EN
Teaching Peace in Schools: The Research Studying How to Make It Possible
A doctoral research project analyzes how to bring peace education into schools and the type of training teachers need to implement it. The study uses the Living Peace International project as its primary case study.
When Lisiane Mazzurana began her PhD at Università Sophia (Italy) within the Cultura Dell’Unità (Culture of Unity) program in October 2024, she was unfamiliar with the Living Peace International initiative, which officially launched in 2012.
“The Living Peace International Project is a pathway for peace education,” according to the organization’s website. They describe this “pathway” as a “commitment to developing the creativity and autonomy of youth to face problems and conflicts,” teaching them dialogue and training them to “be protagonists, thus gaining awareness of their own potential” and “feeling responsible for everything”.
Upon learning more about the platform, Lisiane became interested in investigating it further and using it as the subject of her thesis. United World Project interviewed the 31-year-old Brazilian about the progress of her research, which seeks to determine if peace education is possible and how to form the educators who will implement this pedagogical peace project in various schools.
What is the theme and focus of your doctoral thesis?
My theme is a study of peace based on the Living Peace project. The focus is on teachers, because the idea is to understand how Living Peace ended up in schools and what training those teachers—the ones who choose to bring Living Peace into the classroom—received from the organization. So, the goal is to investigate the training aspect and, through that, work on training the Living Peace educators themselves so that the movement can expand.
You are still in the early stages of your project. What structure or development do you anticipate as it unfolds?
I am currently conducting a historical review to understand existing concepts of peace within philosophy, sociology, and theology. Although I am not researching religious concepts per se, the concept of peace within theology is very important because Living Peace emerged within a religious movement. I need to understand the founder’s perspective on peace that gave rise to Living Peace. What was the driving force there? Then there are the philosophical concepts—because philosophy is the foundation of our life and our thought—and the sociological ones, because those are the concepts of social construction. Since Living Peace exists on several continents, I need to understand the structure of those continents and how they view peace to understand how projects develop throughout the rest of the world. Although I have a very specific focus—education and training those educators—I must understand the origins of the movement.
Your investigation begins with an analysis of historical peace through an interdisciplinary approach. How has each discipline informed your research?
I haven’t delved deeply into sociology yet; I’m still at the reading stage. But philosophy is very much about “thinking toward peace.” There are concepts like positive peace and negative peace, which they even define. I had never imagined peace having a “negative” aspect. But philosophy brings up the idea that “negative peace” is a view of peace born out of war. It has a negative side because people create war while already waiting for peace—so it’s not a proactive, positive peace. This really affected me because I thought it was quite different. We usually hear in school or on the news about war and “fighting for peace.” You think peace is something that comes after… and they are already acting with that mindset. Philosophy is very much about the construction of our thought, so it provided many concepts in that regard.
Then, philosophy offers another vision they call the post-modern view of peace, which is what you build in your daily life. The goal isn’t just to have peaceful moments in your day; it explains that peace is not just a thought or a feeling—it is an action. I found that philosophical part very interesting. In pedagogy, this aligns perfectly and brings in many religious concepts. Paulo Freire was Catholic, and he brings the question of religion into the realm of peace, noting how important it is to work on this in schools. It is a “constructive peace.” It’s not a “passive peace” where you just accept things. He argues, through education, that we are all “builders of peace.”
And then there’s the theological part, of course. We have the issue of the Crusades, which were understood as a “good” for the Church to achieve peace. Later, theology offers another perspective regarding the peace we build—like what philosophy says—which is different from that of the Crusades. The Crusades were later understood as a process of war… as if it were necessary to fight for God with weapons. We are bringing a different vision: that is not how we build peace. We must build it, yes, but with other tools, not through physical struggle. That brings us to dialogue, which is the primary foundation for building peace. It’s about knowing how to accept and respect the opinion of the other, regardless of what you think of them, the country they come from, or their culture.
What are some challenges you have encountered so far in your investigation?
There are many within sociology, because I have to deal with political issues. How does each country or continent understand peace, right? Especially the divide between the East and the West, which is very culturally rooted. Peace is also very cultural; each culture sees it differently. For some, it’s a lifestyle. For others, it’s a conquest. And to conquer, the first thing that comes to mind is war. Do I need to have a war with one person to conquer something else? So, it is a cultural construction.
And in the pedagogical field?
You work with the child’s perspective; you help them build various ways of seeing peace. It starts with you: through the choices you make and the reactions you have in your daily life. It’s not something far away from us, as we often imagine. It’s there with you every day, and you choose whether to act on it or not. Beyond a feeling, it is a concrete action. Paulo Freire mentions concepts in education involving peace, especially when he pairs it with dialogue. He begins by talking about the importance of dialogue in education—of knowing how to respect your student as a being in progress. Just because you are the teacher doesn’t mean you impose things. You build together.
In your opinion, what is the importance of the pedagogical concept of peace?
In school, we don’t often teach our students to be autonomous, to know how to defend their own ideas, or to seek to build something different with someone they might not get along with. Teachers are often so focused on delivering content that they forget they can relate it to real life. For example, if I have to teach the division of neighborhoods—the very basics of early literacy—I ask: Where is my neighborhood? Which is my street? A child needs this identification to situate themselves. If I start by discussing the neighborhood… how many neighbors do they have? Who do they talk to? Who don’t they talk to? Why not? You are already helping with that construction of knowledge.
From there, you can start sowing the concepts of peace in their lives, so they understand that just because my neighbor doesn’t get along with my mother—maybe they argue over “adult things”—I can still play with their child. That doesn’t stop me from building a friendship. But we have to take these small steps within education. Often, teachers don’t want to get involved because it’s hard work; you have to know your students. You can’t just walk into the room, play your part, and leave. No, you have to get involved and relate to each of their stories. Sometimes you have 20 or 30 children. It’s a lot of work, but if you don’t do it, who will?
What does the literature you’ve examined so far say about the possibility of peace education?
It says it is possible. In Brazil, there is even work being done in Rio Grande do Sul by a researcher who did her Master’s specifically on a school with peace education. So yes, it is something we can achieve, but it depends heavily on how the project is structured—whether it has political or religious biases—because many small factors can change an entire project. It must be very well-defined. The literature helps me with this. For Paulo Freire, education is something that sets you free; it gives you the power of knowledge, discussion, and defense—the ability to make choices based on your education. That is something we don’t see happening in schools much anymore. Today, it’s mostly an imposition.
Do you believe peace education is a solution for many of the “symptoms” we are experiencing as a society today?
I think so. I know it is a very arduous path. It will demand a lot from whoever enters this type of education—not just in terms of knowledge, but in terms of predisposition. You have to be aware of what comes with the “package” you are accepting. You have to have patience with the process, especially with the children. That’s the hardest part because we have to listen to the child in their full essence. You can’t divide them, like, “From this door inward, you are my student; whatever is outside stays outside.” It doesn’t work that way for them. So, you must have the awareness that you will face this, but also a lot of criticism. Many teachers will criticize it because they won’t understand the process; they will interpret it through religious lenses. So, we must present the project not as the “salvation” of a religion, but as something that will help society.
A fundamental role, then?
I think peace education today is, for me, an “educational hope” in the sense of learning, but also a “social hope.” It can go beyond the classroom walls. It can become social projects within a church or a neighborhood initiative. We can use a peace education project in that sense. I think the vision for this educational project can be expanded far beyond the classroom.
We live in a context where global peace is increasingly threatened, fragile, or at stake. With that in mind, what is the role of a research project like yours?
It reminds me of a phrase I heard last semester from my political science professor. We were discussing the situation between Israel and Palestine, and he said that perpetual peace will never exist on Earth. The idea of “perpetual peace”—where the whole world lives in harmony without any war—is something that cannot happen because everyone thinks differently. Every politician who serves in a country’s leadership role thinks differently. Their rigidity or their mindset defines whether or not there will be conflicts or wars. It is very difficult. We live in a world where there will almost always be at least one or two countries at war over something. That’s when I started to realize how we are not trained or taught in school to “think outside the box.” We only think locally: my country, my state, my city, and that’s it. We don’t realize that everything we experience encompasses much more.
So, how should we think about peace looking toward the future?
It is possible to carry out this project, but first, I had to understand if it was even possible—if it was something I could stand behind and defend. Often, I asked myself if I truly had the capacity. Because I know that many things I say have a religious undertone because I am very Catholic. I strongly defend what I believe. So, I had to be very careful when I write, and I reread my work many times to correct this in myself—to ensure I don’t have a religious bias, but a more neutral one. I cannot wave a religious flag in my project; it must be open to everyone. I had to be careful to write that peace is for everyone, even if not everyone “conquers” it on Earth. It’s something you build day by day, but “perpetual peace,” as we hope for, belongs only to eternity. You are preparing the ground for later. You are leaving things for the next generation. You can’t think it’s useless. You have to say: “No, it is possible. It can be done. It will be a lot of work. We’re going to have to fight a bit for peace.” But it’s a fight that is important to have.
At this stage of your project, it might be premature to have definitive conclusions. But what are some observations or discoveries you’ve made so far that surprised you?
The realization regarding “perpetual peace” was a shock to me because I thought it was a possibility. I really thought we could have a world in complete harmony. When my professor [who is a diplomat] gave me that summary, it was very painful to hear, but it was also a reality I had to accept. I have to embrace it as it is. But I also can’t just let it go. I have to embrace it, overcome it, and then ask: “Here and now, what can I do for this peace, to build this peace?” I started looking through that lens so I wouldn’t get too discouraged. Pope Francis spoke a lot about our “Common Home” about us taking care of it because it belongs to all of us. I think peace is very much like that. It is common; it is for everyone and belongs to everyone. We all need to care for it, like a piece of human heritage. It is yours to cherish and to do something productive and good with. It is a journey.