Please activate JavaScript!
Please install Adobe Flash Player, click here for download

OHASSTA Nov 2014 final

Rapport 2014 evaluate evidence and draw conclusions about perspectives on the historical and/or contemporary experience of two or more distinct communities in Canada. Such outcomes offer much scope for exploring the roots of conflict, and the consequent difficulty of maintaining a peaceful community, but the concept of peacefulness is never mentioned. Furthermore, because the elementary curriculum asks pupils to make sense of the experiences of widely varied groups of people in different eras and areas – from Mayans to First Nations’ children in residential schools, from Chinese immigrants charged the head tax to the Jesuits, the contextual features necessary to draw conclusions about peace- building or the absence of this, are unlikely to be present. It is in the study of Canada’s role as an international partner, however, that the clearest instances of studying peace are offered, and largely ignored, at least in the naming of that phenomenon. In Grade 6, for instance, two critical outcomes are offered: "B1.1 explain why Canada participates in specific international accords and organizations, and assess the influence of some significant accords and/or organizations in which Canada participates." And "B1.2 analyse responses of Canadian governments, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and individual citizens to an economic, environmental, political, and/or social issue of international significance." These outcome statements among others constitute studies in negative peace. They do help to right the balance between war- worship and pride in other peaceful approaches to contributing to global health. And yet, the terms are never used. By the secondary grades, however, there is much more scope for formal studies of peace and peace-building. Not only could conflict resulting in peace-making or peace-building be woven into the historical concepts strands, but a wealth of topics suggest peace-building as a critical factor, including for example in the grade 10 course, the treatment of enemy aliens in World Wars One and Two, French-English conflicts around Regulation 17, the failure of the League of Nations, Canada’s efforts to control hate crimes, the Asbestos Strike in Quebec, the imposition of the War Measures Act, the work of CIDA, Canadian involvement in the Haitian earthquake relief and much else. Curiously, peacekeeping troops don’t exist even historically in these guidelines. The senior division of History offers many more possibilities for the study of peace. Individual courses studying world politics profile the devastating effects of war on culture and economy, and Canadian intervention in many fields of conflict. Thus, teachers and pupils are offered a plethora of instances of places where peace-making and peace- building could easily be introduced into the Social Studies or History curriculum. The problem is that such investigations are never named as being about peace, the process by which peace is achieved or how it is maintained by a society. In short, there is no systematic attempt to study the need for peace, or the results of not having peace. In this way, the exclusion of peace parallels the exclusions of women from earlier curriculum guidelines. Women could be inserted into the narrative without undercutting the intentions of the guidelines, assuming that teachers had the necessary knowledge and will. But until the 1990’s, there was little attempt to encourage teachers to do so. That gap seems to have been at least partly bridged. We are a long way from that with peace education. References Aspeslagh, R. (1996). Dreamers appear to be practical realists: Peace education as a ‘grand narration’. In R.J. Burns, R.J. & R. Aspeslagh (Eds.). Three decades of peace education around the world: An Anthology. New York: Garland Publishing Inc. Galtung, J. (2012). Positive and negative peace. In C.P. Webe & J. Johansen, (Eds.), Peace and Conflict Studies (pp. 75 - 80). London: Routledge Harris, I. M. & Morrison, M. L. (2003). Peace education. (2nd ed.) Jefferson, N.C. & London: McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers. Salomon, G. & Nevo, B. (2002). Peace education: The concept, principles, and practices around the world. London: Laurence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. 8 RAPPORT FALL 2014