Peacemaking, peacekeeping, and peace-building are complex and important responses to the proliferation of violent conflict. The root of these approaches lies in the basic knowledge and commitment to the practice of non-violence and critical thinking. When we eliminate violence as an option for resolving conflicts, we make room for creative alternatives. Co-operation, critical thinking, communication and problem-solving become essential tools. Conflict itself can be viewed as an opportunity for growth and expanded communication rather than a precursor to violence and a threat to dignity, security and life. Peace educators are developing tools to help transform the current "culture of violence" in which hurt and harm are advocated and glorified to a "culture of peace" in which the preservation of life and human dignity are the central guiding principles for living together in a secure world.

The following suggested Learning Activities connect this global process with classrooms. The first is a simple demonstration of the rewards of working co-operatively to achieve a goal. The second activity utilises the valuable tools of active listening, critical thinking, and imagining creative, non-violent responses to conflict. This Unit can be used with all ages and level of student, though it may be most suited for youth over the age of twelve.

(Skills)
• Practice active listening and reflection
• Gain competence in identifying and challenging assumptions
• Use co-operative problem-solving to achieve goals
• Enhance abilities in imagining alternatives to violence

(Attitudes)
• Exhibit non-judgemental (impartial) attitudes

Step 1: Introduce this activity in the context of other learning in the class. It fits especially well with subjects that deal with power relationships (such as history and politics) and topics related to conflict, co-operation and competition (such as sports and recreation, economics, debate, or law). Because peace education aims to connect learning rather than segment or separate subjects, each activity should be related to previous and forthcoming lessons.

Step 2: Ask students to form pairs and sit opposite their partner at a desk or table. Announce that students are to clasp hands as if to arm wrestle. Explain: "Every time your partners’ hand touches the table, you gain a point". Students with the most points win a prize. (If necessary, remind students that no one in the class has the right to inflict pain, hurt or harm on another.)

Step 3: Allow one or two minutes for the students to gain points. Give a ten second warning before calling time.

Step 4: Debrief the activity. Which students gained the most points? How did they decide what to do? Who "won"? (Teachers Note: When the activity begins, some pairs will likely struggle to force each other’s hand down. Others will realise that a co-operative approach, in which each student in turn allows the other to touch his or her hand to the table will enable both students to accumulate more points.) In the debrief, discuss the relative merits of co-operative and competitive methods. Also, allow students to share their feelings about the exercise and make sure no one has been hurt or upset by the experience.

Step 5: Award prizes to those with the highest points. However, the class as a whole may choose to discuss and ultimately decide if the prizes should be re-distributed. Keep in mind the idea of a "win-win" solution, where all participants come out feeling they have succeeded.

Step 6: Assess these activities with the students.

Source
Learning activity #1 is adapted from "The Smarties Game" in Smith, David C. and Terrance R. Carson, Educating for a Peaceful Future, Toronto: Kagan and Woo Limited, 1998.

Suggested Learning Activity #2
In the context of learning co-operatively and exploring non-violent responses to conflict, critical thinking is an essential skill. Practising critical thinking skills involves active listening, withholding judgement, questioning assumptions and stereotypes, exploring alternative interpretations of information and allowing time for self-reflection and contemplation. In a conflict, these skills enable us to take a step back, assess the situation, and make responsible choices about how to act. The following Critical Conversation exercise enables students to practice these valuable skills.

Step 1: Divide students into groups of five.

Step 2: Students then choose one of three roles: in each group, one student becomes the "Storyteller", three are "Detectives" and one student becomes the "Umpire". The Storyteller is the person who makes him/herself the focus of the critical conversation by presenting a conflict incident from his/her experience. The incident can be one in which the Storyteller observed a conflict or directly participated, and it can be an example or a positive response to conflict or one in which there was a negative outcome (such as hurt, unresolved anger, or violence). (NOTE: This role can be very difficult and the storyteller should be prepared to be respectfully questioned on his/her beliefs about what happened in the incident.)

The three Detectives are the people who will critique the presentation by listening for unacknowledged or unquestioned assumptions that the Storyteller may convey. (NOTE: Detectives do not critique the person, but rather challenge possible assumptions that may be evident to them in listening to his/her story.)

The Umpire is the person who will monitor the process and make sure that the others are speaking to each other in a respectful and non-judgemental manner. The Umpire should remind participants that the purpose of the critical conversation is not to pass judgement on the actions of the Storyteller in any way, but rather to remain impartial as they try to understand what happened and offer alternative perceptions of what took place.

All three roles work as a team to better understand the incident and shed light on others ways to look at the same situation.

Step 3: Once the roles are established, the Storyteller begins relating his/her story. The Storyteller should be given five to ten minutes to speak and should not be interrupted in any way.

Step 4: While the Storyteller speaks, the Detectives listen attentively and make eye contact with the speaker. Their task is to identify the assumptions underlying the story. Does the Storyteller have any biases related to the story? What do they appear to be? What assumptions or conclusions has she/he drawn about what took place? What is stated as an assumption and what seems to be implied, or unstated? What are some alternative interpretations that could be given based on the same facts and circumstances described?

Step 5: When the Storyteller completes his/her remarks, Detectives may ask impartial (non-judgemental) questions to gain more information about what happened. For instance, Detectives may pose alternative interpretations of the facts presented and ask if the Storyteller thinks these other viewpoints could also be true. The Storyteller provides all additional information as long as he/she feels it was requested without judgement. The Storyteller may also choose to ask Detectives why they are asking particular questions.

Step 6: The Umpire should intervene if at any point questions are posed in a judgmental way. For instance, Detectives should not say things like, "You can’t seriously believe that….". A question such as "Why did you do that?" may be asked in a neutral, curious tone, but not as an accusation.

Detectives also explain their alternative interpretations of the story. They could see what happened in a different light and say, "Perhaps from a different perspective, you might conclude that …" or "another possible way to explain what happened might be…". Detectives should provide their reasons for drawing such alternative conclusions. Ideally, they provide insight that sheds new light onto the story. Their feedback should never be asserted as "the truth" but only another possible interpretation of what happened.

Step 8: The Storyteller then has a chance to respond or comment on these alternative interpretations and to ask questions about them. It is not necessary for the Storyteller to always agree with the Detectives, but rather to respectfully consider what they have shared.

Step 9: Finally, the Umpire should offer any feedback he or she has about the process or the outcomes.

Step 10: When all parties have had an opportunity to speak, participants should step out of their roles and discuss what took place and any new insights they gained. The group may also discuss ideas about how they might act differently if a similar conflict situation arose in the future. The teacher should then bring the groups back together to assess the activity together as a class.

Source
Learning activity #2 is adapted from a "Critical Conversation" exercise in Developing Critical Thinking, a manual based on a two-day workshop with Stephen Brookfield sponsored by The Centre for Educational Outreach and Innovation at Teachers College, Columbia University.

Group Report
Ask students to take ten to fifteen minutes after the exercise is over to reflect on the experience. They may want to discuss their reactions as a group or focus on themselves individually. Provide an assessment worksheet for the group to report back their response to activities. The group report could ask the following:

• Please describe what you enjoyed about this activity.
• Please describe what was difficult about this activity.
• How would you change this activity to make it more effective?
• Would you use this activity to teach critical thinking? Why or why not?
• Please add any other feedback here.

Thank you.

Dialogue Sheet
Another way to get feedback about an activity or to assess whether learning objectives have been met is to use a "Dialogue Sheet". A Dialogue Sheet should distributed after each activity or in particular cases. The following is a sample Dialogue Sheet:

2.

3.

THANK YOU.