History Education in the Formation of Social Identity

Toward a Culture of Peace

K. Korostelina

• Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan
• Year: 2013
• ISBN:
  9781137374769
• Topic: Bildung
• Subtopic: Vergleichende Erziehungswissenschaft

In order to determine how history education can be harnessed to reduce conflict attitudes and intentions and create a culture of peace, this book examines how history curricula and textbooks shape the identities of their students through their portrayals of ingroup and outgroup identity, intergroup boundaries, and value systems.

C H A P T E R 1

IDENTITY-BASED APPROACH TO THE FORMATION OF PEACE CULTURE IN HISTORY EDUCATION

Building a culture of peace within society has often been delegated to the education systems of a state. By influencing how people understand themselves in relation to others in their community, one can help promote or impede the formation of a culture of peace within a society.

This book analyzes the formation of a culture of peace through the development of specific connotations of social identity by history education: it examines the notion of a peace culture from the perspectives of the identity of social groups, social boundaries between these groups, and intergroup relations. By studying the mechanisms of social identity formations that impede or facilitate the development of peace culture, the book hypothesizes that a culture of peace is an outcome of social identities and relations between social groups as presented in history education. This process is an essential part of the complex relationships between developing a culture of peace and social identity in which they both impact and affect each other: the meaning and salience of social identity, especially as presented in the textbooks, impede or promote the formation of a culture of peace while culture of peace so developed prevents identity-based conflicts and reduces discrimination and violence overall.

In recent decades, the formation of a culture of peace was analyzed through the analytical categories and concepts of different psychological theories, including social identity theory. Academic studies on social identity significantly advanced our understanding of negativities as well as cooperation and mutual understanding between identity groups (racial, nationalistic, ethnic, religious). But to my knowledge, the formation of a culture of peace through redefinitions of the meanings of social identity and intergroup relations in history education is yet to be fully analyzed. To address this gap, this book examines certain advances in the psychological studies of peace culture, drawing special attention to the achievements of recent researchers in the study of social identity as a framework for the formation of peace cultures. Finally, the book proposes an analytical framework that unites the social identity and history education approaches in the task of forming a culture of peace.

PSYCHOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS OF A CULTURE OF PEACE

During the last decades there were some discussions on how social psychology can contribute to the development of a culture of peace.¹ One psychological approach to the formation of a culture of peace includes critical examination of biological determinism that treats violence as a predisposition of human behavior, thus justifying aggressive actions of people, as defined by their nature. The Seville Statement on Violence² had emphasized that, although human beings have a potential to start war and violence, this ability is not biologically determined. Conflicts and wars are not inevitable parts of social life but are constructed by people in their competition for power and resources. By denying the biological determinism of aggression, this approach emphasizes the social roots and constructed nature of violence. In the same way, people are capable of inventing peace enabling the society to create culture of peace using such social-psychological characteristics as altruism, empathy, and sympathy.³

Another psychological approach to the formation of a culture of peace emphasizes the negative impact of poverty on human consciousness and argues that the reduction of poverty is an important factor in the improvement of mental health of a population. There is empirical evidence demonstrating that “poverty is detrimental to psychological well-being”⁴ and that nations with smaller gaps between the average incomes of the rich and poor have better health, greater longevity, less violence and mental disorder, and more social cohesion.⁵ Thus, reduction of poverty contributes to the creation of a peace culture by increasing economic equality and economic well-being for all, but also by reducing stresses and violence in communities.

The third approach promotes gender equality and criticizes “patriarchy, a social and cultural construct that has not only privileged men over women, but can be seen as a paradigm for other forms of authoritarianism, hierarchy and inequality.”⁶ This approach develops inclusive gender perspective based on theoretical and methodological integration of masculinities studies with human rights norms and concepts. The scholars treat gender as socially constructed, varied, and dynamic, and stress the possibilities for significant change in the social perception of gender. The approach moves beyond gender roles that are defined as dichotomous and static toward their understanding as mutable and open to normative change, encouraged by the society.

The fourth approach delegitimizes the use of violence as an inevitable part of conflict and proposes a constructive approach to conflict management. It challenges the culture of violence, global militarism, and the “just war” tradition showing that resorting to violence escalates conflicts instead of resolving them. This approach promotes policies that encourage the creation of common ground and appreciation of differences. Examples of such interventions include interactive problem-solving workshops developed by Kelman⁷ that have been conducted in the Middle East, Cyprus, Sri Lanka, Bosnia, and Northern Ireland, and the community education workshop US & THEM: The Challenge of Diversity,⁸ which helps social groups explore common ground and differences, and the system of peace education.

The fifth approach explores the process of empowerment that challenges the legitimacy of establishing social order and involves big social groups in a process of social change. This approach aims to redefine the dominant narrative in the society that presents the existing system as “not only the best, but the only system possible”⁹ and shows the ways of overcoming such beliefs. This approach includes several methodologies: (a) development of the people’s capacity to improve their lives by establishing control over their environment¹⁰; (b) a “liberation psychology” that centers on the struggle for social justice and promotion of human well-being based on an indigenous approach in Latin America¹¹; and (c) psychology that addresses the problems of exploitation and oppression in South Africa.¹² One of the central issues in this approach is the relation between gender and power and facilitation of the empowerment of women across the globe. By taking control over their social environment and structures of power, and by promoting justice and equality, people can create the foundations for a culture of peace.

The sixth approach studies the complex psychological characteristics that promote nonviolence and nonviolent actions. The first group of research within this approach studies interrelations between emotional, cognitive, and value spheres that constitute the basis for nonviolent behavior. For example, research shows that non-violence rests on the empathic emotions and perceptions of controllability and intentionality.¹³ The importance of empathy as a predisposition for non-violent behavior was also confirmed in other research.¹⁴ Another important factor that promotes non-violent behavior is self-efficacy: people who are more effective in their work and life have less inclination to violence.¹⁵ The second group of studies within this approach concentrates on the development of specific values including self-transcendent values (e.g., social justice, broadmindedness, wisdom, equality, unity with nature, being helpful, and being forgiving). These values create the foundations for mutual understanding, support, and enhancement of the welfare of others.¹⁶ Another group of values, conformity values, prevents actions that could harm other people or violate social norms.¹⁷ Finally, the third group of research within this approach promotes models of non-violent social behavior including a model of peaceful selfhood¹⁸ and models based on the peacebuilding approaches of women.¹⁹

Finally, many psychologists working on the formation of a culture of peace employ theoretical ideas developed within social identity theories. Social identity theory emphasizes a need for positive self-esteem as a basic need that leads to favorable comparison in which the ingroups (e.g., ethnic, gender, class) are viewed more positively than outgroups and stresses how positive social identity can be achieved through intergroup comparison and through intragroup exaggeration of virtues (Tajfel and Turner, 1986). According to social identity theory, people are motivated to protect and enhance their self-esteem through the assessment of the ingroup against other groups based on dimensions that provide the ingroup a comparative advantage. This comparative bias leads to negative perceptions of outgroups and is most pronounced in a situation of a threat to one’s identity.²⁰ Prejudice and discrimination often rests on perceptions that members of outgroups have more advantages in matters of power or resources. These perceptions of relative deprivation, whether real or imagined, strongly contribute to the development of intergroup conflict.²¹ The social identity theory approach promotes intergroup dependence and cooperation for achieving common goals as a means to reduce levels of prejudice.²² Research shows that redefinition of categorical boundaries into a common ingroup identity of “we” that includes the former “us and them” leads to the reduction of conflict.²³ If this superordinate categorization becomes salient, individuals extend the ingroup favoritism and trust to former members of the outgroup who are now united within the new categorical boundary. In intergroup conflict, a single inclusive identity increases the likelihood of forgiveness of former attackers by their victims²⁴ and encourages the perpetrators of such harm to see their actions as illegitimate,²⁵ thus promoting a positive transformation of conflict and helps reconciliation.

SOCIAL IDENTITY AND HISTORY EDUCATION

The primary objective of this chapter is to critically review the major developments in social identity theory as to how they can contribute to the formation of a culture of peace through history education. The importance of social identity for the formation of a culture of peace rests on its role as the bridge between individual psychology and the structure of social groups. Historic narratives are essential in the development, establishment, and shaping of social identity and intergroup relations. As such, the impact of history education on social identity is very relevant and rests on three major functions: (1) establishment of connotations of ingroup identity (norms, beliefs and values), (2) justification of intergroup relations and social hierarchies, and (3) legitimization of power structure and mobilization of collective actions. In each of these functions, history education can promote a cultur...