insist on investing millions ofdollars in training that is still based on man-agement theories versus pedagogiesgrounded in sociological and cultural educa-tional theories.” (op cit, AERA web page).

Amongst the main theoretical and method-ological trends discussed in this event werewhiteness theory, African studies and women,gender studies, imperialism, and neo-colo-nialism, addressing oppression in diverse con-texts. For the first time, in the period analyzed,a study entitled The Brazilian National Curricu-lum for Foreign Languages Revisited Througha Multiculturalism and Peace Studies Ap-proach (COSTA, 2011), addressed the post-colonial multiculturalism according to theperspectives of authors such as Canen (2014),Canen (2012), Canen and Canen (2005), andCanen and Peters (2005), since this perspec-tive conceives the differences within the dif-ference, and so understands the identityconstruction as hybrid, fluid and transitory.

17/18

Summaries analyzed on the site of AERA An-nual Meeting 2011 proved that theoreticaland methodological trends evidenced withinPeace Education SIG that year focused on im-plicit multiculturalism, as occurred in 2010. Weargue that these studies have the potential toforge peace studies and; thus, promote peaceeducation which was simply implicitly ad-dressed in connection with critical multicul-turalism.

In 2012, AERA Annual Meeting took place inVancouver, British Columbia under the themeNon Satis Scire: To Know is not Enough. A totalof 23 papers were presented at SIG Peace Ed-ucation: 9 in roundtable sessions, 10 in papersessions and 4 in symposium sessions. It wasnoted that out of 23 papers, 2 presented ex-plicit multicultural perspective, whereas 12presented it implicitly. Once more, we empha-size that a considerable amount of papersworked with multicultural categories. Itstrengthens our argument about the connec-tion between multiculturalism and peacestudies.

The multicultural categories the 21 sum-maries focused were: inclusion x exclusion,cultural awareness, diversity, difference, socialconditions, cultural interactions, identity, the“other”, inequities class, social change, socialjustice and whiteness.

The research studies with explicit multicul-tural perspectives were Canen and Canen’spaper (2012), entitled Peace Education in aMulticultural Perspective: Illustrating Possibil-ities in a Higher Education Institution pre-sented in a roundtable session andCavanagh’s paper (2012), in a symposium ses-sion entitled Creating Peaceful and Nonvio-lent Schools in the Midst of a Culture of Warand Violence.

Whilst Canen and Canen (2012) argued that[…] peace education in a multicultural per-spective could help imbue Higher Educationcurriculum development for peace. It con-tends that dimension should not be limited toa separate discipline in the way of an add-onto curriculum, but rather be part of the syl-labuses not only in human and social sciencesbut also in the so-called “hard sciences” linkedto technological areas. (AERA web page).

Cavanagh (2012) discussed the Western coun-tries changes in post 9/11 era, as well asschools’ since “Both are dominated by culturesthat support war and violence. [and] As a re-sult, schools have become sites of violent be-havior (Morrison, 2003).” Results and findingsshowed that amongst the themes thatemerged from the analysis of the data col-lected at a New Zealand school were:

(a) Evidence of western culture values sup-porting war and violence in schools […]3) Racism and privilege4) Imposition of the dominant culture5) Adversarial relationships (b) Alternative ways to create a culture ofpeace and nonviolence in schools.[…]3) Respect biculturalism/multiculturalism4) Be aware of power differences […] (CA-VANAGH, 2012, AERA web page, our mark).

Amongst the roundtable sessions presented,the work of Verwoord (2012), Building PeaceThrough Quilt Making: participatory artisticquilt making for supporting peace buildingamong youth in grades 4-7 called our atten-tion for the artistic component emphasized.

The study was composed of ethnographic ob-servations, participatory artistic quiltmakingon inclusion and exclusion, and interviews.

Analysis of the data revealed [that] The partic-ipatory component contributed to group de-velopment, a sense of inclusion, and theconnecting of personal experiences to inclu-sion and exclusion. The quiltmaking processfostered a shift in perspective about others,[…]. These outcomes demonstrate peacemak-ing and peacebuilding.” (op cit, AERA webpage).

In a paper session, Ingenthron’s research pre-sented that

[…] precepts of critical pedagogy lead to con-fronting and breaking through mythologizingideologies [and] the significance of criticalwhiteness studies for understanding the rela-tionship between peoples in the United Statesand Israel-Palestine; and [show that] interdis-ciplinary approaches and methodologiesbring to light multiple dimensions of the Is-rael-Palestine conflict. (2012, AERA web page).The content for a course on Israel-Palestinewas analyzed from these theoretical assump-tions such as whiteness studies that implicitlypresent multicultural perspectives when, forexample, highlight the need to overcomemythologizing ideologies that contribute tosupport differences between people. We can notice that multiculturalism was ex-plicitly mentioned this time, validating that alink between peace studies and multicultural-ism should empower perspectives towardvaluing social justice and challenging preju-dices.A partial conclusion let us infer that theoreti-cal and methodological approaches consid-ered in Peace Education SIG 2012 evidencedan implicit connection with multiculturalismchiefly with its critical approach. The paperswe have examined so far privileged a criticalmulticultural perspective although not overtlymentioned.

This has led us to infer that a postcolonial/modern approach to multiculturalism has notcome even implicitly to contribute to peacestudies/education so far.In 2013, AERA Annual Meeting took place inSan Francisco, California under the theme Ed-ucation and Poverty: Theory, Research, Policy,and Praxis. A total of 24 papers were pre-sented at SIG Peace Education: 9 in round-table sessions, 11 in paper sessions and 4 insymposium sessions. We figured out that outof 24 papers, 2 presented explicit multiculturalperspective, whereas 16 presented it implic-itly. More than half of the papers developedmulticultural categories which validate our ar-gument concerning the link between multi-culturalism and peace studies. Amongst themulticultural categories the 24 summaries de-veloped were: immigrant parents’ religion, in-clusion, marginalized voices, human rights,silent minority, feminism, colonialism, in-equity, “sameness”, silences differences, the“other”, discrimination and exclusion.

19/20

Two works carried out explicit multicultural-ism. They were presented at roundtable andpaper sessions. In the first, we highlight thestudy of Rajuan and Bekerman (2013) thatsought to […] investigate how teachers of the Inte-grated Bilingual Schools in Israel constructtheir school culture in relation to various out-side pressures […]. It was found that teachersperceive themselves as primarily pedagogicalexperts with a shared vision of multicultural-ism and coexistence to the detriment ofscholastic achievements […]. (op cit, AERAweb page, our mark).

In the latter, we pinpoint the paper of Canen,Costa and Canen (2013) aimed to “[…] to dis-cuss how a multiculturally oriented curricu-lum could promote educational inclusion andpeace, thus mitigating the effects of educa-tional and moral poverty in military and incivil educational institutions.” (2013, AERAweb page, our mark).Roundtable sessions brought a relevant dis-cussion on Amerasians in Okinawa betweenUS military fathers and Okinawan mothers(IDE, 2013). “The purpose of the paper is to dis-cover the voice of a silent minority in peaceeducation, and to develop a theory of peaceeducation more inclusive than current alter-natives […].” It addresses relevant questionssuch as: “what are the foundational problemsthat drive Amerasians to suffer as a silent mi-nority? [and] How can Amerasians take amoderate course about the discussion onpeace?” (IDE, 2013, AERA web page).

In a paper session, our study calls attention tothe work of Cassidy (2013), whose provokingtitle Understanding of Community to IncludeDifference as a Foundation for Peace inSchools bring the discussion of “sameness”within community basis, which “[…] silencesdifferences, expects conformity, and inher-ently excludes the “Other”.” (2013, AERA webpage).

In the symposium session papers assumedthatGiven their close connections with childrenand youth, it is certainly understandable thatteachers across many nations have struggleddiligently for peace. This panel will provide in-sights into four such endeavors undertakenduring the first decades of the 20th Century.Henrietta Rodman, a NYC teacher, was activein the New York Woman’s Peace Party againstmilitarization of schools in the 1910s. JuliaGrace Wells, University of Wisconsin, travelledto Europe in 1914 as part of an internationaldelegation attempting to end WW1. Follow-ing that debacle, both the National Union ofWomen Teachers in Britain, and an interna-tional committee of teacher unionists, contin-ued to struggle for peace. While seeminglyunsuccessful at the time, all four endeavoursprovide lessons for contemporary struggles.(AERA 2013, Previous Annual Meetings webpage).

As a result, these papers approached criticalmulticulturalism since categories such as fem-inism, women’s equality, religious beliefs, free-dom and colonialism openly aroused.Carter’s (2013) objective was to show “[…] therole of New York City teachers’ involvement inthe WWI-era peace movement and the subse-quent assault on their academic freedom asseen through the political activities of Henri-etta Roman” (AERA web page).”

McLean (2013) hoped “[…] to enhance our un-derstanding of women’s international peaceactivism, in particular, as it relates to Wales’transnationalism, mobility, spiritual beliefsand her identification with the peace move-ment” (AERA web page). Smaller (2013) at-tempted “[…] to explore the role of teachersand teacher unions in their quest to achieveworld peace and understanding during the1920s and 1930s” (AERA web page). Goodman(2013) intended “To explore the relationshipsbetween the women’s movement, the peacemovement, internationalism, anti-fascism andeducation during the inter-war period in theNUWT [The National Union of Women Teach-ers]”. (AERA web page). According to one of the paper sessions

Understanding needs that conflict evidencesis a crucial component of peace educationand other work to eliminate poverty. Concep-tions of peace are contextually and culturallyshaped. This session features analysis of stu-dents’ though processes and those of educa-tors whose pedagogy this panel will describe.(AERA 2013, Previous Annual Meetings webpage).In this scope, Cassidy (2013) explored that Community is generally understood asformed upon “sameness”. This conception si-lences difference, expects conformity, and in-herently excludes the “Other”. As long ascommunity is understood in terms of exclu-sion of difference—violence, discrimination,and poverty will be perpetuated. Education isan important context for youth to learn thatcommunity and difference are interdepen-dent to foster a culture of inclusion and peace.(AERA web page). We noticed that in 2013, similar to 2010, 2011and 2012 Peace Education SIG, the linkage be-tween peace studies and multiculturalism inits critical perspective continued to be evident

and; thus, reinforces that these theoreticalframeworks have much to contribute to peaceeducation. In 2014, AERA Annual Meeting took place inPhiladelphia, Pennsylvania under the themeThe Power of Education Research for Innova-tion in Practice and Policy. A total of 15 paperswere presented at SIG Peace Education: 10 inpaper sessions and 5 in roundtable sessions.This time, out of 15 papers, 14 implicitly ap-proached multicultural perspectives. Themain categories with multicultural potentialwere: inclusion, social inequality, religion,people of color, racial groups, minorities, di-versity, social justice and popular culture;however, we realized that there was no evi-dence of explicit multiculturalism in 2014.

In paper sessions, Edwards (2014) presentedin his study “Implications […] for practitioners,facilitators, administrators, and researchers ofIntergroup Dialogue. […].”, and offered “[…]some foundational suggestions for a broaderdiscussion on interfaith, intercultural, and in-terethnic dialogue as a peacebuilding tool inother contexts, both in the United States andaround the world.” (op cit, AERA web page).

21/22

Meanwhile, an exploratory survey study pre-sented by Shammas (2014) about teaching anAmerican Ethnic Studies course to Palestinianstudents from Al Azhar University in Gaza Cityillustrated an implicit multicultural approachwhose “[…] main objectives of the study wereto determine if learning about the historicalstruggles of people of color in the UnitedStates compel Palestinian students to identifywith other racial groups in the United States.”(op cit, AERA web page). Also, “[…] variousdemocratic and inclusive dialogic pedagogiesthat encourage interdisciplinary students toengage in dialogue about conflict and diver-sity.” (PARKER, 2014, AERA web page) werepresented by Parker (2014) who assumes that

Multimodal, dialogic pedagogies, such as cir-cle processes, cooperative learning, criticalthinking exercises, and interdisciplinaryteams, are used to engage students in learn-ing about peacebuilding and conflict resolu-tion, within the context of diversity. (op cit).In roundtable sessions McLean (2014) “[…] an-alyzed the approach that one magazine usedin Canadian schools in the 1950s and 1960s todepict peace, diversity, social justice and con-flict.” (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 ofall current volumes in a book series on peaceeducation and encourage participants to sub-mit new book proposals. Participants will thentake a "gallery walk" to visit with authors/edi-tors of volumes in the book series who will dis-cuss the innovations in their work. Thisinteractive session will encourage collabora-tive networking and future innovations in thefield of peace education.” (AERA, 2014, Previ-ous Annual Meetings web page).

It is evident that in 2014, multiculturalism, al-though implicit, has one more time led thescene in Peace Education SIG. Out of 15 pa-pers presented, only one had no multiculturalperspective (see graphics below), whilst theothers worked with categories that emergewithin the critical multiculturalism, thus seek-ing to overcome social injustices to contributeto peace building departing from school set-tings.

When we delved into the analysis of the datapresented during the period studied and lookahead to possibilities, challenges, promisingdirections and limitations to overcome for thenext century to capture contributions to thefield of peace education in the commemora-tion of the Centennial of American Educa-tional Research Association, we reach somefindings and results.Firstly, the limited number of papers pre-sented in 2014 within Peace Education SIG;secondly, that there was no paper with ex-plicit multicultural dimensions.

Our study points out that it seems Peace Edu-cation SIG is looking forward to work undercategories directly related to peace, such asviolence, conflict resolution, mediation, nego-tiation, reconciliation, restorative justice,restorative practices, culture of care, justiceand peace, non-violence, peace education,concept of peace, humanitarian law and mili-tarism. Although the majority of the sum-maries analyzed are permeated by implicitmulticultural perspectives, it seems the SIG istrying to outline its field, what we considerpositive. However, this argument is a gap ourstudy did not intend to confirm, but it leavesa door open for other findings. Therefore, our argument that multiculturalismand peace studies have the potential to de-velop partnership to strengthen the field of

peace education stays valid since out of 15 pa-pers presented in 2014, 14 had implicit multi-cultural perspective developed. Moreover, inprevious study (COSTA, 2009; COSTA; CANEN,2007; 2008a; 2008b; 2008c), it was highlightedthat an articulation between multiculturalismand peace studies can enhance a multiculturalpeace education. As noticed before, intentions and similarities,as well as related categories between multi-culturalism and peace studies lead to the con-clusion that education research andorganizations, either civil or military oneswould benefit from an academic cooperationand partnership in times of globalization, mul-ticultural workforce and on-going emergingcultural conflicts.We claim that an academic effort to embraceall educational organizations, formal or non-formal, public or private ones interested inurging forward governmental initiatives andpublic policies in education to work toward in-clusion and peace at schools settings shouldbe the target in contemporary world.

For example, in previous work we had demon-strated that “syllabuses in technological areassuch as engineering could enhance the un-derstanding of the meaning of multiculturalorganizations” (CANEN; CANEN; COSTA, 2014).This should be extended to military curriculathat have also been seeking for educationalresearch findings to support and guide theireducational practices to support soldiers tocope with cultural challenges and threats de-manded by the operational scenarios today.In this context, we feel the need to leveragefruitful dialogues between multiculturalismand peace studies, mainly after the analysis ofthe graphic underneath where we can noticethat it seems Peace Education SIG is movingtoward excluding other contributions to thefield.In this direction, we infer that Multicultural/Multiethnic Education: Theory, Research, andPractice SIG will be probably embracing stud-ies whose intention would have been aimedat looking for connections with peace studiesand peace education.

Source: the authors

Brazilian civil and military educationaldiscoursesIn our methodology path we translated themeanings and scopes of multiculturalism andpeace studies into curricular practices and ed-ucational policies of educational institutionsin Brazil such as: national curricular policies forforeign languages, a military training centerand a civil Higher Education Institution.A documentary analysis of Brazilian nationalcurricular policies for foreign languages pro-moted reflection on how cultural plurality hasbeen conceived as a transversal theme inBrazilian state level, whilst empirical experi-ences from the other sources were observedthrough in-depth interviews and oral dis-courses held with institutional leaders and ac-tors directly involved with civil and militaryeducational institutions.The research of Brazilian national curricularpolicies for foreign languages revealed theprevalent categories in this document such asdiscoursive engagement, social constructionof meaning, social and interactive view of lan-guage and learning. The study of English language in a multicul-tural perspective highlighted the discussionon the transdisciplinarity of the theme cul-tural plurality in the Brazilian national curricu-lum. This discussion aimed to contribute topublic education policies and to practicescommitted to valuing diversity, social inclu-sion and a culture of peace in time of crisis. Italso pointed out improvements, limitationsand opportunities presented in Brazilian na-tional curriculum to deal with a multiculturalpeace oriented approach (COSTA, 2011). Itplaced emphasis on the criteria for the inclu-sion of foreign languages in Brazilian nationalcurriculum, such as social responsibility, socialjustification and relevance of teaching andlearning a second/foreign language (COSTA,2001).

Since this curricular policy is currently in usein Brazil, we believe it was appropriate to re-visit it in order to promote new dialogue andnew perspectives. The theme cultural pluralityproposed in Brazilian educational policies andpractices is important because education inBrazil takes place in a multicultural environ-ment surrounded by lack of respect for differ-ences. In this sense, our research highlightedthe multicultural approach used in Braziliannational curriculum for foreign languagethrough the lens of critical multiculturalism(MCLAREN, 2000; ZEUS, 2005), and associatedwith the peace studies (GALTUNG, 1990;2005). As a result, the study called attention toasymmetrical power relations, construction ofdifferences and colonization of discourses inlinguistic environments. It stressed the needto struggle against structural and cultural vi-olence in school settings (GALTUNG, 1990)and the need to search for positive peace (opcit, 2005).

The critical revolutionary and post-colonialmulticulturalism (MCLAREN, 1997; 2000) as al-ready said, points out asymmetrical power re-lations from which cultural differencesemerge and seeks to promote the decoloniza-tion of linguistic constructions implanted inthe language by prejudices and stereotypes.These constructions reflect Western colonialperspectives and are registered in metaphorsand other symbolic images what had beenpointed out by Galtung (1990) as a mecha-nism of legitimizing cultural violence whichwill be shown in the empirical experiencespresented underneath.The data collected showed that even thougha multicultural perspective is incipient withinBrazilian pedagogical and curricular practices,there are trends evidenced in the discoursivesource analyzed for working towards plural-ity.

We consider it a significant progress, particu-larly when the novelty of the theme and thedoubts, mistrusts and discussions surround-ing it are taken into account. The national curriculum for foreign languagestalks about The coexistence between boys and girls in theculture of the foreign language [...] the rightsachieved by women in other countries, the or-ganization of minorities (ethnic and non-eth-nic) in other parts of the world [...] the issue ofsexual orientation in other countries (BRASIL,1998, p.73).

It also points out that “when someone uses alanguage, he or she does it from a place his-torically, culturally and institutionally located,which is defined in the multiple marks ofhis/her social identity and in light of politicalvalues and beliefs” (BRASIL, 1998, p.35). In this direction, the national curriculum rec-ognizes that In a multicultural country like Brazil, it is notconstructive to work in classroom with a viewthat excludes much of the Brazilian popula-tion from the usual child representations inthe pedagogical discourse (it also includeshis/her representations in didactic material):white, catholic, medium class, speaker of anhomogeneous variety [...] (BRASIL,1998, p.48).

This document emphasizes that “language iscentral to the determination of human rela-tions and the individual social identity. This isthe reason why it reaffirms the right to be cul-turally and linguistically different" (BRASIL,1998, p.48).These examples demonstrate that this cur-riculum attempt to instill educational prac-tices that value cultural plurality. However, itleaves gaps because values technical ap-proaches and focuses on content discon-nected from cultural aspects.

This is seen in the discourse below: The goal is to involve the student in the con-struction of meaning from the beginning[fifth and sixth grade], with less focus on thesystematic knowledge of the foreign lan-guage. In the fourth period [seventh andeighth grades) systematic knowledge of a for-eign language may be increased, since thestudent will have developed the ability to en-gage in a foreign language (BRASIL, 1998,p.72).

At this moment, we question whether it ispossible to consider that all students in thefifth and sixth grades have acquired the ma-turity or ability to develop a systematic knowl-edge or whether the development of morecomplex structures might contribute toschool failure.

We also question whether it would not bemore appropriate to guarantee that those stu-dents who are excluded early from the foreignlanguage education process (many studentsenter the labor market before completing pri-mary or even entering high school) have theopportunity to learn a foreign language fromthe point of view of their sociocultural envi-ronment. Wouldn't be more useful for thesestudents to be exposed to activities that aimto promote reflection on and discussion oftopics that work towards citizenship andbroaden students' knowledge, rather thanworking toward the development of a system-atic structure of the foreign language?

25/26

It seems that the national curricular discourseconceives that all students have a determinedand prior knowledge that enables them todelve into foreign language systematic struc-tures in a specific grade without consideringthe individualities and cultural backgroundsof the students.

Although the curriculum seems to be ori-ented towards a multicultural perspective, itchanges its discourses and practices and in ef-fect leans toward technical and homoge-neous approaches. This approach considersstudents' differences chronologically anddoes not take into account their cultural dif-ferences. The analysis of the discourse in the Braziliannational curricular policy for foreign lan-guages has shown that there is the potentialfor multicultural practices which celebrate di-versity and peaceful relations between peo-ples. At the same time, the analysis shows thatcultural dimensions are not stressed enoughin the curriculum and if they were, it wouldstrengthen public education policies as wellas promote curricular and teaching practicessensitive to the inclusion of differences, theelimination of inequalities and the construc-tion of a culture of peace in educational envi-ronments (COSTA, 2001; 2011). In the scope of the military, a study developedby Costa and Canen (2008a) evidenced a per-ceived need for multicultural training in mili-tary schools. Actually, only recently themilitary has been considering the importanceof working toward contemplating cultural di-mensions in its educational system (COSTA,2013).

[…] Army commanders know that criticalshaping actions often occur prior to the urbanoperation in the form of professional educa-tion and training. […] which include- […] Mul-ticultural understanding. Brazilian and foreign military intervieweesseem to understand cultural issues in broaderterms, closer to local and national values. Theyseem to get close to Carter’s (2013) multicul-tural and contextual awareness knowledge in-herent to peace oriented curriculum standardand to conceive culturally diverse identities inrather an essentialized approach opposed tofluid, hybrid and transitory identity construc-tion approach (BEKERMAN et all, 2009).

[…]. We have a discipline called culturalawareness, and certainly it helps expand it be-yond the borders of Brazil […] (leader a, 2012).

The following excerpts illustrate the way amulticultural curriculum has been perceivedby three military instructors and peacekeep-ers interviewed who had a previous history ofdeployment in contexts marred by diversityand conflicts:

Our instructions are based on training mod-ules United Nations Core Pre-DeploymentTraining Module (CPDM). It has all frameworkinformation. We have a discipline called cul-tural awareness, and certainly it helps expandit beyond the borders of Brazil and CCOPABhas been a disseminator of these ideas (leadera, 2012). Several instructors mention a concern withculture, the cultural context where soldierswill be performing their activities. For in-stance, in negotiating class we emphasize thataspect and what makes it much easier are thecommunication skills. But if I were to includea subject, it would be more focused on cul-tural issues of that country, which makesthings much easier [...].

I would emphasize cultural history of thecountry [...] and give some tips that may befollowed by those who are there, in the mis-sion. [...] I would particularize the dimensionof cultural awareness (leader b, 2012).

Those patrolling, a great deal have a lot of in-teraction with the local population and theywill need to be culturally aware of the sur-roundings, particularly when it comes towhom they speak to, for example, [in somecontexts] male soldiers should not approachwomen or speak to women […] so it is veryimportant that those people doing that jobhave cultural understanding of what they canand cannot do […] however it is difficult totalk about a cultural training while the soldiersare in basic training and you do not knowwhere they are going to. I suppose there arelike general lessons you could teach them,based on trying to get soldiers to be moreopen to other experiences or develop theirunderstanding about the existence of othercultures, about accepting different ways ofworking and different ways of living, but Ithink it would be difficult to teach them im-mediately about a culture of a particular coun-try, because you know, they may go or not gothere (leader c, 2012).

These interviewees seem to understand thedevelopment of sociocultural aspects inbroader terms, closer to local and national val-ues. In that sense, they seem to get close toCarter’s (2013) aforementioned multiculturaland contextual awareness knowledge anddispositions inherent to peace oriented cur-riculum standards. At the same time, theyseem to conceive those culturally diverseidentities in rather an essentialized approach,as opposed to the fluid, hybrid and transitoryidentity construction approach espoused byauthors such as Bekerman et all (2009).

However, it seems that a multicultural dimen-sion has been in the limelight. The fact thatthe referred Center has recently evolved intoBrazilian Peacekeeping Operations Joint Cen-ter had proved it. The initiative of re-namingand re-modeling the Center with the armedforces working together in a multicultural-likestructure seems to make the point that thetendency and demands of military missionshave really changed today. This is due to thefact that avoiding conflicts among peoplerather than states (SMITH, 2008) requires mul-tidimensional and multicultural approaches(MOSKOS et all 2000), which should be re-flected in multicultural educational practicesand policies. Also, as claimed by some of theinstructors and peacekeepers interviewed,cultural awareness, negotiating and commu-nication skills have been pinpointed as crucialfor that new army role, which could arguablybe pointed as stepping stones towards cul-tural awareness and peace oriented curricu-lum perspective.

27/28

In the context of Brazilian civil Higher Educa-tion Institution (HEI) there have been chal-lenges to rethink curriculum in human and inso-called hard sciences, not only to preparefuture professionals to deal with cultural di-versity and promote peace in schools and or-ganizations, but also to nurture social, ethnicand racial inclusion in higher educational con-texts which had been hitherto a remotedream for poverty stricken populations.Canen and Canen (2012) have argued thatprofessional development geared towardsgenerating a culture that values plural voicesand helps combat bullying against those per-ceived as the other can mitigate exclusionaryeffects which attain minorities and poorly rep-resented groups in decision making spaces atuniversities and other non-academic organi-zations, thus transforming those arenas infavor of plurality and the challenge of moralpoverty (CANEN; CANEN, 2008).

Based on the above, the following excerpts il-lustrate the way two leaders of a HEI seem toperceive the need for multicultural curriculaas a way to lighten envy in these institutions.They seem to perceive envy as the main rea-son for institutional conflicts and absence ofpeace and both linked it to a competition di-mension inherent in contemporary organiza-tions..

At the same time, they pointed out that thereferred issue has not been either recognizedor adequately faced by organizations andposited that their organizations have notbeen adequately prepared to deal with it.Leader 1, for instance, claimed that “envy ismore powerful in high echelons of HEI than inlower ones, it gets mixed with competition,but people do not use that taboo word, whatthey do is try to disqualify the others”.

In the same way, leader 2 also perceived envyas directly linked to competitive rather thancollaborative climate and it has arguably pre-vailed in HEI lately:the quest for scientific involvement has beendwindling […], there is a relentless fight for re-sources […]. That really scares me becauseenvy is a result of that continuing growingprocess that leads to competition and to theabandoning of humanistic values […]. (leader2, 2012).

To promote peace and lessen deleterious ef-fects of envy as moral poverty institutionaltrait, the interviewees stressed the pivotal roleof the HEI curriculum, so as to prepare leadersto competently turn institutions into multicul-tural and peaceful organizations, as illustratedin the following excerpt of leader 2:

Curriculum in any area of HE should have thecontribution of educators, even if they are notspecialists in specific areas. It should conveythe notion of the fragility of the constructedworld, it helps students to construct and de-construct their views, and it gives the real di-mension of human beings with all theirsmallness, diminishing the propensity forenvy […]. (op cit) Therefore, from the life narratives, the need forHE curricula to more strongly incorporate dis-ciplines that could better equip students tovalue cultural plural views and problematizetheir own could be perceived as an axe for amulticultural curriculum. It is noteworthy that while in military institu-tion the focus of the narratives seems to be ona multicultural curriculum that could raise cul-tural awareness in relation to peoples with dif-ferent cultural values, in the HE the leadersseem to perceive a multicultural and peaceoriented curriculum as crucial to combat envyas a source of moral poverty and conflicts.

Furthermore, whilst in military discoursesidentity seems to be perceived in a ratheressencialized way present in dichotomiessuch as we and the others, it has been re-garded in a more fluid and transitory way inthe discourses of the leaders from the referredHE. In either way, the relevance of embeddingcurricula in a multicultural peace oriented per-spective in civil and military settings could begleaned and it is hoped that future researchdeepen the ways it turns into a real drivingforce in both scenarios.

29/30

We consider the present time very promisingfor fostering multicultural projects in eithercivil or military educational institutions, so asto overcome monocultural curricula towardraising intercultural studies and nurturingmulticultural attitudes in education publicpolicies and practices, either in Brazil, NorthAmerica and elsewhere.

Multiculturalism in the military arena shouldrepresent possibilities of coping with the ten-sions hierarchical organizations have beenfacing to address the demands of multicul-tural organizations in contemporary contexts. This should be surely translated into educa-tional practices that seek to prepare war fight-ers competent enough to cope with thechallenges operational scenarios requiretoday such as interoperability, civil-military re-lations, and joint combination work. Thus,warfighters should be able to use interculturalapproaches, negotiation and mediationstrategies amongst others related.In this direction, we point out that studies wealready presented at Peace Education SIGsought to show the needs a military educa-tional institution presented to cope with thedemands of contemporary operational sce-narios.Future contributions should be toward inves-tigating Peace Education SIG listening to its

Chairs as well as its Board members in orderto know their motivations and intentions forthe future. In the same direction, we recom-mend to analyze other SIG that produce workon peace studies such as International PeaceResearch Association (IPRA) to figure out itsmain theoretical and methodological trendsfor the field as well as its connection with mul-ticultural perspectives.It is worth mentioning that the analyses weremade from the summaries available at the An-nual Meeting Online Searchable Program onAERA site. It was not our intention to verify fullpapers on the Online Paper Repository ,chiefly because it is a volunteer decision of theauthors to upload them. However, we areaware that this procedure may reveal othertheoretical and methodological perspectives.Therefore, we suggest that other researchesfill this gap in order to bring to light other rel-evant information that may consolidate thisstudy.Recommendations to the field would includethe need to embrace military academies, theirmotivations and resistances to operate in mul-ticultural and clashing societies through co-operation with civil Higher EducationalInstitutions that should overcome militariza-tion criticisms to join efforts that seek to pro-vide defense, security and; thus, peace forsocieties.

CONCLUSIONFINAL REMARKS & RECOMMENDATIONS

BANKS, J. A. (Ed.) (2004), Diversity and Citi-zenship Education: global perspectives. SanFrancisco. USA: Jossey-Bass.

BEKERMAN, Z; ZEMBYLAS, M.; MCGLYNN, C.(2009), Working toward the de-essentializa-tion of identity categories in conflict andpost conflict societies: Israel, Cyprus, andNorthern Ireland, Comparative EducationReview, v. 53, n. 2, p. 213-234.

Bortolini, A. (2008), Diversidade sexual e degênero na escola: uma perspectiva interrela-cional e intercultural. In: Bortolini, A. (Org.),Diversidade sexual e de gênero da escola:educação, cultura, violência e ética. Rio deJaneiro: Pró-Reitoria de Extensão, UFRJ, p.26-51.

BRASIL. (1998), Ministério de Educação e Cul-tura. Parâmetros curriculares nacionais: Ter-ceiro e quarto ciclos do ensino fundamental:Língua estrangeira. Brasília: Secretaria de Ed-ucação Fundamental.

CANDAU, V. M. F. (2012), Sociedade multicul-tural e educação: tensões e desafios. In: CAN-DAU, V. M. F. (Org.), Didática crítica eintercultural: aproximações. Petrópolis. Ed.Vozes, p. 19-54.

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

CANDAU, V. M. (2004), Sociedade multicul-tural e educação: tensões e desafios. In: Can-dau, V. M. F. (Org.), Didática crítica eintercultural: aproximações. Petrópolis. Ed.Vozes, p. 19-54.

CANEN, A. (2014), Currículo para o desafio àxenofobia: algumas reflexões multiculturaisna educação, Revista Conhecimento e Diver-

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

Canen, A. (2012), Currículo e multicultural-ismo: reflexões a partir de pesquisas real-izadas. 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 ofmulticultural global citizens: the case of atechnological curriculum. In: POPOV, N.;WOLHUTER, C.; ERMENC, K. S.; HILTON, G.;OGUNLEYE, J.; CHIGISHEVA, O. (Orgs.), Educa-tion s role in preparing globally competentcitizens. 1st ed Sofia: Bulgarian ComparativeEducation Society, v. 1, p. 296-302.

CANEN, A. G.; CANEN, A. (2012), Challengingenvy in organizations: multicultural ap-proaches and possibilities, Business StrategySeries (in press).

CANEN, A. G.; CANEN, A. (2008), Multiculturalleadership: the costs of its absence in organi-zational conflict management, InternationalJournal of Conflict Management, v. 19, p. 4-19.

CANEN, A. G.; CANEN, A. (2005), Organiza-ções multiculturais. Rio de Janeiro: CiênciaModerna.

CANEN, A.; PETERS, M. A. (2005), Editorial: Is-sues and dilemmas of multicultural educa-tion: theories, policies and practices, PolicyFutures in Education, v. 3, n. 4, p. 309-313.

CANEN, A.; SANTOS, A. R. dos (Orgs.) (2009),Educação multicultural: teoria e prática paraprofessores e gestores escolares. Rio deJaneiro: Ciência Moderna.

CANEN, A.; XAVIER, G. P. de (2012), Gestão docurrículo para a diversidade cultural: discur-sos circulantes em um curso de formação

continuada de professores e gestores, Cur-rículo sem Fronteiras, v.12, n. 2, p. 306-325.

CARTER, C. (2013), Standards for peace edu-cation. In: HARRIS, I.; MORRISON, M., Peaceeducation, 3rd ed London: McFarland, 2013.

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

COSTA, R. P. (2009), Multiculturalismo e estu-dos para a paz: articulação possível nopreparo e no emprego de militares para mis-sões de paz. Rio de Janeiro, 2009. Thesis(Doctorate in Education)-Faculty of Educa-tion, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro.Available at: <http://www.educacao.ufrj.br/ppge/ppge-teses-2009.html>. In: 3 Mar. 15.

COSTA, R. P. (2001), O ensino do inglês emuma ótica multicultural. Rio de Janeiro, 2009.Dissertation (Master in Education)-Faculty ofEducation, Universidade Federal do Rio deJaneiro. Available at: < http://www.educa-cao.ufrj.br/ppge/ppge-teses-2009.html>. In:11 Mar. 15.

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

COSTA, R. P.; CANEN, A. (2008b), Multicultur-alism and peace studies: the need of a dia-logue in/for multicultural/ peace education.Paper presented at the International PeaceResearch Association 2008 Global Confer-ence, 2008, Leuven. Building Sustainable Fu-tures - Enacting Peace and Development.

COSTA, R. P.; CANEN, A. (2008c), Multicultur-alism and peace education: possible connec-tions to improve military and civil education.Paper presented at the International Con-gress on Blue Black Sea: new dimensions ofsecurity, energy, economy and education,2008, Sakarya. International Congress onBlue Black Sea: new dimensions of security,energy, economy and education.

COSTA, R. P.; SCHIMITT, V. G. H.; MORETO LuísNeto (2012). Desvendando a administraçãoem ambientes militares. Paper presented atthe XVII Congreso Internacional del CLAD,2012, Cartagena de Indias, Colombia. XVIICongreso Internacional del CLAD sobre la re-forma del estado y dela administraciónpública.

DENZIN, N.; LINCOLN, Y. (2003), Handbook ofQualitative Research. New York: Sage Publi-cations.

GALTUNG, J. (2005), Peace studies: a tenpoint primer. Conference in Nanjing Univer-sity, Nanjing, China, At: <http://www.old-site.transnational.org/SAJT/forum/meet/2005/Galtung_PR_Primer.html>. In: 27 Oct.2014.GALTUNG, J. (1969), Violence, peace andpeace 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 emediações culturais. Belo Horizonte: Editora:UFMG.

HAGE, J. A. A. (2004), Caráter nacional ediplomacia brasileira, Caderno de Estudos daUNIFEOB, São Paulo, ano 3, n. 5, p. 40-72.

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

THEORETICAL REFERENCES

rativa. In: SLAKMON, C.; DE VITTO, R. C. P.;PINTO, R. S. G. (Eds.), Justiça Restaurativa.Brasília: Ministério da Justiça e Programa dasNações Unidas para o Desenvolvimento-PNUD.

McLAREN, P. (1997), MulticulturalismoCrítico. São Paulo: Cortez, 1997.

MELO, R. B. C. L. de. (2008), O processo de in-stitucionalização das operações de paz mul-tidimensionais da ONU no pós-guerra fria:direitos humanos, polícia civil e assistênciaeleitoral. Orientadora: Mônica Herz. Rio deJaneiro, 2008. Tese (Doutorado em RelaçõesInternacionais)- Instituto de Relações Inter-nacionais, PUC, Rio de Janeiro.

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

OLIVEIRA, L. F. de (2012). Perspectiva eemergência de construção de uma análisedecolonial: conclusões? In: História da Áfricae dos Africanos na Escola: desafios políticos,epistemológicos e identitários para a for-mação dos professores de História. Rio deJaneiro: FAPERJ/Imperial Novo Milênio,p.263-325.

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

PINTO, R. C. G. (2005), Justiça restaurativa épossível no Brasil? In: SLAKMON, C.; DEVITTO, R. C. P.; PINTO, R. S. G. (Eds.), JustiçaRestaurativa. Brasília: Ministério da Justiça ePrograma das Nações Unidas para o Desen-volvimento- PNUD.

SANTIAGO, M.; AKKARI, A.; MARQUES, L. P., A.(2013), Os caminhos do interculturalismo noBrasil. In: Educação intercultural: desafios e

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

SMITH, R. (2008), The utility of force: the artof war in the modern world. New York: Vin-tage Books Edition, 2008.

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

PAPERS CONSULTED AT THE AMERICAN EDU-CATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION ONLINESEARCHABLE PROGRAM

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

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

BAILY, S.; SHAKLEE, B. D. (2011), Urban Teach-ing: A Place for Peace Education. Paper pre-sented at the 2011 Annual Meeting of theAmerican Educational Research AssociationNew Orleans. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 fromthe AERA Online Paper Repository.

BARAB, S. A.; PETTYJOHN, P. K.; SALEH, A.;SEWELL, B; HASELTON, M. (2011), Uganda’sRoad to Peace: Using Video Games to TeachComplex Values. Paper presented at the2011 Annual Meeting of the American Edu-cational Research Association New Orleans.Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA On-line Paper Repository.

BRANTMEIER (2010), Multicultural Peace Ed-ucation: Integrating Gandhian and DeepEcological Norms in Teacher Education.

Paper presented at the 2010 Annual Meetingof the American Educational Research Asso-ciation Colorado. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015from the AERA Online Paper Repository.

BRANTMEIER, ARAGON AND YODER (2010),Multicultural Peace Education: EmpoweringPreservice Teachers. Paper presented at the2010 Annual Meeting of the American Edu-cational Research Association Colorado. Re-trieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA OnlinePaper Repository.CANEN, A.; CANEN, A. G. (2012), Peace Edu-cation in a Multicultural Perspective: Illus-trating Possibilities in a Higher EducationInstitution. Paper presented at the 2012 An-nual Meeting of the American EducationalResearch Association Vancouver. Retrieved18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online PaperRepository.

CANEN, A.; COSTA, R. P.; CANEN, A. G. (2013),Cultural Challenges to Identity Building: Ten-sions in Civil and Military Educational Lead-ers’ Narratives. Paper presented at the 2013Annual Meeting of the American Educa-tional Research Association San Francisco.Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA On-line Paper Repository.

CARTER, P. A. (2013), Henrietta Rodman andthe Peace Movement: New York City Teach-ers in the World War I Era. Paper presented atthe 2013 Annual Meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Association San Fran-cisco. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERAOnline Paper Repository.

CASSIDY, K. (2013), Understanding Commu-nity to Include Difference as a Foundationfor Peace in Schools. Paper presented at the2013 Annual Meeting of the American Edu-cational Research Association San Francisco.Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA On-line Paper Repository.

CAVANAGH, T. (2012) Creating Peaceful andNonviolent Schools in the Midst of a Cultureof War and Violence. Paper presented at the2012 Annual Meeting of the American Edu-cational Research Association Vancouver. Re-trieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA OnlinePaper Repository.

COSTA, R. P. (2012), The Potential of Researchto Improve Military Education and Serve thePublic Good. Paper presented at the 2012Annual Meeting of the American Educa-tional Research Association Vancouver. Re-trieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA OnlinePaper Repository.

COSTA, R. P. (2011), The Brazilian NationalCurriculum for Foreign Languages RevisitedThrough a Multiculturalism and Peace Stud-ies Approach. Paper presented at the 2011Annual Meeting of the American Educa-tional Research Association New Orleans. Re-trieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA OnlinePaper Repository.

COSTA, R. P.; CANEN, A. (2010), MulticulturalPeace Education in Brazil: State of Art andPartnerships Between Military and CivilianEducation. Paper presented at the 2010 An-nual Meeting of the American EducationalResearch Association Colorado. Retrieved 18Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online PaperRepository.

DOWNTON, M; PEPPLER, K. A. (2011), Piecesfor Peace: Using Impromptu to Build Musicaland Cross-Cultural Understanding. Paperpresented at the 2011 Annual Meeting of theAmerican Educational Research AssociationNew Orleans. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 fromthe AERA Online Paper Repository.

EDWARDS, S. (2014), Intergroup Dialogueand Religious/Spiritual Identity: AddressingFaith Privilege, Conflict, and Marginalizationin U.S. Higher Education. Paper presented atthe 2014 Annual Meeting of the American

Educational Research Association Pennsylva-nia. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERAOnline Paper Repository.

FUXMAN, S. (2010), Socializing Agents andPersonal Experiences as Predictors of IsraeliAdolescents Understanding of Conflict andPeace. Paper presented at the 2010 AnnualMeeting of the American Educational Re-search Association Colorado. Retrieved 18Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online PaperRepository.

GACASAN, K. (2011), Resistance to Anti-Racist Curriculum: Diversity ManagementVersus Diversity Education. Paper presentedat the 2011 Annual Meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Association New Or-leans. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERAOnline Paper Repository.

GOODMAN, J. (2013), Peace, Anti-Fascism,and Empire: Activism in the National Unionof Women Teachers (1920-1939). Paper pre-sented at the 2013 Annual Meeting of theAmerican Educational Research AssociationSan Francisco. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 fromthe AERA Online Paper Repository.

GROSS, Z. (2010), Combating Stereotypesand Prejudices in a Higher-Education Con-flictual Venue: A Case Study. Paper presentedat the 2010 Annual Meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Association Colorado.Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA On-line Paper Repository.

IDE, K. (2013), Lost in Peace Education: U.S.Diplomacy and Amerasian EducationalRights. Paper presented at the 2013 AnnualMeeting of the American Educational Re-search Association San Francisco. Retrieved18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA Online PaperRepository.

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

disciplinary Approach. Paper presented atthe 2012 Annual Meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Association Vancouver.Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA On-line Paper Repository.

JOB, J. (2011), Our World Cracked Open: Posi-tioning of Educators During 9/11. Paper pre-sented at the 2011 Annual Meeting of theAmerican Educational Research AssociationNew Orleans. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 fromthe AERA Online Paper Repository.

MCGLYNN, C.; LONDON, T. D. (2010), BeyondIntegrating Catholics and Protestants: Lead-ership for Inclusion in Integrated Schools inNorthern Ireland. Paper presented at the2010 Annual Meeting of the American Edu-cational Research Association Colorado. Re-trieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA OnlinePaper Repository.

McLEAN, L. (2013), Continuous MediationWithout Armistice: Julia Grace Wales as aTransnational Peace Activist and Educator,1900-1950. Paper presented at the 2013 An-nual Meeting of the American EducationalResearch Association San Francisco. Re-trieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA OnlinePaper Repository.

McLEAN, L. (2014), World Trouble Spots asNew Year Begins: Teaching About War andPeace in the 1950s and 1960s. Paper pre-sented at the 2014 Annual Meeting of theAmerican Educational Research AssociationPennsylvania. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 fromthe AERA Online Paper Repository.

NDURA-OUEDRAOGO, E.; MAULDEN, P. A.(2011), Creating a Hopeful Future ThroughCommunity-Based Peace-Building in Bu-rundi and Sierra Leone. Paper presented atthe 2011 Annual Meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Association New Or-leans. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERAOnline Paper Repository.

PARKER, C. (2014), Conflict Resolution Prac-tices in Diverse Contexts: Exploring Interdis-ciplinary Professionals’ Experiences WithConflict and Diversity. Paper presented atthe 2014 Annual Meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Association Pennsylva-nia. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERAOnline Paper Repository.

RAJUAN, M.; BEKERMAN, Z. (2013), Pedagogyof Peace in the Integrated Palestinian-JewishSchools in Israel: Personal or Political? Paperpresented at the 2013 Annual Meeting of theAmerican Educational Research AssociationSan Francisco. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 fromthe AERA Online Paper Repository.

SHAMMAS, D. S. (2014), Empowering Univer-sity Students Under Siege: Teaching Ameri-can Studies Overseas. Paper presented at the2014 Annual Meeting of the American Edu-cational Research Association Pennsylvania.Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA On-line Paper Repository.

SMALLER, H. (2013), International TeacherUnions and the Struggle for Peace: The Her-mann-Jordan Plan, 1923-1937. Paper pre-sented at the 2013 Annual Meeting of theAmerican Educational Research AssociationSan Francisco. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 fromthe AERA Online Paper Repository.

SUNAL, C. S.; KELLEY, L. A.; SUNAL, D. W.(2011), What Does Peace Mean? Kinder-garteners Share Ideas. Paper presented atthe 2011 Annual Meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Association New Or-leans. Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERAOnline Paper Repository.

VERWOORD, R. E. M. (2012), “Building Peace”Through Quilt Making: Participatory ArtisticQuilt Making for Supporting Peace BuildingAmong Youth in Grades 4-7. Paper presentedat the 2012 Annual Meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Association Vancouver.

Retrieved 18 Mar. 2015 from the AERA On-line Paper Repository.

www.moderndiplomacy.eu