English (pdf)
Article in xml format
Article references
Automatic translation
Send this article by e-mail
Cited by SciELO 
Cited by Google 
Similars in
SciELO 
Similars in Google 
Permalink
INTRODUCTION
Irenology4, understood as peace studies or peace and conflict studies, traditionally refers to academic disciplines, especially within political science and sociology. It deals with the multifactorial study of conflicts and threats to peace of various kinds. Specifically, from an educational perspective, the epistemological and methodological foundations of the subject to be dealt with in this work emerge from Social Pedagogy, as a discipline, and from a complex field of action for Social Education in its practical and professional dimensión: Peace Education5,6. This model is known in Latin America as "Popular Education", derived from the French current with the same name.
Addressing peace education means to confront diverse situations as well as historical, political, social, economic, among many other realities that are often mediated by violence and context-specific conflicts. Peace education, certainly, aims to lay the groundwork that will allow the identification and analysis of current and future realities, in order to propose intervention mechanisms to improve the issues detected; such as different forms of coexistence that lead to deconstruct, construct or reconstruct fairer societies for life, societies based on human rights, both within and outside the school setting, societies in which everyone has a place.
For these purposes, it is important to take into account different perspectives, such as those related to the personal and social training, the protection and exercise of human rights, but also solid theoretical contents based on coexistence, management and transformation of conflicts, development of educational options beyond the school environment and supporting pedagogical and methodological principles.
On the other hand, and in parallel, there exist the need of implementing socio-educational practices which generate spaces, moments, situations or events that raise awareness and help to understand the processes of change and management of the matter under improvement, overcoming, or integral development in order to build a harmonizing and inclusive "culture of peace".
It is not possible to ignore from this framework the presence of political, ideological, economic, social, etc., perspectives and interests merged in a scenario in which structural violence, and frequently other types of violence (direct-verbal, psychological and physical, and cultural-symbolic)7, represent a great challenge for Peace Research and for socio-educational processes. By interfering or interacting all these factors simultaneously, they legitimize and promote a "threshold of tolerance" towards them, and sometimes they are part of the injustices generated by the entire system.
In sum, this work aims to analyze the different elements involved in the configuration of peace education and in the development of a culture of peace, from an inclusive point of view, as well as from the socio-educational mechanisms aimed at this end.
1. Peace and Peace Education
1.1. A historical perspective
In the words of Francisco Muñoz8, probably in the first years, centuries and millennia of human history, the idea of peace did not exist, since it would have required the recognition of peace as a constitutive element of social realities. Its origin can be associated with the very origin of humanity; and its evolution, with its own history. Indeed, socialization, learning, collectivization, sharing, association, cooperation, altruism, etc., are factors that correspond to the origin of the species. The idea of peace implies the preexistence of a social and symbolic complexity that had not been reached in those times.
When social development reached a certain degree of differentiation and "complexity", explanatory categories for such phenomena emerged. In this way, peace -as an idea came to light, gave coherence to social practices, and has remained present since then.
It was in the 20th century, after the Second World War, when peace began to be considered as an object of scientific study, from different disciplinary approaches and from specific elaborations that have enriched the general panorama of human behavior. Perspectives in which the concept of peace is linked to that of war, and consequently to the need to stop it, to explain, and analyze its horrors. Peace began to be related to a horizon of hope in which war did not exist.
Research for Peace has incorporated such perspectives and interests in different fields, forums, social and academic institutions with scientific and research character (Universities, Research Institutes, Educational Centers, and scientific community in general9). In this way, Research for Peace has been nourished by epistemological and scientific approaches, and also by new and interdisciplinary instruments and methods to facilitate a significant advance in the treatment and solution of experiential and intellectual problems of human beings.
In the process of generating new analysis approaches and contemplating more variables involved in these phenomena, the birth and evolution of Peace Education cannot be ignored. According to Jares10 this development can be seen from 5 major currents or schools, as follows:
At the end of the 1950s, the Peace Research movement got off to a strong start, paradoxically, universities in general did not welcome it. However, the initiative was taken over by research institutes, often without dependence on educational institutions. A broad social activism was developed in contrast to a timid academic work.
For their part, the documents that deal with Peace Education (PE) do so by proposing a definition and its purposes, establishing its characteristics and listing contents or themes to be contemplated; a directive, little adapted approach to the context. However, Peace Education is "a social practice that promotes certain values, tries to make a certain type of emotions emerge and encourages the resignification of words and concepts with we can relate to"12, it should be viewed as a policy and as an awareness-raising process:
A process for developing self-awareness to know, along with others, how to act and how to change the social relationships that create violence, and how to acquire moral skills to remove social obstacles that prevent one's potencial realization.13
Freire sees PE as a means to unveil injustices and educate critical human beings, as stated in his speech when awarded The UNESCO Prize for Peace Education:
Peace is created and built with the overcoming of perverse social realities. Peace is created and built with the incessant construction of social justice, therefore, I do not believe that any effort called Peace Education, instead of revealing the world of injustices, turns it opaque and tries to blur its victims. On the contrary, the education that I defend is the one that is rigorous, serious, substantively democratic, progressive, concerned about students learning, one that challenges them and makes them critical.14
Jares15 proposes a definition of PE based on the socio-critical paradigm: "It is a continuous and permanent educational process based on two defining concepts: the positive conception of peace and the creative perspective of conflict. This, through problematizing methods, aims to develop a new type of culture; the culture of peace, which helps people to critically reveal the unequal, violent, complex and conflictive reality, in order to be able to situate themselves before it and act accordingly".
When educating for peace, it must be done "for dissidence, indignation, responsible disobedience, informed choice and criticism, that is, to get out of the proposals of cultural and political alienation. Jares defines PE as: "an effort capable of counteracting the tendencies of violence and able to consolidate a new way of seeing, understanding and living the world, starting from one's own being and continuing with others, horizontally, forming a network, giving confidence, security and authority to people and societies, exchanging with each other, overcoming distrust, helping to mobilize them and overcome their differences, showing them the reality of the world in order to reach a global perspective that can later be shared by the greatest possible number of people".
1.2 The Concept of Peace Education
Today, the emphasis continues to be on the need for Peace Education to be carried out in all areas and that "education for development and global citizenship should aim at forming critical global citizens who are capable of acting against any situation of injustice", in other words, "to form a critical socio-culturally competent citizenship"16.
This particular type of education has a different orientation, with respect to the traditional one, since "it does not seek to classify students, it does not promote competition or comparison with one another, it does not justify the use of violence to win, it just does not automatically agrees with the majority."17
Creating a Culture of Peace is the central objective of Peace Education. "Education is a crucial instrument of social and political transformation (...), peace is the creative transformation of conflicts, and its key words are, among others: knowledge, imagination, compassion, dialogue, solidarity, integration, participation and empathy. We must agree that its purpose is none other than to form a culture of peace (.. .)."18
These approaches are confirmed in one of the most recent states of the question on Peace Education. When comparing 44 articles published between 2013 and 2017, it was found that Peace Education implies "educate to promote a culture of peace that advocates sustainable and humane development in a globalized world."19
Peace Education is based on four fundamental aspects:20
It is aimed at transmitting a specific code of values that includes justice, cooperation, solidarity, personal and collective autonomy, and mutual respect. Likewise, it questions discrimination, intolerance, ethnocentrism, and blind obedience, among others.
It is based on action for change.
Must be sustained over time.
It is transversal to each of the teachings of the different educational stages.
Peace Education must be critical, based on peace studies, grounded in conflict resolution and able to detect deceptive forms that manipulate the ideal of peace. Moreover, it is the cohesive pursuit of values that makes possible the attainment of peaceful conditions and environments21.
In short, from the perspective of Social Pedagogy, in its theoretical and practical dimension, it not only needs to develop methods and techniques, but a pedagogical thought with critical and real dimensions towards the social situations that provoke the process of violence, marginalization and exclusion in its diverse manifestations, degrees and moments. It must be oriented to promote critical change processes from the very personal and contextual realities, in order to improve the conditions and quality of life of people22.
1.3. Contents and practices of Peace Education
The themes and their ways to be put into practice in daily life are the socio-pedagogical axis of Peace Education. Recognizing them allows us to identify a set of concepts and methodologies that favor the acquisition of special skills and knowledge oriented to the construction of (a culture of) Peace. The consulted authors propose or cite different contents that they consider should be part of the curricular program of this type of education.
According to them, the main theme to be addressed is that of conflicts23 and the ways of coping with them, including violence and the methods created to resolve or transform them. This content is suggested to be addressed in the traditional school since infancy: "A simple way to build a culture of peace would be to introduce knowledge and practical skills about conflict from kindergarten to Ph.D programs, starting with problems such as 'there are two kids and one orange, what do you do?'. (there are at least 16 qualitative different answers)."24 Perspective in which the role of educational entities is crucial, not only in educational, training, research processes, etc., but at all levels where the University needs to redefine its role and presence25; a role in which it transcends the academic field, being able to address social reality.
For his part, Jares26 states that the objectives and contents of Peace Education should focus on international understanding, human rights, interculturality, disarmament, development, conflict and disobedience.
In the most recent meta-analysis, some of the themes proposed by Jares are still in force, however, we can also add a couple of important topics that have emerged with greater relevance in recent decades: gender equality and sustainable development. In short, in Jares' opinion: "among the themes that Peace Education should address, in order to promote a culture of peace, (...) coexistence; cooperation; gender equality; human rights; non-violence; international understanding; sustainable development; and conflict resolution are a priority. "27
The concept of Peace Education28 in Latin America has been limited to contexts of war or extreme violence. Today, the perspective includes other areas of social life and covers education in human rights by linking everyday life experiences, social and political practices, and interactions between people and institutions.
It can be observed a general agreement on the fundamental themes that should be part of the teaching-learning process of Peace Education:
Conflicts and types of conflict resolution;
Cooperation at all levels;
Human and sustainable development;
Human rights;
Peaceful and intercultural coexistence;
Gender equality;
International understanding and disarmament.
Other authors point out the need to generate alternatives to achieve the objectives of Peace Education: "to create or identify methods that lead to: become aware of the existence of others and recognize the relationships that bind us together; accept the cultural, ethnic, sexual, political and religious pluralism we live in and the legitimacy of the values raised from diversity; divest ourselves of the ideologies by which we judge others based on our prejudices or preconceived images; convince ourselves that, as human beings, we need to interact with others and that every person, from birth, has aptitudes and qualities that should be able to emerge in favor of individuality".29
In terms of didactics, Jares30 affirms that the teaching methods should be based on dialogue, experience, teamwork, cooperation. Methods that encourage student participation and autonomy. Following this author, the transversal "socio-affective" approach is recommended given that it consists, in general terms, of making students live an experience to develop their intuition as well as their intellect, without giving priority to information, but rather to the description and analysis of this experience in order to develop "empathy" and thus enable them to contrast and generalize such an experience at the micro and macro levels of everyday situations.
2. Relationship between Inclusive education and Culture of Peace. A Pedagogy of difference and equity
Inequalities and gaps31 (social, educational, cultural, economic, etc.) are partly explained by structural violence, which could be understood as a type of violence present in social injustice and other circumstances that support it and hide static forms of systemic violence (misery, dependence, hunger, gender discrimination, etc.) and the possible interactions between them.
In addition to incorporating the values of Peace and Justice, Peace Research was allowed to advance considerably in fields of study that were thought to be exhausted or disseminated by the social sciences such as development and underdevelopment, democracy, forms of participation and exclusion, etc. All this has contributed to the decline of scientific neutrality, has favoured the renewal of studies, and has encouraged interdisciplinary cooperation. In turn, the notion of conflict opens up great possibilities for analysis because of its relationship with the needs, desires, emotions, etc. that make up the entire social fabric.
On the other hand, delving into the responses to diversity and inequalities, it is worth noting that Spain, through the inclusive approach of universal social policies, has been implementing measures so that people with greater difficulties have access to universal services and thus help eradicate situations of disadvantage and social exclusion.
Current studies recognize the existence of a greater gap between groups belonging to disadvantaged contexts32. Therefore, the development of proposals inspired by principles of inclusion, multiculturalism and social justice are becoming increasingly relevant33. An inclusive school is one that is on the move, rather than one that has achieved a certain goal34. A process of identification and minimization of the exclusion factors, ingrained in social institutions, which therefore helps to balance and achieve fundamental rights and social justice35. Schools that work for social justice are schools that have consistent themes and a fair operation. Education becomes a powerful tool to fight against exclusion36.
Research works carried out in recent years37,38,39 offer an overview on the influence of the phenomenon of diversity in schools. Different studies show their unanimous agreement about inclusive education as the most appropriate option, nowadays, to face the challenge of educating everyone equally bacause it defends human rights and endorses the principles of equality, equity and social justice40.
Inclusive education demands special attention in creating a warm and welcoming community for all students in the classroom and school41. An open, diversity-ready curriculum with a school culture that admits and deals with differences openly42.
One limitation of the current discussions about inclusion is the failure to recognize that school policies reflect the broader values of society and that barriers to inclusive education are therefore deeply rooted in the social, political, economic and ideological structure. This becomes a social justice issue and a growing concern.
When talking about inclusive education in schools we focus, as mentioned above, on the Pedagogy of Difference and Equity43 where difference is treated as a souce of wealth, and mutual support is used to eradicate inequality, discrimination and injustice. This pedagogy is the scaffolding of an inclusive education-culture of positive and integral peace44.
The construction of a positive and comprehensive peace45 is engendered in human rights, which only exist in peace settings. Therefore, it is necessary to educate on inclusion, based on difference and diversity. From this conception of the school, talking about inclusion implies talking about justice and, it seems logical, that in order to build a distributive and honest society, it is necessary to develop equitable educational models that face its imbalances in a fair way. The notion of a culture of peace goes beyond the negative definition and brings a positive content of social justice, collective well-being and absence of direct, cultural and structural violence46,47. It is based on practices that generate peace processes and conflict resolution.
The movement for a culture of peace and non-violence, promoted by UNESCO, conceives peace as a construction, as a project that concerns all citizens. The ingredients to achieve this are: democracy, dialogue, solidarity, justice and a spirit open to difference and diversity. The latter are the ingredients of inclusive education in schools, where educational work is an instrument of transformation, through a pedagogy with the following characteristics:
a) critical and pro-social for ethical responsibility and coexistence; b) capable of transforming conflicts in a positive and creative way; c) free of exclusion; d) promoter of participation.48
On this account, it is necessary to cultivate a pedagogy of differences and equity from and towards an inclusive education-culture of positive and integral peace.
2.1. Inclusive practices for peace
2.1.1. Dialogic Pedagogy
In the dialogical model, the concept of education is understood as a process that involves all the actors in order to promote human interactions that tend towards the transformation of both the one who teaches and the one who learns; therefore, it is assumed that every person is capable of bringing about change by interacting with others, since they are endowed with the action, they are agents, constructors and transformers both of themselves and of the environment in which they develop and live in an effort to consolidate a dialogical society.
Contextualization of the critical-dialogical pedagogical approach aims at motivating the permanent reflection by the teaching community on its pedagogical practices so that learning is focused on students and the final concern is not so much related to teaching but to the learning process and the cognitive, emotional, and attitudinal skills of students and the way they use knowledge to face the challenges posed by the knowledge society and the new problems of the globalized world. This approach requires a constant stimulation for the construction of knowledge by students49.
Freire (1970) developed the Theory of the Dialogical Action in which intersubjectivity was the protagonist, that is, the dialogue between all people.50
Based on the INCLUD-ED research (2006-2011), which analyzed the educational strategies that contribute to overcoming inequalities and promoting social cohesion, several schools began to apply the Successful Educational Actions. These SEA, inspired by contributions of critical and dialogical pedagogy are made up of those educational practices that obtain the best results in different contexts, in addition to positively influencing the development of values, emotions and feelings of students.51 Building a culture of peace52 requires not accepting those social behaviors that exalt the use of force, but insists on overcoming certain social incompatibilities through dialogue and equal opportunities.53
2.1.2. School, a space of peace
The construction of an increasingly implemented peace has to lead us to place ourselves before reality in a specific way, it will offer us a vision that gives meaning and makes possible this construction: the starting point of this peace is found in the capacity of the human being to grow, to optimize and optimize oneself, to be a person in society, together with others.
United Nations (1998) also illustrates the culture of peace as a culture based on a set of values, attitudes and behaviors that reject violence and prevent and address conflicts, seeking to placate their causes in order to solve them through dialogue and negotiation among individuals, groups and nations. This implies the need to seek a change of mentality that helps us to organize around the idea of the defense of the common good, based on certain values.54
An example of this is the project "Red Escuela: Espacio de Paz", in Andalusia,55 which received a boost for its development in 1995 (Order 19 December 1995). Moral and civic education acquired an important significance within this program, it looked for a change in social mentality that would collaborate in the educational approach to coexistence problems that constitute a great challenge both at a social and school level.
This change in mentality began to take shape in 2002-2003 within a pioneering project including three hundred Andalusian schools. Nowadays, it has almost two thousand registered. In order to take part in this project, a two-year program dealing with contents listed below must be developed:
3. Educational agents facilitating a culture of peace
School culture could be defined as the historically transmitted patterns of meaning that include norms, values, beliefs, ceremonies, rituals, traditions, and myths understood, perhaps to varying degrees, by members of the school community56.
Coexistence refers to the quality of the interpersonal relationships built in the educational institution, which give rise to a certain school climate and, in turn, influence them. This definition states that the search for positive coexistence is an essential goal of education and cannot be understood exclusively as a reaction to the appearance of certain conflicts57.
Based on similar terms, school coexistence is defined as the interrelation between the different members of an educational institution. It is not limited to the relationship between people, but includes the forms of interaction among the different levels that make up an educational community, so it constitutes a collective construction under the responsibility of all educational members and agents without exception.
The concept of coexistence from the quality of education can be approached from different disciplinary perspectives. The psychoeducational dimension assumes that education only occurs through the intersubjective encounter between people, and when this encounter is not developed under parameters of psychological, ethical and emotional well-being, the processes of teaching and learning can be very difficult or even imposible to carry out. This is a social and moral dimension58 that includes the recognition of the other, as similar and different at the same time.
School coexistence can be understood as an interrelational process that foresees both an interpersonal and a collective dimension, given that the actions of individual persons and their inter-subjective exchanges, as well as the set of institutionalized policies and practices that mark such exchanges, converge in it.
Hierarchies, norms, traditions, stories, and forms of relationship are, among others, cultural elements that intervene in the configuration of certain modes of coexistence in the school. Therefore, the way of living together expresses the uniqueness of a school and its history.
It should be noted that in a peace school, it is essential that teachers, students, families and the environment act as defenders of their work. The atmosphere of collaboration and joint work is fundamental to help generate spaces of peace59. It is necessary to work to bring family and school cultures closer together, which favors education in children and their school performance. This becomes then, an indicator of educational quality60,61. This also fosters children's overall development and expands opportunities for generalization of learning in different contexts, thus helping to shape the path to full inclusion.
This current of change implies a new vision of the relationships established between families and education professionals. Here, the key elements in the cooperation agreements between the parts begin to emerge: professional competence, communication, respect, commitment, equity and trust; all united in a great feeling of solidarity.
The school must be conceived as a basic unit of change, open to the community, a place with other educational agents; this implies a flexible and democratic school organization with a high level of autonomy to redefine spaces, times and training practices, with a new style of pedagogical leadership, with greater commitment and presence in the social and natural environment62.
The creation of professional communities committed to the improvement of teaching-learning allows the simultaneous articulation of organizational changes in the schools and individual changes in their teachers. It also facilitates the transition from a culture of individual execution of external proposals, to a culture based on autonomy, negotiation, trust, internally generated innovation and the collegial work of the teachers. All these forms of joint work aim at analyzing reflectively and collaboratively what has been done, why and how it has been achieved, it allows to assess achievements and needs, to rethink what could be changed and agree on action plans, measures that together represent an important change in the teaching culture and practice.
It is necessary to mention the figure of the social educator as the person who, after specific training, contributes through pedagogical, psychological, and social methods and techniques to the personal development, social maturation, and autonomy of young people and adults with disabilities or social misfits (or at risk of them)63. If we start from the base of the changes in our society towards more complex and multicultural environments, in scenarios such as education, the need to incorporate the figure of Social Education arises in a more notorious way.
Increasingly, vulnerable groups have a presence in society, this is why, research must give priority to addressing their needs and the influence of Social Education in both free and paid teaching contexts. The complexity of our current society requires social mediators between the school and other social institutions such as the family and local entities.
The role of social educators64 in educational institutions falls into three models:
Registered in schools, model applied in the Communities of Andalusia, Extremadura and Castilla - La Mancha;
Integrated into the municipal social services. Model applied in the Balearic Islands, the Basque Country, Galicia and Madrid;
Specific projects led by experts in schools. Model applied in the rest of the communities not mentioned above.
In autonomous communities such as Andalusia, the incorporation of experts in schools took place in 2007-2008. The paralysis of the project and the scarce repercussion of this figure can be seen.
The opening of some autonomous communities is not enough. It is necessary for social educators to be able to participate freely in the life of the educational institution, they must be granted the privilege of deciding, bearing in mind that their vision of certain problems is different from that of teachers. The incorporation of social educators in the formal sphere must be implemented by the State through laws that guarantee their presence in all educational institutions in Spain, as a support for the rest of educational agents.
Building and growing a Culture of Peace is one of the central objectives of socio-educational intervention for peace, so it is important to be clear about how it is defined and about the aspects to be considered in the process towards it.
Culture of Peace65 can be defined as a movement to overcome the culture based on antagonism, confrontation and struggle; to overcome the predominance of geoculture (cultural diversity linked to biodiversity), geopolitics and geoeconomics, the democratization of the market and the State. This is a movement to reform the capacity and potential of local producers, the linking between the macro and the micro aspects of each society and the democratization of knowledge to serve in the generation of equity and economic development.
The idea of conceiving a culture of peace includes a "new social and ecological contract at the planetary level able to install, through legal and political instruments, a balance between societies based on the values of modern humanism, values of solidarity, brotherhood, justice, freedom and sustainable development"66.
According to Article 3 of the Declaration on the Right to Peace: "a) The culture of peace is meant to defend, every day, the peace in the spirits of human beings, by means of education, science and communication; it must build the path that leads to the global implementation of the right of the human being to peace. b) the culture of peace implies the recognition, respect and daily practice of a set of ethical values and democratic ideals that are based on the intellectual and moral solidarity of humanity.67"
It is interesting to see how the concept of a culture of peace evolves from UNESCO, which in 2015 defines it as "a set of values, attitudes and behaviours of human beings in society, that simultaneously create and cause social interrelationships and interactions based on the principles of freedom, justice, democracy, tolerance and solidarity; which reject all violent action and prevent conflicts, seeking also to prevent their causes, and solve problems through dialogue and negotiation; while guaranteeing to all people the exercise of all rights by providing the possibility to fully participate in the endogenous development of their societies." 68
A culture of peace is built on a daily basis and constitutes a "multidisciplinary effort from education, to transform conceptions, change perceptions and assume commitments in order to derive the presence of peace in culture, understanding that this building task must go beyond the limits of conflicts to become a daily experience in scenarios such as school, work, family, the State, civil society, among others."69
CONCLUSIONS
The variability and richness of the themes addressed make conflict a present element in every society, so it is necessary to understand it as a source of creativity and opportunity for change. Consequently, conflict is part of the process of social interaction in which the interests of individuals and groups interact, regulate, transform and even resolve themselves. It is clear that in this process multiple and complex collisions and coalitions occur, this fact may support important issues in coexistence, namely: forms of mutual recognition (otherness and diversity), understanding of the perceptions of the other, mere coexistence (tolerance) or even the emergence of new forms of collaboration, coexistence and miscegenation. However, on some occasions it brings about destructive and annihilating results70, before which we must react by articulating proposals able to transform, manage, regulate or prevent conflicts, in order to offer spaces for coexistence and peace, even if it is imperfect.
Today, for instance, in the educational and academic field, there are still resistance movements or approaches to work that are ideal or theoretically well spelled out, but that do not respond to the intended objectives in practice. Therefore, it is necessary to consolidate a work based not only on theories, but also on practices and scientific evidence, with interdisciplinary and integral views. In this sense, according to Galtung71, the consequences of this timid acceptance of the theme by the academy are still visible, that is, a strong movement of research and activism, but weak in the education scenario, a movement that generally fails to enter schools and universities. In short, despite attempts, peace education has probably not developed significantly over the last few decades, particularly in contrast to the considerable advances in research and activism.
For its part, returning to the school framework, educational inclusion helps to attack social justice72, it is concerned with increasing attendance and completion of all students, thus reducting dropout and expulsion rates, it learns from diversity and promotes cohesion. This, in turn, requires an analysis of the causes of exclusion; sharing the blame for failure and seeking support for those excluded. Exclusion can be based on many factors: migration and refugee status, conflict, natural disaster, income, linguistic and cultural status, gender, and capacity. Therefore, it is necessary to work on practices that will improve work in schools.
More and more conflict situations arise in the classrooms, such as coexistence problems, aggressive behaviors, low tolerance for frustration, lack of social skills73, ICT addictions, problematic alcohol and drug use, male chauvinism and small-scale male chauvinism, etc. Peace cannot be achieved from an outdated traditional modernity where values are imposed on individuals or groups through power relations. School peace can be achieved from approaches consistent with dialogical modernity, from approaches of egalitarian dialogue, from the plurality of voices that make up the educational community.
Social and contextual realities, and people "change" frequently, and so do the forms of conflict. Peace is not an immovable objective but is identified and built daily, it is imperfect because it is unfinished74, it is therefore dynamic, open, diverse, etc. This processual approach benefits the evolution of pacifism. In addition, it is based on theoretical and epistemological approaches based on evidence and subjectivities that bring us closer to the understanding of the human being.
Peace Education and respect for human rights acquire in our days a particular relevance when contrasting their values with the daily violence, the horrors of war and the destruction or gradual transformation of values that affect us day after day.
As discussed, "peace is not only defined by the absence of war and conflict, it is also a dynamic concept that needs to be understood in positive terms, such as the presence of social justice and harmony, the possibility for human beings to fully realize their potential, and respect for their right to live their lives with dignity. Long-term human development cannot take place without peace and without a fair, equitable and continuous planning, peace cannot be maintained."75
Educating for Peace means developing complex themes and problems with a critical, deep and serious approach to our shared present and our common historical period. Complex themes with diverse meanings in different contexts that expand themselves from the school environment to the family, the neighborhood, the peer group, and the diverse socialization processes.
In summary, from the approaches of Social Pedagogy, Education for Peace, specifically, stands as a necessity for the construction of an integrative and inclusive "culture of peace".
