Show Less

Framing Peace

Thinking about and Enacting Curriculum as «Radical Hope»


Edited By Hans Smits and Rahat Naqvi

The language of frames suggests the need to rethink self and other in fostering ethical relationships as a foundation for peaceful existence. Educational writers and practitioners from many parts of the world, including New York, Denver, Minneapolis, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Israel, and Canada offer their perspectives on peace as an aim of curriculum.
Possibilities for learning about peace conceived in terms of Jonathan Lear’s (2006) notion of «radical hope» are illustrated in the contexts of diverse settings and challenges: the aftermath of apartheid in South Africa, re-imagining post-colonial history curricula in Zimbabwe, exploring the meanings of truth and reconciliation and restorative justice in Canada, examining the quality of pedagogic relationships in elementary school classrooms, attending to experiences of gay and lesbian students in schools, experiences of marginalized students, children’s experiences of civic engagement, Islamophobia in high schools and teacher education classes, fraught relationships between Palestinian and Jewish students in a teachers’ college in Israel, and the inclusion of First Nations culture and knowledge in Canadian teacher education classes. As whole and in each of its parts, Framing Peace encourages us to think about peace as an urgent and fundamental responsibility of curriculum at all levels of education.


Show Summary Details
Restricted access

Case Study: Coming up against the Worldin Social Studies Education:Framing Peace


Case Study Coming up against the World in Social Studies Education: Framing Peace mark helmsing In the United States, the term “social studies” is used to identify a unique school subject discipline required of most students in all grades of public schools, an alchemy that melts the academic disciplines of history, geography, economics, sociology, and other social, behavioral, and human sciences into an examination of human conflict, change, adaptation, and progress (all terms contestable and debatable, though rarely approached critically in “official” social studies curriculum (Hursh & Ross, 2000; Kincheloe, 2001). At its best, social studies education takes holistic concepts and practices, such as citizenship and democracy, and thrusts students into the constructed archives and cartographies of history, geography, political science, anthropology, and more, to encounter, feel, deliberate, and debate the terms by which societies, cultures, and individuals create such concepts. But as social studies education comes under increased reduction in class time to make way for remediation and test preparation in mathematics and literacy, the aim of social education and the role of the social studies educator require fresh reconcep- tualization and a vitalizing defense of how social studies education can improve life. This case study attempts to show how, by engaging in curricular enactments of Butler’s (2010) concepts of affect as part of her larger treatment of framing and the radical ethics of living otherwise. How do the ways in which social studies others the world for students, and others students from their world, create affective encounters with difference,...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.

Do you have any questions? Contact us.

Or login to access all content.