Ge n e r a l I n t roduc t ion

I n t e r ro g at i ng t h e M e a n i ng(s) a n d
Doi ng(s) of I n t egr at e d E duc at ion

Zvi Bekerman and Michalinos Zembylas

T he chapters in this volume are all the fruits of the first confer-
ence, the Integrated Peace Education: Global Network for Practice
and Research, held in Belfast in March 2012, of the international
network of academics, practitioners, and nongovernmental organi-
zations,. The volume is a new addition to our longstanding and
collaborative endeavor on the theme of sustained peace education
efforts in societies that have suffered from protracted conflict,
introduced in Addressing Ethnic Conflict through Peace Education:
International Perspectives (Bekerman & McGlynn, 2007) and
the award-winning Peace Education in Conflict and Post-Conflict
Societies: Comparative Perspectives (McGlynn, Zembylas, Bekerman,
& Gallagher, 2009). Yet, this volume is different in that it focuses
on the developing field of integrated education in conflicted societ-
ies, where children who are more normally educated apart are delib-
erately educated together. We bring together papers that approach
the development of integrated education in a variety of geographi-
cal and sociopolitical sitesCatholic and Protestant in Northern
Ireland, Palestinian and Jewish in Israel, and Greek Cypriot and
Turkish Cypriot in Cyprus as well as examples from Macedonia,
Bosnia, and Croatia. In all of these societies integrated education
has been difficult to initiate, complex to sustain, and has aroused
the suspicion of the local historically divided communities; none-
theless, those involved believe it to be essential in contributing to
the healing of the wounds that afflict their societies, easing the path
toward integration and inclusion.
xii Zv i Be k e r m a n a n d M ic h a l i no s Z e m b y l a s

On the Challenges of Social Cohesion,

Integration, and Inclusion
For long, the lack of social cohesion has been considered as the main
problem afflicting societies, creating social instability and conflict.
The lack of social cohesion is also seen as a threat to national and
international stability. It is mostly found among what are considered
to be groups belonging to other (e.g., minority) cultural groups;
their cultural differences, accompanied at times by territorial con-
flicts, are assumed to be the basis of the social tensions. Thus, social
cohesion is assumed to be the answer to these differences and ten-
sions; other groups must adjust to the majoritys social and cultural
norms so that the society becomes cohesive.
Within the semantic field of social cohesion, we find other words
that might describe the complex social processes that are taking place;
these words are integration and inclusion. Integration seems to
be a rather older concept with practical connotations (e.g., access
to work, education); inclusion is a more recent word and seems to
imply higher expectations, ideals, goals, which, if achieved, should
help us all, majority and minority, abled and disabled, overcome
estrangement. For the most part, those perceived in need of integra-
tion are expected to adopt a set of values and worldviews hailed by
the majority or the powerful group as the pillars of their civilization.
Mostly, therefore, integration and inclusion seem to be unidirec-
tional. Migrants, indigenous people, and the disabled are integrated
into the residents/citizensthe abled, the hegemonic. At the wide
sociopolitical level, integration and inclusion seem not to be working
well; social cohesion is not really being achieved and the threat is out
there. The foreigners, the disabled, the enemies, so we are told, refuse
to join and conform.
There are various theoretical considerations that try to explain
strategies used by others (minorities, indigenous, migrants), when
encountering majoritarian contexts. Berry (1997), for example, uses
two dimensionsidentification with the host culture and iden-
tification with group cultureand defines four strategies used by
minority groups in negotiating the encounter. These are integration,
assimilation, separation, and marginalization. Esser (2010), using a
theoretical model based on Berrys approach, distinguishes between
two entangled featuresthe individual (e.g., language) and the
social (e.g., labor market). These features, he argues, are interrelated
for together they influence the social integration of the individual
and the system integration of a society. Rudmin (2003) has posited,
 G e n e r a l I n t r oduc t ion xiii

critically, that the integration construct, as it develops through accul-

turation theories, does not seem to allow for much progress regarding
minority policy articulations, for not all cultural aspects are open to
code switching (e.g., religion), making integration at multiple levels if
not impossible at least difficult.
When considering possible solutions, governments and interna-
tional organizations have pointed at education as one of the main
arenas in which the lack of social cohesion should be dealt with.
Educational institutions are expected to help overcome social divi-
sions and thus contribute to social stability and peaceful develop-
ment. Within educational discourses it is also, mainly, strategies of
integration that are discussed as being possibly the best ones to be
considered when attempting to overcome societal tensions.
Though not always recognized or acknowledged, at the least edu-
cationally, where many of the countries represented in this volume
are today, the United States of America was over 60 years ago. It
took over one hundred years of struggle to reach the 1954 unani-
mous Supreme Court opinion in Brown v. Board of Education, which
overturned the Plessy v. Ferguson 1896 Supreme Court decision find-
ing Louisianas separate but equal law constitutional. The primary
concerns that the psychological briefs submitted to the court in the
Brown case over half a century ago are surprisingly similar to pres-
ent concerns in areas of intractable conflict as the ones discussed in
this volume; the solutions offered were also based on the contact
hypothesis principles. These concerns had to do with the potential
psychological impact of segregationist practices that, as was argued,
could seriously damage both the populations involved in the seg-
regative system, Afro-Americans and Caucasians (Zirkel & Cantor,
2004). Educational integration seems to have been expected to help
overcome these dangers and help better society.
Views are divergent, however, as to whether the Brown decision
has fulfilled its promise. The discouraged point out that even today,
while not state imposed, many school districts remain segregated by
race (Guinier & Torres, 2002). Even in integrated settings, students
of color find themselves resegregated through academic tracking or
social interactional boundaries (Tatum, 2003). They find themselves
disproportionately represented in poorly funded schools (Glickstein,
1996) and, for those students who do make it to college, their drop-
out rate is much higher than the rate for white populations (Bowen
& Bok, 1998; Steele, 1997). The optimists point to the tremen-
dous growth of students of color in the percentage of college gradu-
ates (Bowen & Bok, 1998) and to the fact that many educational
xiv Zv i Be k e r m a n a n d M ic h a l i no s Z e m b y l a s

institutions are involved in developing strategies that will further

support the development of students of color through a variety of
tools such as affirmative action and a multicultural curriculum. These
steps, as well as others, all try to readdress racial disparities in order
to attain the primary goal of Browns decision to offer equal access to
educational opportunities (Wells & Jones, 1998).
While the results on school integration may not be conclusive,
there is a growing impression that scholars are becoming more and
more critical, if not about the essentials of the Brown decision, then
about its implementation. This criticism is so strong, that some have
recently argued that racial disparities would have been better served
if Brown had upheld the Plessy v. Ferguson decision of 1896 that pro-
vided for separate but equal settings. As evident in todays real-
ity, educational settings are still separate but unequal (Bell, 2001;
Bifulco, Ladd, & Ross, 2009).
It is worth mentioning in this context that research in a parallel
stream in integrated educationthat which relates to the inclusion
of children with special educational needs in mainstream educational
institutionsand which is seriously considered in some of the chap-
ters included in this volume, though showing neutral to positive
effects, is also not conclusive (Polat, 2011; Ruijs & Peetsma, 2009).
The effects of educational integration on the academic achievement of
children with special education needs seems to be slightly positive and
there are very few reports that find any negative effects of inclusion in
the achievements of children with mild to moderate special education
needs. Integration is found to have neutral to negative socio-emo-
tional effects on children with a similar degree of special educational
needs as on the ones mentioned above (Bakker & Bosman, 2003).
In the countries included in this volume there has been a long
tradition of the use intergroup encounters/dialogues as a tool to
improve relations and mutual perceptions among the groups in con-
flict. The contact hypothesis, which was presented in its first widely
accepted outline by Allport in 1954, stands today as the basis of most
educational efforts toward integration. The contact hypothesis sug-
gests that intergroup contactwhen occurring under conditions of
status equality and cooperative interdependence, while allowing for
sustained interaction between participants and the potential forma-
tion of friendshipsmight help alleviate conflict between groups and
encourage change in negative intergroup attitudes (Allport, 1954;
Amir, 1976; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006).
A large number of studies have been conducted on intergroup
encounters/dialogues, and most of these have tried to assess their
 G e n e r a l I n t r oduc t ion xv

effectiveness by focusing on attitudinal change based on pre- and post-

measures (Bargal, 1990; Gaertner, Dovidio, Anastasio, Bachman, &
Rust, 1993; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006). A meta-analysis has marked
evidence for the benefits of intergroup contact, especially when the
contact situation maximizes most, or all of its optimal conditions
(Pettigrew & Tropp, 2000). However, what characterizes these dia-
logue encounters is that they are one-time, singular, two-to-three-
day events. Thus, they do not allow for any conclusions to be reached
regarding the potential influence of sustained educational initiatives
geared toward the alleviation of conflict.
When considering the above, it becomes apparent that integra-
tion efforts cannot be considered an easy recipe for the problems of a
diverse and conflicted society.

This Volume
Rather than focus on ad hoc responses to conflict such as short-
term educational encounters or programs, this volume investigates
a long term, systemic approach and its innovative pedagogies in a
range of conflicted societies. These initiatives discussed afford partic-
ipants long-term exposure to each others group within an integrated
school setting. In this sense these settings can be considered more
real or at least more present in the reality in which participants
interacttheir daily lives. Reflecting on these settings, the present
volume should help us move away from the utopianism of contact
research conducted under ideal situations to a more detailed analysis
of contact of ordinary people in more ordinary situations; schools
are indeed a more mundane activity in the lives of children. Research
by C. McGlynn, J. Hughes, Z. Bekerman, R. Gavison, and others on
the encounters that take place in integrated schools functioning in
countries such as Northern Ireland and Israel, though showing some
positive results, is yet not decisive, but the present volume, though
assisted by this research, wants to reflect not on the work of research-
ers but on the experience of those directly involved in these educa-
tional efforts. Their voices, as it is so traditional in most educational
research, have not been heard enough.
The chapters in the book interrogate what can be learned about
establishing new integrated schools in conflicted societies from the
perspective of those who have been and those who continue to be
involved in the development of integrated education. They draw
attention to the kind of support that is required by those strug-
gling to establish integrated schools in challenging contexts; explore
xvi Zv i Be k e r m a n a n d M ic h a l i no s Z e m b y l a s

leadership, specifically the types of strategies, skills, and characteristics

that are required for success; and examine the extent to which lead-
ership aspects are common or otherwise across the various country
contexts. The chapters ask important questions about what is taught
and also how teachers can be given the confidence and skills to meet
the challenges of the integrated classroom without shying away from
the more difficult aspects of teaching in integrated schools, such as
how to deal with controversial issues. All in all, this volume presents
integrated education as a broad and constantly developing concept
that will not suffer innocence or illusion.
The book is organized into four parts. The first part interrogates
the leadership of integrated education, in particular the strategies,
skills, and characteristics that are required for success. It examines the
extent to which these are common or otherwise. It considers school
leadership and the qualities needed to support integrated education,
and evaluates the challenges that need to be confronted by both
schools and supporting communities.
The second part explores the challenges of establishing new inte-
grated schools in conflicted societies. In particular, the chapters
focus on the challenges of establishing new integrated schools and of
transforming existing schools. In doing so it also considers the ways
in which the biographies of particular schools have influenced their
visions of integrated education.
The third part investigates the curriculum and the pedagogy that
has developed in integrated schools to respond to student diversity
and to historical divisions. It considers the challenges of planning
appropriate curricula for integrated education initiatives, explores
how difficult topics can be approached in integrated school class-
rooms, and ponders on the training needs of teachers.
The fourth and final part focuses on what is currently needed to
develop and support international integrated education. It reflects
on what has been achieved already and what has yet to be done.
Furthermore, it investigates the needs of new initiatives for integrated
education and the current barriers to the establishment of integrated
schools in conflicted societies.
We are told more and more that narratives are powerful tools for
encountering and deciphering realities in the world; they are pow-
erful in helping us understand ourselves and our positioning and in
reflecting on our interactions with others; in short, they are tools
that help us find a path. Reading narratives can transport the reader
to other places, contexts, situations he or she might not have directly
experienced but wishes to understand. Reading other peoples stories
 G e n e r a l I n t r oduc t ion xvii

can help readers understand experiences about which they have ques-
tions but which in their own realities are not yet available. Stories help
us explore, reflect, and understand.
Thus, this book is a collection of stories, reflective stories, of edu-
cators who encounter educational scenes at different institutional lev-
els. What connects these stories is that they are written by educators
who share, unfortunately, a common sociopolitical stage character-
ized by conflict. Not all come from the same geographical area but
each of the geographies they inhabit can be described as a conflict or
post-conflict society. They also share the fact they are all involved in
school initiatives that believe putting children together in an inclusive
and respectful context can help alleviate conflict and support mutual
understanding. What the authors have, which most researchers lack, is
an intimate knowledge of the complexities involved in creating such
integrated settings. These authors have lived through the difficulties
of starting integrated schools from scratch in political contexts that did
not support them and have realized through their long experience that
idealistic and romantic perspectives cannot, all by themselves, sustain
a real encounter between those who have suffered the results of harsh
conflicts. If indeed, as Muriel Rukeyser would have it, the universe is
made up of stories, not atoms, the stories in this volume should become
the basic units with which to construct better understanding and per-
spectives for a future with more successful integrative initiatives.

References
Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. London: Addison-Wesley.
Amir, Y. (1976). The role of intergroup contact in change of prejudice and
ethnic relations.In P. A. Katz (Ed.), Towards the elimination of racism
(pp. 245308). New York: Pergamon.
Bakker, J. T. A., & Bosman, A. M. T. (2003). Self-image and peer acceptance
of Dutch students in regular and special education. Learning Disability
Quarterly, 26, 514.
Bargal, D. (1990). Contact is not enoughThe contribution of Lewinian
theory to inter-group workshops involving Palestinian and Jewish youth
in Israel. International Journal of Group Tensions, 20, 179192.
Bekerman, Z., & McGlynn, C. (Eds). (2007). Addressing ethnic conflict
through peace education: International perspectives. New York: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Bell, D. A. (2001). Dissenting. In J. M. Balkin (Ed.), What Brown v. Board of
Education should have said: The nations top legal experts rewrite Americas
landmark civil rights decision (pp. 185200). New York: New York
University Press.
xviii Zv i Be k e r m a n a n d M ic h a l i no s Z e m b y l a s

Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied

Psychology: An International Review, 46, 568.
Bifulco, R., Ladd, H. F., & Ross, S. (2009). Public school choice and inte-
gration: Evidence from Durham, North Carolina. Social Science Research,
36 (1), 7185.
Bowen, W. G., & Bok, D. (1998). The shape of the river: Long-term conse-
quences of considering race in college and university admissions. Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University Press.
Esser, H. (2010). Assimilation, ethnic stratification, or selective accultura-
tion? Recent theories of the integration of immigrants and the model of
intergenerational integration. Sociologica, 4(1), 0-0.
Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., Anastasio, P. A., Bachman, B. A., & Rust, M. C.
(1993). The common ingroup identity model: Recategorization and the
reduction of intergroup bias. European Review of Social Psychology, 4, 126.
Glickstein, H. A. (1996). Inequities in educational funding. In E. C. Lagemann
& L. P. Miller (Eds.), Brown v. Board of Education: The challenge for todays
schools (pp. 122128 ). New York: Teachers College Press.
Guinier, L., & Torres, G. (2002). The miners canary: Enlisting race, resisting
power, and transforming democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
McGlynn, C., Zembylas, M., Bekerman, Z., & Gallagher, T. (Eds.). (2009).
Peace education in conflict and post-conflict societies: Comparative perspec-
tives. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2000). Does intergroup contact reduce
prejudice? Recent meta-analytic findings. In S. Oskamp (Ed.), Reducing
prejudice and descrimination (pp. 93114). Mahwah, NJ: Earlbaum.
Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup con-
tact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 751783.
Polat, F. (2011). Inclusion in education: A step towards social justice.
International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1), 5058.
Rudmin, F. W. (2003). Critical history of the acculturation psychology of
assimilation, separation, integration, and marginalization. Review of
General Psychology, 7(1), 337.
Ruijs, N. M., & Peetsma, T. T. D. (2009). Effects of inclusion on stu-
dents with and without special educational needs reviewed. Educational
Research Review, 4(2), 6779.
Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual
identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52, 613619.
Tatum, B. D. (2003). Why all the black kids sitting together in the cafeteria.
And other conversations about race. New York: Basic Books.
Wells, M., & Jones, R. (1998). Relationship among childhood parentifica-
tion, splitting, and dissociation: Preliminary findings. American Journal
of Family Therapy, 26, 331339.
Zirkel, S. & Cantor, N. (2004). 50 Years after Brown v. Board of Education:
The promise and challenge of multicultural education. Journal of Social
Issues, 60(1), 116.