Educating for Change:
A Survey of Programs for Peace, Justice, and
Diversity in the Washington, DC Area
A Report from Education for Peace DC, a Project of the Center for
Peacebuilding and Development and the Localizing Peace Initiative,
School of International Service, American University
November 2012
Authors: John David Clark, Amber Hill, Roberta Kleepko, Livia Mueller, Maura Scully, and Laurie Segel-Moss
2
Partners
The Center for Peacebuilding and Development’s (CPD) mission is to promote a crosscultural approach to developing and expanding research and practices in peace education, civic
engagement, nonviolent resistance, conflict resolution, religion and peace, and peacebuilding in
a sustainable development context.
The Localizing Peace Initiative (LPI) is a program of the Mohammed Said Farsi Chair of
Islamic Peace. LPI works to promote the understanding of local peace in the Washington, DC
region. By highlighting a wide range of vibrant activities, and by coordinating dialogues, events,
and projects, LPI hopes to celebrate how peace practices and ideas have become localized in
Washington and beyond.
Background
The project Education for Peace DC (EPDC) was developed through conversations that LPI
conducted with community leaders and organizations in the summer of 2011. Many of these
conversations centered on the energy, opportunities, and challenges of peace education
programming in the District of Columbia (DC) and surrounding areas. Partnered with CPD’s
experience conducting international peace education programs and trainings, EPDC was
launched in the fall of 2011. It is compromised of a team of American University students, staff,
and alumni, who share a passion and dedication for peace education and the well-being of DC
metro area communities.
EPDC’s mission is to analyze, foster, and grow education programs for peace in the
Washington, DC metro region in order to make a more visible and collaborative local culture of
peace education. As a first step w to map the trends in peace education across the DC community, identify important questions and issues, and develop a collective narrative of peace education in DC. Through this research, EPDC will identify potential opportunities for peace education
organizations and develop further programming to support existing initiatives.
3
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Research and Production
Team:
Stephanie Christel, LPI
John David Clark, LPI
Amber Hill, CPD
Brittany Jacoby, CPD
Roberta Kleepko, LPI
Livia Mueller, LPI
Alison Venable, CPD
Interviewers:
Alison Drury
Heather Speight
Mio Yamashita
Alseta Gholston
Heidy Sanchez
Noah Nunez-Gross
Ann Dunn
Ho Kang
Rebecca Davis
Camille Kashaka
John Connor Michalek
Terri Brezner
Carly Oboth
Laura Castelli
Vanessa Perez
Conor Jackson
Lukas Tecson
Yeree Woo
David Greenberg
Meredith Norris
Eric Oliver
Mike Duvall
Advisors:
Mohammed Abu-Nimer
Daryn Cambridge
Tarek Massarrani
Abdul-Aziz Said
Barbara Wien
4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PAGE 6
DC CONTEXT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PAGE 9
WHAT DOES PEACE MEAN IN DC? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PAGE 14
WHAT IS PEACE EDUCATION IN DC? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PAGE 16
CHALLENGES, RESPONSES, AND NEXT STEPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PAGE 26
CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PAGE 31
APPENDIX A: ORGANIZATIONS AND SCHOOLS . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . PAGE 35
APPENDIX B : INTERVIEW QUESTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PAGE 40
APPENDIX C : DC PEACE EDUCATION RESOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . PAGE 42
5
INTRODUCTION
While math, science, and grammar are essential skills for individuals to be successful in
life, self-esteem, leadership, and conflict resolution are equally important. Peace
education aims to teach the skills, values, attitudes, and behaviors that are necessary
for positive growth of individuals and communities. Through a variety of methods, peace
education programs work to combat violence, keep human beings physically safe and
free of fear, as well as work to cultivate positive mental development through social and
emotional skill building.
While there exists a wide range of types and approaches to peace education, they are
unified through their work to empower individuals to create change in their own lives
and communities: in the form of a teenager who says no to drugs, a middle school
student who stops school bullying, or a prisoner who works on repairing his relationship
with his family. It is through these small changes that peace education helps to develop
healthy families and communities.
Within the DC metro area, many organizations operate programs, formal and informal,
that pursue this important goal of peace education. With this report, Education for
Peace DC (EPDC) sought to identify what programs exist in the DC area, how they
have designed their programs, and what are the important questions and challenges
facing community work in DC.
EPDC hopes to support these organizations with their work and thus to contribute to
their fostering of the positive growth of peaceful individuals, families, and communities
in, and around, our nation’s capital.
6
METHODOLOGY
As its first undertaking, EPDC wanted to get an in depth understanding of existing
peace education initiatives in the DC area as well as the current trends, challenges,
questions, and opportunities in relation to these initiatives. EPDC interviewed 40
different organizations operating peace education programs in the DC metro area, as
well as teachers and administrators from 11 schools, public and private.
EPDC first researched peace education initiatives in Chicago, Baltimore, Los Angeles,
and London to get a better understanding of the culture of peace education in urban
environments. This background helped to shape the research focus and questions. An
initial list of organizations to interview was pulled from the Localizing Peace Directory, 1
the DC Public School After School Programs list,2 and Internet searches. This list was
reduced to organizations that had an available website, current contact information, and
a clear mission statement, which included reference to violence and conflict prevention,
restorative justice, global citizenship or creating peaceable communities. EPDC then
edited the group to include a representative sample of programs serving different
Wards, neighborhoods, age groups, and providing different types of programs (arts,
camps, sports, etc.). Organizations neighboring DC were included because those
communities struggle with similar and contributing issues of violence and conflict. The
final group of organizations and individuals was limited in representation as
organizations were unable or uninterested in participating during our research time
frame or interviewers were unable to reach the organization by phone or email.
Interviews were carried out by independent student researchers as well as students in
the Spring 2012 Peace Education class at American University’s School of International
Service. Independent researchers were chosen based on their past experience and
interest in the topic of peace education. All interviewers were given an orientation
before conducting interviews and were required to read background materials related to
peace education, qualitative interviewing, and the DC context.
The interview questions used focused on the organization’s program design and
methodology, resources and process, and their perspectives about educating for peace.
Questions were developed through a review of previous peace education evaluations
completed in urban areas across the globe. The interview questions are provided in
Appendix B.
7
This report, Educating for Change, summarizes the conversations from the interviews.
Organizations were allowed to choose how they would like to be identified in this report,
and some have chosen to remain anonymous. As this report demonstrates, the field of
peace education programming in the DC area is rich with dedicated staff, creative
educational tools, and a wealth of success stories. Educating for Change includes the
following sub-sections:

the DC context in which these organizations operate;

how peace and peace education are defined in the DC area;

a breakdown of existing peace education programs by issues they
address, their demographics, their geographic areas, the peace
education tools they use, and the successes they have achieved;

and an analysis and next steps for EPDC.
EPDC intends to continue to work to raise the profile of the featured organization's actions and, thus, support and foster peace education city wide.
8
THE DC CONTEXT
Communities in the DC metro area are dealing with many challenges including poverty,
crime, lack of educational funding, racial achievement gaps in schools, and high teen
pregnancy levels. These issues impact the physical, mental, and social development of
individuals, families, and communities. It is important to consider the unique context in
which the organizations involved in this study operate.
To start, the DC area has always had high levels of poverty, but with the recent
economic downturn, the situation has worsened even more. In fact, in 2010, DC
became the state with the third highest poverty rate in the United States, with one in five
residents at or below the poverty line.3 In Wards 7 and 8, child poverty was 40% and
48% respectively.4 At the same time, DC is one of the wealthiest cities in the country. In
the year 2010, the average annual income in the city was $84,523, compared to the
national median of $50,046,5 leading many people to overlook the poverty that exists
and the problems that accompany it.6
Furthermore, poverty directly correlates with racial disparity. While the overall poverty
rate of 19.9% in DC is shocking in itself, a breakdown of that rate by race is even more
so. In 2010, the African-American poverty rate of 27.1% was three times higher than the
8.5% poverty rate of white residents, and the Hispanic poverty rate of 14.7% was two
times higher than the rate of whites. Moreover, according to the Berkley Center for
Religion, Peace & World Affairs, “In Washington DC, 31.3% of African-American
children are poor, as opposed to 2.3% of white children.”7
Closely connected to poverty and racial inequality, crime is a significant problem in DC.
Despite overall crime levels having decreased significantly in the District over the past
two years,8 these improvements have not been felt everywhere. For example, while the
total violent crime rate dropped by 14% in Ward 2, by 11% in Ward 4, and by 10% in
Ward 6 from 2010 to 2011, in Ward 8, the most crime-struck Ward in the DC area, the
total amount of violent crime increased from 255 incidents in 2010 to 258 incidents in
2011 and crime in Ward 1 increased by 15%.9 In fact, over the last decade there has
been no change in the overall crime levels in Ward 8. 10
Furthermore, different areas struggle with different types of criminality. According to the
Metropolitan Police of DC, most homicides occur in the eastern parts of the city,
especially in Wards 7 and 8,11 where 12 of the 20 homicides were committed in 2011. In
comparison, no murders occurred in the Western parts of the city, comprised by Wards
2 and 3, in the same year. However, Ward 2, comprised of the downtown area, the
Federal Triangle, and some residential areas, has by far the highest rate of property
crimes committed, with 1138 incidents having occurred in 2011, compared to 301
incidents in Ward 3, an area primarily dominated by single family homes and apartment
complexes, in the same year. 12
9
Thus, violent crime disproportionally impacts lower income neighborhoods, where many
African American and Latin American populations reside, while nonviolent crime mostly
occurs in wealthier areas with lower minority populations. For example, Ward 7 is 96%
black and Ward 8 is 94% black, the Wards with the two highest rates of violence in the
city.13 This correlation between crime and poverty is impressively visualized in the following two maps: Figure 1 shows the spread of homicide in DC over the two year period
from November 2004 to November 2006 and Figure 2 shows the percentage of people
in poverty:14
Figure 1: Map of the Spread of Homicide in Washington DC
Figure 2: Map of People in Poverty in Washington DC
The areas where most homicides occurred from 2004 to 2006 overlap with the
neighborhoods that continue to be the most poverty-stricken.
This type of violence has a strong impact on the physical and mental development of
individuals growing up in these neighborhoods. As Patrick Sharkey found in his study on
the cognitive effects of homicides on children’s performance, if a homicide takes place
in a child’s neighborhood, that child’s test scores go down, regardless of whether the
child witnessed the murder or not.15 Sian Beilock of Human Performance Lab at
University of Chicago further connected the occurrence of homicides to the racial
achievement gap in schools saying, “Children's scores after a homicide account for
about half of the difference in the typical racial achievement gap.” 16 Thus, violence,
10
poverty and racial inequality, affect the success of DC youth and, with that, ultimately
the health of the communities in the region.
The racial achievement gap Sian Beilock discusses is very visible in the DC area. While
about 95% of white fourth graders are proficient in reading, only about 40% of blacks
and Hispanics are proficient in reading in fourth grade (about 80% of Asian fourth
graders are proficient).17 In terms of overall proficiency in fourth grade, 91% of white
children are proficient, while 45% of Hispanic fourth grade children and 38% of black
children are proficient.18 By eighth grade these numbers change little and the gap is still
highly significant.19 Figure 3 shows eighth-grade achievement by race.
Figure 3: Eighth Grade Reading Proficiency, DC CAS
The figure demonstrates that DC possesses a clear racial achievement gap. Connecting
the dots between this finding and the previously discussed issues of violence and
poverty, it becomes apparent that the racial achievement gap is impacted by the context
DC students live in.
School Year
2008-2009
School Year
2009-2010
School Year
2010-2011
Graduation Rate
72%
73%
59.6%
Drop-Out
28%
27%
40%
Table 1: DCPS Graduation and Drop-Out Rates20
Furthermore, the low graduation and high drop-out rates of DC students further attest to
the difficulties students of the city encounter in school. In the 2010-2011 school year,
only 59.6% of DC students graduated on time, compared to 73% in the previous year
and a national graduation rate of 72%.21 The striking difference in graduation rates can
be attributed to many factors including the environmental challenges that many students
who struggle academically face.
11
Another issue that affects the well-being and health of DC youth and their communities
is the high teenage pregnancy rate. With 47.7 births per 1,000 for women between 15
and 19, the DC teenage pregnancy rate is way above the national average of 34.3
births per 1,000 women.22 Only half of the teenage girls that have a child in high school
graduate by the time they are 22, compared to 90% for those who do not have a child. 23
Further, the Center for Disease Control has found that children of teenage mothers are
much more likely than others their age to, “have lower school achievement and drop out
of high school, have more health problems, be incarcerated at some time during
adolescence, give birth as a teenager, and face unemployment as a young adult.” 24
The prospering of juvenile criminality is another issue that is impact by the context in the
DC area. According to DC police Chief Cathy Lanier, youth 18 years and younger have
committed 40% of the city’s violent crime in the year 2010. Thus, as a result, between
1,500 and 2,000 youth are arrested on average per year in the area, which equals 4 to 5
arrests per day.25
The struggling DC youth and the challenging contexts of DC communities demand a
response, but factors like the harsh economic situation of the country have led to a
continued cut of government funding for programs that could provide assistance. One
example is the reduction of DC government funding to out-of-school time26 (OST) from
2009 to 2012.
Figure 4: DC Government Out-of-School-Time (OST) Funding27
While DC OST programs continue to serve the same number of children, about 115,000
children and youth between the ages 5 and 21, in 2012 as they did three years ago,
those same programs now, jointly, are operating with 44% less money than they did
back then.
Also, DC Public Schools had to deal with increased costs in the past years, resulting in
increased class sizes, more teacher responsibilities, a reduction of essential support
staff like school psychologists, etc.28
12
While some are able to thrive despite this challenging context, many young people in
the DC area are left unable to overcome of those violent or poverty ridden backgrounds.
To help fill the gap created by decreased funding, a multitude of organizations exist who
use different after-school programs to reach out to the DC youth to empower them with
the skills and knowledge that cultivate peace.
But what does peace mean in DC? The halting of violence? The absence of hostility?
Or the state of harmony? In the following sections, EPDC demonstrates how the 40
organizations interviewed define peace and peace education in the context of their
work.
13
WHAT DOES PEACE MEAN IN DC?
As a teacher[…]and as a mom, I was very concerned about the messages that the
kids were getting and the approach people were taking – a lot of no’s, you can’t,
don’t bring guns to school, no violence tolerated. My brain was loaded with what
they couldn’t do and I started thinking about what they can do.—Mary Joan Park
of Little Friends for Peace
In this reflection, Mary Joan Park expressed many of the motivations, values, and
opportunities that peace educators bring to their work in the DC metro area. The region
is rich with peace education organizations promoting and supporting individual, family,
and community well being. Through their programs, they work towards promoting
healthy development and building peace, which is a diverse and complex concept in the
DC area.
In our conversations, many organizations struggled to define
peace in DC. The community organizers, teachers, and
mentors we spoke with reflected on their work to challenge
issues of poverty, teen pregnancy, HIV/AIDS, gang and crew
violence. Rather than envisioning an abstract peace, the work
that these organizations and teachers do, along with many
others like them, promote context specific understandings and
definitions of peace: peace in Columbia Heights, peace for
young girls, peace with prisoners. The rich and varying
definitions of peace collected during our conversations with the
community shared three common themes: peace is the
absence of conflict; peace requires justice; and peace is dependent on transformative relationships and celebrating diversity.
Peace is the absence
of conflict; peace
requires justice; and
peace is dependent on
transformative
relationships and
celebrating diversity.
Peace = Absence of Conflict
For us, [peace] is truly the absence of violence. Thriving and healthy communities free from the threat of violence. - Donald Parker of Columbia Heights Shaw
Family Collaborative
Peace was frequently defined by organizations as the absence of conflict for individuals,
families, or communities. In different ways, educational programs in the DC area strive
to decrease the violence and fear people experience. The conflict could be physical
such as in crew fights or shootings in a neighborhood, or social and emotional such as
in drug abuse, bullying, or domestic violence. By working to decrease violence, peace
education organizations help to increase the peace that people experience in their own
lives and empower them with the skills to enrich their own communities. Jodi Ovca of
14
ACCESS Youth said, “Living in DC, they expect fights, violence, jail. We try to teach
them to be a change agent. How do they see conflict, manage it, and help others
manage it. It is all teachable moments.”
Peace = Justice
“Peace is respecting rights and advocating for justice for yourself and others.” –
Folabi Olagbaju of Amnesty International Human Rights Education Service Corps
As the DC area struggles with issues of race, gentrification, and poverty, justice—both
of legal as well as social—becomes a central part of how communities and individuals
relate to each other. An interviewee stated, “Peace education has to minimize prejudice
and, with that, level the playing field for everybody.” Fostering justice provides a sense
of balance, trust, and an understanding of mutual respect. Peace education programs
in the area advocate for justice, respect of human rights and the promotion of equality.
With the presence of justice, communities and individuals are better able to support and
trust each other and grow beyond past grievances. One Common Unity discussed the
values that drive their programming: every human being has the potential to nurture
peace, cooperation, team work, social justice, and live healthy, violence-free lives. This
organization, along with many others, works toward supporting individuals to reach their
potential and promote justice.
Peace = Transformation and Diversity
“The work we do is helping the community realize these kids are vital to its well
being and helping the kids understand how they can positively affect their
communities.[ …] And I think that does a lot for peacebuilding in the community,
helping foster relationships between others.” – Allison Bouley of Liberty’s Promise
Peace, in addition to reducing violence and the presence of justice, includes the
presence of meaningful connections that help build transformative relationships and
celebrate diversity. According to Multicultural Community Services, “Peace education
and peace in DC is everything that gets people from different backgrounds communicating with each other.” These transformations grow from understanding and appreciating
diversity locally and beyond. Diversity not only includes racial and ethnic diversity, but
manifold view points and experiences from different genders, age groups, religious
backgrounds, sexual orientations, and ability levels that help to transform individuals’
understanding of the world. Horizons Greater Washington articulated this well, “If you
expose kids to new experiences, you expand their horizons.” Building relationships
transforms individuals, fosters tolerance within communities, and nurtures the
development of peace.
15
WHAT IS PEACE EDUCATION IN DC?
Translating the values of peace into peace education requires
creative and innovative approaches to educating children, youth,
and adults. Peace education organizations work to foster skill
development in their audiences so that individuals can learn to
recognize conflict and how to address it. Larry Gold of Covenant
House said,
Skill development
allows individuals
to recognize
conflict and know
how to address it.
A lot of the youth that come into our program lack the tools to deal with
conflict… We put a lot of emphasis on helping youth learn to communicate…and help them be able to navigate that conflict without turning violent or nasty.
Teaching conflict resolution skills includes: developing effective communication skills,
being able to mediate conflict, and responding to violence through nonviolent methods.
Organizations like Covenant House, Communities in Schools, or Asian American LEAD
give youth the ability to resolve conflicts such as school bullying or develop ways to deal
with conflict at home, at school or on the street. Furthermore, Sasha Bruce Youth Force,
Liberty’s Promise, and Boys and Girls Club also help to develop skills that promote
healthy lifestyles including homework help and job training. Peace cannot be achieved
unless individuals are taught the necessary tools, skills, and strategies to manage
conflict.
Educational programs also look at ways in which individuals can be peacemakers.
These programs help individuals to realize the inherent resources they possess for
creating peace in their day-to-day lives, such as being a positive leader or being
compassionate. As Andrew Kutt, Director of the Oneness Family School explains,
“Education is intended to leap out of people their own virtues in a
way that they become aware of what those gifts are and what
DC peace education
their source is. Therefore, peace education taps into an individual’s inner resource for peace and helps him or her to build the
programs help
individuals to realize inner and outer abilities to be reflective and not reactive in life.” In
other words, individuals are empowered through their own
the inherent
passions and interests in order to spread respect within their
resources they
communities. Empowered individuals are able to make healthy
possess.
decisions and work to prevent conflict in their families and
neighborhoods. Through teaching kids peace education, organizations, such as Little Friends for Peace, the Center for Teaching Peace, or AMYLA,
are finding ways to celebrate what makes each individual unique. This helps to increase
self esteem, foster relationships between people, and build strong networks among the
participants. Addressing these needs supports the healthy development of communities.
16
In addition, organizations work to increase knowledge that can help to increase
tolerance, respect, and empathy as concepts to be incorporated into everyday life. As
Global Kids explained, peace education helps, “young people
understand how to deal with conflict by equipping them with
Increasing knowledge
skills and knowledge to deal with conflict in different settings.”
can help to increase
The goal is to get people from different backgrounds engaged
tolerance, respect,
in an active dialogue. Deborah Menkart of Teaching for
Change in particular focused on teaching about the civil rights
and empathy.
movement and social change. This look into history works to
foster an understanding of the contributions different people from different backgrounds
have played as agents of change. Teaching students to embrace their individual
strengths and those of others from different backgrounds across the city empowers
them to be agents of change through how they see and manage conflict. This ultimately
reduces prejudice and promotes peace and mutual respect.
I.
Issues, Demographics, and Geographic Areas
From interviews with 40 organizations and representatives from 11 schools, peace
education organizations represent a range of issues, demographics, and geographic
areas. The following section breaks down the programs that these organizations
provide and the communities they are able to serve.
Figure 5: Violence/ Conflict/ Issue DC Peace Education Programs Structure Around
*These categories were developed from an overall analysis of responses. If organizations had multiple
programs or a multi-issue focus, they were classified in more than one category.
17
Issues
In their quest to promote peace, local peace education organizations have tailored the
structure of their programs to cover the issues affecting the health and wellbeing of their
particular communities. The types of programming used to address the different forms
of violence that exist in the Washington DC area range from direct conflict resolution
efforts such as anti-bullying trainings or gang violence intervention to more holistic
conflict transformation approaches utilizing art or leadership development. The
research found the following types of violence receive the most attention in the
programming of local organizations:
15% of all peace education
programs in DC address
issues of discrimination
and inequality.
Discrimination and inequality is the most prevalent
issue that peace education programs work to address,
included by 15% of the peace education programs
interviewed. A prime example of a Washington DC peace
education organization that focused on these issues is
Community Bridges. Interim Executive Director Jacilyn
Skupien explained,
I would say that [the girls we work with are…] all school-aged, and, the
population we work with being low-income—we tend to focus on issues
of oppression, […] issues of racism, […] and how that impacts the girls
in their schooling, in their educational paths, opportunities that are available to them or are not available to them. […] For example, […] why is it
that my teacher only calls on all the boys in the class? Or why is it that
only the Asian kids and white kids are in the magnet program in
schools?
Additionally, one school teacher in one of the focus groups conducted
for this research explained that the socio-economic status of a
student’s family is often found to be the root cause of disruptive
classroom behavior and violence: a student who comes to school
hungry because the family could not afford serving a nourishing meal
is much more irritable than a student who enjoyed a good breakfast.
The Center for Teaching Peace, St. Columba’s Episcopal Church or
Multicultural Community Services share this same focus on
discrimination and inequality in their programming.
The socioeconomic status
of youth plays an
important role in
their conflict
behaviors.
Another form of conflict that ranges among the most important issues in the DC area is
gang violence, addressed by 13% of the organizations. Alliance of Concerned Men,
Columbia Heights Shaw Family Initiative, Identity, and Take Charge use different forms
of gang prevention initiatives targeting at-risk youth and teens as well as intervention
18
programs with prisoners, gang members and families. Latin America Youth Center
directs its focus on developing community peace circles
and strategies for restorative justice. Sasha Bruce Youth13% of programs fight
work employs a diverse set of programs such as a youth
gang violence.
basketball league, problem-solving activities, or Opportunity
Knocks (a workforce development program) that aims to prevent at-risk youth from
getting involved in gang violence by offering them a safe space in combination with
skills development.
It should be noted that out of the 40 organizations we interviewed, only 37.5% focused
on one single issue, while the majority focused on addressing two or three issues.
Demographics
Gender
With the exception of Community Bridges and Young Ladies of Tomorrow, who only work with girls, and the District Youth Rehabilitation Peace education
Services and Take Charge, who deal mostly with young men, the majority programs serve
of the organizations interviewed provide their services to both the males both male and
and females. However, it is important to note that the organizations that female
have gender specific programming do that because their focus is based
populations.
on assessed needs, not necessarily because their programming is
restrictive or discriminatory. For example, Young Ladies of Tomorrow
exclusively works with girls because, “since 1993, the number of arrests among female
adolescents has increased more for most offense types, in comparison with males.”
Race
Figure 6: Race of DC Peace Education Participants
The racial breakdown of the populations served by the 40 organizations interviewed
reveals a primary focus on African Americans (36%) and Latin Americans/Hispanics
(28%). While the smaller sample size of this research might be in part responsible for
this result, the interviewees explained that the populations they served were the
19
individuals most in need of peace education programs.
Nevertheless, like gender, no racial-restrictive focus is actually
embedded in the programs. Tim Phillips from the Boys and
Girls Club Greater Washington, which operates in Ward 7,
explained for example that, “when you open a facility like this in
an area like this, you get the kids from the neighborhood. When
this facility opened up, it was probably 100% African-American,
and the majority of the kids served today continue to be so.”
African-Americans and
Latino Americans/
Hispanics make up
64% of the populations
DC peace education
programs serve.
Age
Figure 7: Ages of DC Peace Education Program Participants
High school aged youth between thirteen and eighteen make up the majority of
individuals served by the organizations interviewed, with 33 programs serving youth in
that age range. Participants ages 2-12, as well as 18 and older, are
significantly less represented in the demographics of the 40
Youth ages 13-18
organizations interviewed with only a third of the organizations
form the primary
serving these age groups. Unlike the case of gender and ethnicity,
beneficiaries of DC where the dominance of one or two groups is the result of
peace education
circumstances, most programs actively target this specific age
group. Wilderness Leadership and Learning (WILL), for example,
programs.
offers its programs exclusively to 9th and 10th graders, excluding any
other age group. It should be noted that Teaching for Change,
Identity, Dance4Peace, The Gandhi Memorial Center, Little Friends of Peace, and
The Center for Teaching Peace are the only organizations that incorporate adults.
However, most organizations mentioned that they had good relationships with their
communities, thus some inclusion of individuals beyond the high school age is present.
20
Geographic Area
The 40 peace education organizations included in this
The 40 DC-area peace
report span the DC metro area, including parts of Maryland
and Virginia. They serve over 88 neighborhoods, and 11
education organizations
organizations serve communities city-wide. While a rough
serve over 88
regional breakdown of the statistics points towards the
neighborhoods.
Northwest quadrant of the District of Columbia as the
primary area served, followed by the Southeast, and
Northeast, a more detailed look at the different Wards is necessary to gain an insight
into which of the geographic areas most peace education programs operate.
Ward
Number of
Programs
1
18
2
12
3
12
4
11
5
13
6
12
7
13
8
13
Table 2: Number of Programs by DC Wards
Figure 8: Geographic Division of DC into Wards 29
Ward 1, which includes the neighborhoods of Columbia Heights,
Adams Morgan, Howard University, Kalorama, LeDroit Park,
Ward 1 concentrates
most peace education Mount Pleasant, Park View, Pleasant Plains and Shaw, has the
largest presence of peace education organizations with a total of
programs within its
18. Violence in Ward 1 has increased by 15% in the last year
borders.
indicating an increased need for this type of programming.30 All
other Wards host somewhere between 11 to 13 programs, which
does not always adequately correlate with the needs of the Ward.
21
II.
Local Peace Education Strategies
The strategies used in local peace education programs encompass a range of
resources that are used in formal classrooms and informal settings in order to engage,
motivate, and teach effectively. Peace education organizations and their leaders have
developed best practices that can be used to further benefit communities locally and
nationally. The strategies can be categorized in the following way:
Using Existing Peace Education Curriculum
One prominent strategy is to use pre-existing nationally or internationally recognized
peace education curriculum, which organizations apply to the specific context of the
community they work, so that they become as relevant
as possible. Dance 4 Peace is a prime example of an
Using existing nationally and organization using this approach. Three key theories stage, psycho-social, and CASEL’s social-emotional
internationally recognized
theory - form the foundation of its curricula, which the
peace education curricula is a organization has developed to work effectively in the
frequent strategy in DC peace classroom.31, 32, 33 Oneness Family School uses the
Montessori approach for its educational model that
education programs.
intends to empower students to find their own part in
life and, “uncover and embrace the unique gifts that lie within them.” 34 Little Light Urban
Ministries uses the Blue-Eyed Curriculum to address the issue of discrimination based
on highlighting one physical characteristic.35 Sasha Bruce Youthwork and the
Department of Youth Rehabilitation Services (DYRS) use the Phoenix curriculum, which
is used nationwide by many juvenile justice programs, in their work to prevent gang
violence.36
Developing Tools for the Local Context
In addition to applying pre-existing curricula to the local context, DC organizations have
developed their own methods and tools. For example, Do the Write Thing uses its local
book of essays to promote the work that students are doing. Peace Thru Culture
employs culture literacy techniques specific to the neighborhoods they are working in to
foster understanding and tolerance. Wilderness Leadership and
Learning identified wilderness as a crucial tool for their
specific programming. “Taking kids out into the wilderness puts Creative, unique tools
them in an experimental learning situation, where they can
and methods allow
recognize their own potential as well as learn from others.” Kid
working contextPower uses “Kid Power Circle,” where participants provide
specific.
feedback on what does and does not work well. The staff in
DYRS that use the Phoenix curriculum are trained based on a
guide of best Washington DC practices, developed by the Columbia Heights/Shaw
Family Collaborative. As an organization explained, “using a local model that is
grounded in local realities is very important for this kind of work.” William Blake at Wise
22
Jr. High School, on the other hand, monitors Twitter feeds by his students to combat
cyberbullying and provides education on how to use modern technology in a way that is
constructive for the school. Many of these unique strategies developed by the
organizations reflect the strengths of the organizations and the relationships and
knowledge they have developed about the DC context.
Fostering Leadership
An empowerment
approach to peace
education creates
sustainability for
the effort.
Another strategy that is frequently used by DC area organizations is
developing strong leaders. Hawah of One Common Unity, for
example, explained,
Our best tool is training the trainer. When we were doing a lot
of work in the schools, the model was to spend a week to train
15-20 high school students. They would then facilitate diversity
workshops in classrooms during a ‘peace week.’ […] Once you
empower a young person then that is when they really own it. You don’t really
know something until you have to teach it. That is something they take with them
forever.
Similarly, Playworks said, “We build play into leadership through the Playworks Junior
Coach program, which encourages teams of students to work together to learn games,
fair play and positive conflict resolution and to teach these skills and lessons
appropriately to their classmates.” Teachers in the two focus groups also emphasized
that engaging students and strengthening their negotiation skills, forming anti-bullying
committees, and widening their intercultural lens on their perception of the world are
crucial areas of peace education in the context of leadership development.
Cultivating Community Support
Peace Alliance, Little Lights Urban Ministries, St. Columba’s
Episcopal Church, Peace Thru Culture, Asian American LEAD and Community support
is a key tool for
AMYLA were only a few of the many organizations that spoke about
effective peace
community support as a significant tool. They highlighted how their
programs use parents, community leaders, and their own staff to
education
provide a supportive and safe environment for individuals. Teaching
programs.
for Change, for example, strategically targets the parents of
participating children to be included because of their importance in their children’s lives
and the community in which they grow up in. Deborah Menkart from Teaching for
Change said,
We…support the parents —if they’re interested or concerned about
what kind of experience children are having in the school...We engage
them in developing an assessment of what’s happening in the classroom. We have them meet with teachers, so it’s never this “gotcha”
for the
23
teachers, but to meet with teachers and talk about what a good classroom would look like. […] And what we’ve found when we’ve done
that is often times the parents develop incredible appreciation for what
the teachers are doing, and often the teachers have said this is the
first time they’ve gotten both good feedback and good recognition.
Creating Advocacy Campaigns
Advocacy forms another important tool to further peace
education work in the DC metro area. Peace Alliance uses
campaigns to develop grassroots advocacy to direct Congress’
attention towards youth violence in the Washington DC metro
area. One of their most recent campaigns was to organize over
one hundred screenings of “The Interrupters,” a documentary
focused on the work that Ceasefire, which is an organization
that works on gang violence does in Chicago on violence
prevention and resolution. Furthermore, Break the Cycle emphasized the importance of
advocacy for the success of their work to end teen dating violence.
Advocacy efforts direct
attention to the many
challenges youth face
growing up in
Washington DC.
III. The Success of Peace Education
The 40 organizations and 11 schools shared a variety of success stories displaying the
lasting impact their programs had on participants:
Preparing Leaders
The American Friends Service Committee highlighted that one of its staff members met
a participant from its first class that has now actively joined the Human Rights
Campaign movement to promote tolerance. Alliance of Concerned Men had a hard time
choosing a success story, and said, “We have lots of success stories highlighted on our
website, but Derrick Ross sticks out. He was the most dangerous man in the city. After
working with us, he went to Catholic University and got a degree and then went on to be
in charge of the DC Housing Authority.”
Creating Advocates and Allies
Little Friends for Peace underscored how school pupils who went through their program
utilized basic conflict resolution skills on the playgrounds; Lafayette Elementary School
proudly recounted several occasions where previously troublesome students have
stood up for other students who are being teased and bullied.
Sustaining Personal Transformation
ACCESS Youth emphasized that only 1.4% of those who have completed their program
have been repeat offenders. In comparison, Washington, D.C.'s reconviction rate within
12 months of release was 25% in 2007.37 Many of these programs have been able to
demonstrate that they are making important impacts on participants’ everyday behavior.
24
Promoting Creativity and Self-Esteem
Folabi Olagbaju from Amnesty International’s Human Right Education Service Corps
spoke about how creative and engaged the students from Cardoza High School in the
Human Rights Education program are. Impressed with the enthusiasm and zest
exerted, Olagbaju added that “[although], we [tend to] have a condescending view of the
DC Public Schools students…they are very very bright, they understand. It’s just so
funny they don’t get the resources they need to really excel in the innate talent they
have.”
Promoting Personal Growth
Kelley Hampton of Break the Cycle describes a powerful breakthrough moment when a
youth in the program opened up about an abusive relationship she was in during a
group session,
We’ve created a place for this person to recognize – whether or not
they’ve recognize it before. They felt comfortable with all these other
people that they didn’t really know there, with us who they didn’t really
know, talking about something that’s so personal for them.
While these stories are only a selection of the many positive experiences of the 40 organizations and 11 schools that attest to their success, they demonstrate the important
role the existing and future efforts to educate for peace in the Washington DC area play
for the positive growth of individuals and communities alike. The programs these organizations execute equip DC youth with skills, knowledge, and support networks that further their ability to succeed in school, the work place, and their private sphere, so that
they can become an integral part of their community, improving life in the Washington
DC metro area and ultimately the country as a whole.
25
CHALLENGES, RESPONSES AND NEXT STEPS
Our interviews with peace education organizations provided us with a wealth of
knowledge about the development of programs and how they engage with their
communities. Along with this, we learned about the challenges that peace education
organizations face in the DC area. Across the board, the biggest challenges that organizations and programs encountered
Limited funding and
is funding and resources. As a result of the economic downresources form one of turn, it has become increasingly difficult to obtain money from
public or private sources. Funding that is available requires orthe main challenges
ganizations apply for new programs to develop rather than ofpeace education
fering funds to continue existing programs. Lack of funding
organizations face in
leads to underpaid or reduced staff as well as a lack of reDC.
sources. This affects the organization’s capacity to engage
with youth and their communities. AMYLA, Boys and Girls
Club, and Multicultural Community Services spoke about the challenges they face finding and keeping qualified staff under these budgetary constraints. In many cases, this
means relying on a constant stream of volunteers, which requires a large effort to train
and maintain. In DC Public Schools, funding cuts have led to a reduction in programming, including city-wide peer mediation programs that organizations like the Center for
Dispute Settlement used to run.
Monitoring and evaluation is also a struggle for the organizations interviewed. While
organizations like ACCESS Youth, Community Bridges, and Amnesty International’s
Human Rights Education Service Corps have integrated evaluations into their
programming, some have yet to start creating and implementing evaluations.
Evaluating a program’s success and measuring its impact
are extremely challenging for peace education
Many DC peace education
organizations. Environmental factors, such as parents and
communities, have strong and sometimes unknown impacts
organizations struggle
on participants in a program. In addition, EPDC found durwith developing and
ing the research for this report that very little data exists
executing monitoring and
about the issues the organizations are trying to address
evaluation of their
(poverty, teen pregnancy, academic achievement, etc.).
programs.
Therefore, recording positive changes becomes even more
complicated as no comparable measurement exists.
Furthermore, organizations that do evaluations also talked about all of the data that they
have acquired, but said they do not have time to reflect on it and integrate it into their
programs. Due to a lack of training and capacity, evaluations do not get the time
needed to be implemented and used successfully.
Organizations further spoke about the lack of coordination in the DC area.
Geographic designation, especially by neighborhood, is a common way for programs to
26
A lack of coordination
between the existing
peace education
programs prevails.
focus their energies. Violence and conflict are often based on
neighborhoods, and peace education programs need to build
trust within these communities in order to be successful.
Whatever the differences might be between organizations, there
are areas of similar interest and cooperation that exist. DC-area
peace education programs currently do not operate across communities or neighborhoods in a way that would allow them to
capitalize on their cooperative potential.
In addition to a geographic divide, there is also a lack of coordination between levels of
peace education programming. While there are several in school programs, DC area
schools often do not coordinate with after school programs. Teachers in one of our
focus groups explained that no public school system wide peace education approach
exists. Several organizations do not have strong relationships with DC or county
government agencies, including the Metropolitan Police of DC. The lack of coordination
across geographic areas and levels creates overlap in programming, and prevents
organizations from being successful as a united movement and raising the profile of
their work.
The cycle of DC government is another challenge to
The DC government cycle
peace education programs in the area. As government
poses a challenge to
rotates with each election cycle, so do the priorities of the
peace education programs
City Council and the Mayor’s Office. With the turnover of
leadership, communication and coordination with the govin the area.
ernment prevents the ability for city-wide initiatives to
have continuity and sustainability. These changes greater
challenges of funding, resources, and coordination amongst organizations.
The last challenge is that many of these organizations are run by one or two dedicated
individuals. Individuals who run these programs are champions of DC, working long
hours, mostly motivated by their passion for the work.
As peace education requires a certain amount of trust
High burn out and fatigue
building, leaders of these organizations are requested to
rates are a common
build and maintain trust with the populations they serve
phenomenon among
as well as with a network of organizations. Relying on
organizations educating
individual leadership can contribute to high burn out
for peace in DC because
and fatigue rates. With high turnover rates, the knowledge and expertise that these individuals develop leave
of their reliance of
when they leave rather than the knowledge staying with
individual leadership.
the organization. While individual leadership continues
to be a testament to the dedication people have for DC communities, it will increasingly
become a challenge as burn out continues.
27
These challenges as well as the reflections that the organizations, teachers, and
mentors have shared in their interviews have lead us to the following responses:
1. Increasing Coordination and Communication
Organizations are stretched thin and no longer have the capacity to keep up with
their work loads. Coordination through strategic partnerships can help to
capitalize on an organization’s strengths and provide greater efficiency. This
includes partnerships with DC City Council, DC Public Schools, and local
universities.
Partnering between teachers, organizations, and DC government on monitoring
and evaluation processes can create a more effective feedback loop, allowing
information obtained through evaluations to create better public and private
programming, as well as policy. Better communication between government
agencies and organizations can also help to overcome the challenges of political
change and build a more sustainable agenda.
Strategic partnerships with universities in the area can help organizations to
acquire quality volunteers that can be mentors for each other. Many of the
programs at universities would benefit from connecting with DC peace education
initiatives and could help provide much needed evaluations or research. This
sort of partnership can help provide students with opportunities for learning and
engaging with the local community as well as furthering the goals of the
organization and supporting their programming.
As a group, marketing strategies can be used when collaborating with
organizations to build a cohesive movement and raise the profile of the work
being done.
2. Expanding Preventative Programming
Peace education programs provide essential factors for positive growth like
providing a support group beyond children’s families, fostering belonging, and
developing a peer network.38 With this in mind, the DC area should work to
develop more programs aimed at a broader range of ages. As noted, much of the
programming currently focuses on high school age youth. By expanding the
range of programming to include younger children as well as adults, peace
education programs can provide wrap around opportunities for healthy
development rather than being limited to reacting to incidents of violence in
neighborhoods.
28
With programming for younger children, peace education can help empower
children to tackle issues of violence and conflict from a young age. This can help
to bring down instances of drug use, juvenile violence, and help to increase
academic achievement rates. Programming for adults can reach out to single
parents or families who might be struggling as well as adults who have recently
been released from prison. As many of these individuals are beyond school age,
peace education programs for adults can provide essential resources and support
they might need.
3. Promoting Gender-Specific Programming
Girls and boys deal with different challenges while developing. A study conducted
by Michael Resnick, Majorie Ireland, and Iris Borowsky, found that the predictive
factors of youth violence differ from girls to boys. For example, girls’ “family
connectedness, religiosity, and school connectedness showed significant protective effects…protective factors for boys included connectedness to adults outside
the family, and parental expectations about school performance.” 38 Developing
gender specific programming can help to target the specific support structures
needed by girls and boys. This can provide creative opportunities to expand and
grow existing programs and to increase the efficacy of these programs.
4. Investing in Organizational Development
Developing operational procedures and knowledge management strategies for an
organization can help increase efficiency and provide more opportunities for
funding. While this takes time, it is a valuable way to increase efficiency in an
organization and harness the expertise of individual leadership so that individuals
are not the sole carriers of knowledge of the organization. Knowledge management strategies will help an organization to be flexible in a changing environment
and be reflective so that organizations are able to respond to new mandates from
the DC City Council and DC Public Schools.
29
NEXT STEPS
EPDC will pursue the following initiatives to building upon the findings of this research:
A launch of the Educating for Change Report
Trainings and workshops for any peace education organization and practitioner in
the DC area.
Develop institutional connections at American University to provide more strategic
links for the needs of local organizations. Initiatives that have already grown out of
this research include:

Peace Corps Fellowship Program: a partnership with the School of International
Service to place returning Peace Corps Volunteers with local organizations and
schools

Design, Monitoring, and Evaluation Courses: a collaboration to provide graduate
student consultants for organizations in need of evaluative support.
Work with local organizations to identify the most pressing research questions and
develop local peace education research.
30
CONCLUSION
Poverty, racial inequality and criminality are among the many forms of violence and
issues that challenge the well-being of individuals and communities in the DC metro
area. In response to this difficult context, a multitude of organizations have undertaken
peace education programs to keep DC youth safe and free of fear.
As this report highlights, these organizations use a wide variety of approaches to peace
education to teach the skills, values, attitudes and behaviors that are necessary for the
positive growth of individuals and communities. Advocacy campaigns, community
engagement, leadership development, as well as highly creative and unique approaches form only a few of the many tools employed to educate for change.
The many success stories that the organizations interviewed proudly shared with EPDC
confirm that those tools have had lasting impacts as many transformed lives and
communities. Peace education programs in the DC metro area have been able to transform destructive behaviors to nurturing acts, to create safe spaces of peacefulness and
trust, and to empower individuals to become agents of positive change themselves.
Despite these achievements, challenges remain for these organizations hindering their
abilities to reach their full potential for success. Limited access to funding and
resources, the absence of monitoring and evaluation processes, the lack of coordination
among organizations and with governmental institutions, the changes brought about by
the frequent turnover of the DC government, as well as the high burn out rate of the
leaders in the organizations due to little staffing pose serious problems for peace education programs in DC.
Thus, based on this research of programs for the promotion of justice, peace, and diversity in the DC metro area, EPDC recognizes a great need for peace education programs
in the DC metro area. These organizations, teachers, and others like them foster the
positive growth of peaceful individuals, families, and communities in our nation’s capital.
Public programs cannot do this alone. NGOs and teachers cannot do this alone. This
report illustrates the value and impact of this type of education and the pressing need
for increased support, collaboration, and coordination for peace education programs in
the DC area. EPDC aims at supporting this effort by working with DC area organizations
in their continued efforts to build better, more peaceful communities.
31
32
33
34
APPENDIX A
Organizations and Schools
The following list is of the organizations and schools that participated in this research
and includes a list of their current peace education programs:
-
ACCESS Youth
o Mediation, Life Skills, Community Service
-
Adams Morgan Youth Leadership Academy (AMYLA)
O
-
After-School Program, Professional Development, Mentoring, Leadership
Development, Nonviolence Training
Alliance of Concerned Men
o Peer Supported Student Success Program, Building Bridges Abridging
Program, Fatherhood Initiative, Partnership with Communities, BVIF Program, Work Force Development, Life Skills Development
-
American Friends Service Corps DC (AFSC DC)
o Peace and Economic Justice Program
-
Amnesty International Human Rights Education Service Corps
o Human Rights Education Program
-
Asian American LEAD
o Mentoring Program, Elementary School After School Program, Secondary
School After School Program
-
Boys and Girls Club of DC
o Health and Life skills – Skills Master And Resistance Training (SMART)
Girls, Passport to Manhood, Violence Prevention
-
Break the Cycle
O
Speak.Act.Change, Ending Violence, School-based Policy Development,
Support for Youth Service Providers, Love is Respect
35
-
Center for Dispute Settlement
O
-
Peer Mediation Program (no longer active due to funding cuts)
Center for Teaching Peace
o In school program at six different schools in the DC metro area
-
Columbia Heights Shaw Family Collaborative
o Creative Solutions Together
-
Communities in Schools
o Charting for Success, Diplomas Now, Performance Learning Centers
-
Community Bridges
o Jump Start Girls!, The Glow!, Community Crusaders Summer Camp
-
Covenant House
o Prevention Services, Street Outreach, Community Support Services
-
Dance 4 Peace
o In School pre-K through 12th grade semester specific curriculum development in the DC metro area
-
Department of Youth Rehabilitation Services
o Professional Development, In Facility Training, Community Based Outreach
-
Do the Write Thing Program
o Do the Write Thing is one particular program of within the National Campaign to Stop Violence
-
Gandhi Memorial Center
o Children’s Help in Music Education (CHIME,) Mentors of Minorities in
Education's Total Learning Cis-Tem (MOMIES TLC,) tailored curriculum to
specific school programs
-
Global Kids
o Global Kids Club, professional development for teachers
36
-
Horizons Greater Washington
o Summer Program, Saturday Program
-
Identity After School Program (Montgomery County)
o Gang Prevention and Intervention, Youth Leadership and Advocacy Training, Norwood High School Wellness Center, Programs for Parents, Reentry and Support Programs
-
Kid Power
o Citizenship Project, Veggie Time, CookieTime Program
-
Latin American Youth Center
o Teen Center, Restorative Justice, Violence Prevention Clubs
-
Liberty’s Promise
o Civics and Citizenships, Opportunities Plus
-
Little Friends for Peace
o Peace Camp, Peace Train, Workshops in school, with parents, in prisons
-
Little Light Urban Ministries
o Homework Help, Reading Heros, Girls and Boys Nights, Choir, Mentoring
Program, Clean and Green Team
-
Multicultural Community Service
o Language Services, Parental Engagement, Translation Service, Language
Advocacy
-
One Common Unity
o A Nu View, Fly by Light, Peace Education, Retreats and Training – Rejuvenate and Freedom Schools National Training
-
Peace Alliance
O
Domestic Peacebuilding, Department of Peace, Faces of Peace,
Advocacy for legislation such as the Youth PROMISE Act, bipartisan
legislation that will give communities the support and funding they need to
37
effectively address youth violence issues by setting up local infrastructure to
support effective on-the-ground work.
-
Peace Thru Culture
o Summer Camp – Culture Camp, Global trek, Cultural Change Agent
-
Playworks
o Workshops and trainings for teachers, parents, etc. – volleyball tournaments, recess, school beautification days, etc.
-
Sasha Bruce Youth Work
o Gang prevention, Safe Homes, Tomorrow’s Leaders, Building Opportunities, Healthy Lives, Stable Families
-
St. Columba’s Episcopal Church
o Appalachian trip, Serving our Neighbors, Saturday activities with service
projects
-
Take Charge
o Youth Diversion, Brotherhood and Leadership, Basketball and Life Skills,
Stop Gang Initiative, Adjudicated Youth Intervention, Crisis Intervention,
Parenting Enhancement
-
Teaching for Change
o Early Childhood Education Initiative, Cross City Parent Coordination Training, Civil Rights Movement, Publications and Research
-
Wilderness Leadership and Learning
o Challenges and Ropes Course, Rivers Day, Holiday Party, Alumni Lunch,
Cultural Appreciation Day, MLK Day, Day at the Lanes, Service Projects
-
Young Ladies of Tomorrow
O
Education Programs – GED and Academic Achievement, Attitude
Adjustment Series/Gang Intervention, Therapeutic Recreation, Summer
Retreat Program, Community Service
38
Schools*
-
Arlington Public Schools
-
Alexandria Public Schools
-
Columbia Heights Educational Campus
-
Glenn Dale Middle School
-
Filmore Arts Center
-
Janney Elementary School
-
Lafayette Elementary School
-
Manassas Public Schools
-
Oneness Family School
-
Bridge Program, Montgomery County
-
Henry A. Wise Jr. High School
*Teachers from two other schools have chosen to remain anonymous.
39
APPENDIX B
Interview Questions
Program Design/ Methodology
1. What violence/ conflict/ issue/program do you structure your programming around?
2. What are the principles/ beliefs that guide your program?
3. What demographic do you serve? How did you determine to target this demographic
when starting your program(s)?
4. What methods do you use in your program? What tools do you use?
5. What challenges did you face when first starting this program? How did you overcome them?
6. What challenges do you currently face with your program?
Educating for Peace
7. How does your program define peace in DC? In your community?
8. What is peace education in DC?
9. What programs would you identify as educating for peace in DC?
10. Please describe your program’s relationship with the community.
11. What three issues/questions do you think could be addressed by peace education in
DC?
Resources and Process
12. What is the most memorable moment for you in the program? Would you be willing
to share this with us?
13. What is the best tool that you use? Would you mind sharing that with us as a best
practice resource?
40
14. What evaluations process exists for the program? Would you be willing to share the
data with us and the measuring system?
15. How do you see this program being developed in the future? What resources would
you need to reach those goals?
41
APPENDIX C
Additional Resources
CURRICULUM
-
Oneness Family School
o Edelson, Vivian & Andrew Kutt. A Oneness-Family School Peacekeepers
Curriculum, Paths Towards Peace – Year 1: Fair Trade, Sustainable Practices, & Green Prodcucts.
-
Amnesty International, USA
o Amnesty International, USA. Human Rights Education Service Corps –
Facilitator Binder. Spring 2012
-
Dance4Peace
o Dance4Peace. Organization’s Proposal and Curriculum. 2012
EVALUATION
-
Access Youth
o Access Youth. District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department Early
Intervention Juvenile Mediation Program. Evaluation Form.
-
American Friends Service Committee (AFSC)
o American Friends Service Committee. An Introduction to Quaker Testimonies. September 2011.
o American Friends Service Committee. Teaching Human Rights in DC
Public Schools AFSC-DC Human Rights Learning Project. Pre-Test/PostTest Evaluation
o American Friends Service Committee. Universal Declaration of Human
Rights (Unofficial Summary). People’s Movement for Human Rights
Learning.

Sara Ramey. American Friends Service Committee. An Introductory Curriculum to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Human Rights
Learning
42
-
Amnesty International, USA
o Amnesty International, USA. Human Rights Education Service Corps –
Program Evaluation. Spring 2010.
-
Identity

Identity. Youth Opportunity Centers. Evaluation. 2010-2011.
OTHER
-
American Friends Service Committee
o American Friends Service Committee. Middle Atlantic Regional Office –
Session Tracking Sheet.
o American Friends Service Committee. State of Human Rights in the District of Columbia as a Human Rights City. February 5, 2012.
-
Do the Write Thing
o Do the Write Thing. Challenge Program Book of Writings. 2011.
-
Kid Power, Inc
o Kids Power, Inc. Overview-Pamphlet.
-
Oneness-Family School
o Oneness-Family School Blog. Teach Peace Instead of AntiBullying.www.onenessfamily.org/bllog.htm
o Andrew Kutt. Solving Conflicts Peacefully – A Ten Step Process. 2005.
o Andrew Kutt. The Harmony Guide – A Program for Building a Harmonious
Family Environment: A guide for Parents. 1996.
o The Oneness –Family School. The Oneness-Family School Constitution.
2007
43