Conference Program

In 2023, UNESCO called upon educational organisations and professionals to take concrete steps towards fostering a culture of peace. “Learning Peace” embodies a community’s commitment grounded in faith and hope in the collective pursuit of positive peace, serving as a laboratory for training, education and growth in the fields of peace and nonviolence. Using a case study in which the Theatre of the Oppressed – a political and pedagogical practice developed by Augusto Boal to promote critical awareness and empower communities – was introduced as a transformative educational tool within “Imparare la pace. Scuola popolare di nonviolenza” in Bergamo, this study seeks to document, understand and map the transformative processes that emerged.

The Theatre of the Oppressed is presented as a politico-pedagogical practice aimed at fostering critical consciousness and the activation of oppressed subjects through the experiential, rather than ideological, recognition of conflict and oppression. Through the analysis of rituals and mechanisms of domination, thereby revealing their underlying power dynamics. The process generates dialogical maieutic pathways that encourage the collaborative search for shared solutions, which cannot be predefined or externally controlled. It produces multiple levels of impact on participants, ranging from awareness to transformation, and from the personal dimension to the social and community sphere (Boal 1994, 1996).

Grounded in a complex and ecological epistemological framework, the study draws on critical pedagogy (Giroux, 2008), transformative learning theory (Mezirow, 2003), democratic education (Dewey, 2018), and systemic-complex thought (Morin, 2007; Bateson, 1977). It adopts a qualitative-interpretative case study design, integrating elements of educational ethnography, narrative inquiry and maieutic methods to analyse the aims and needs that motivated the introduction of the Theatre of the Oppressed within the programme; the cognitive, emotional, embodied, relational and political transformations that participants recognise as outcomes of the experience; and the emerging or unforeseen dynamics and tensions.

In conclusion, the study seeks to highlight the significance of the Theatre of the Oppressed within a Scuola popolare di nonviolenza as a practice that nurtures adults able to embody democratic and nonviolent values (hooks, 2020; Freire, 2008).

In psychological research, national and international ethical guidelines emphasize the importance of returning research findings as an integral part of the researcher's responsibility to participants. The American Psychological Association (APA, 2017) states that researchers should consider returning results as part of the informed consent process and their ethical responsibility (Standard 8.10). Similarly, the National Board of Italian Psychologists Code of Ethics for the Psychologist (CNOP, 2018) recommends ensuring transparency and respect toward participants, promoting practices that encourage informed participation.

However, in the field of educational psychology, the return of findings to teachers remains relatively uncommon, often resulting in research models that limit transparency and active participation, reinforcing the idea of an asymmetry of power between psychologist-researchers and teachers (Fine, 1994; Minkler & Wallerstein, 2008). Conversely, the literature highlights how the feedback process can recognize the active role of participants, enhance trust, promote epistemic justice, and acknowledge the value of collectively produced knowledge (Mertens, 2009; Israel et al., 2013; Fricker, 2007). It is not merely a matter of protecting participants’ rights, but of ensuring that research becomes generative of all possible results, allowing actors to contribute fairly, beginning with the community that made the research possible (Paglieri, 2021). In particular, the school context requires spaces and time in which adults can enact democratic and nonviolent values (Freire, 2004).

Within the research project "Mapping Social Emotional Learning and School Climate in Italian Lower Secondary Schools: advancing understanding and participation to inform intervention" conducted under the PRIN Call 2022 PNRR, quantitative and qualitative findings were shared directly with the teachers of the 36 Italian schools involved in the project. The feedback sessions were designed following an approach inspired by Teacher Participatory Action Research (T-PAR), which enables researchers to focus on teacher involvement, reflective practices, and the contextualized return of results (McNiff & Whitehead, 2002). Several studies also underline that T-PAR is closely intertwined with the personal and professional growth of teachers (Efron, 2013).

The outcomes of the participatory restitution process have been collected in a "Guide of good practices", entitled "Cultivating well-being at school" published on the www.perstarebeneascuola.com website. It is a collection of suggestions for lower secondary school, developed by teachers for teachers and structured around different areas by the research unit. The sections are organized into three parts: student-teacher relationship, positive teaching, student support, classroom management, respect for rules, teacher-teacher relationship, student-student relationship, justice, involvement, encouragement, social awareness and student self-awareness. Each section is divided into in-class activities, out-of-class activities, and interaction strategies, which outlines approaches teachers may adopt to foster trust and collaboration.

The present contribution therefore aims to highlight the importance of the generative return of research results as a methodological practice relevant for research in school psychology, consistent with the principles of nonviolent education and the demilitarization of educational imaginaries. From this perspective, returning research data becomes an opportunity to build relationships of trust and dialogue, also between school psychologists and teachers, to generate further knowledge that supports the development of schools as spaces of authentic democracy.

Abstract

This purely theoretical article argues that the transition from a culture of revenge to a culture of reconciliation is not primarily a moral or legal issue, but a matter of identity formation and therefore an educational one. If the drive for revenge originates in a subjectivity in which the self is conceived as a fixed substance that must be defended against any disturbance, then overcoming violence requires transforming the conditions in which subjects are formed. The central claim is that non-violent education, understood as a pedagogy shaping a different modality of selfhood, is the decisive condition for reconciliation.

The argument is developed through a convergence of two complementary perspectives that approach the same problem from different angles. Paul Ricoeur’s phenomenological analysis of personal identity (Oneself as Another, 1992) distinguishes between two modalities of selfhood. Idem-identity — perfect identity and permanence of a substance over time — defines a self whose coherence depends on rigidity: any rupture threatens its very existence. Ipse-identity, on the contrary, is a narrative identity defined by fidelity to oneself through change: a self capable of incorporating conflict and encounter with the other without being destroyed. The self of ipse is not a fortress to defend but a story to tell and a word to keep.

Francesco Remotti’s anthropological critique (Contro l’identità, 1996; L’ossessione identitaria, 2010) approaches the same structure from a cultural standpoint: the obsessive attachment to a fixed, self-identical subject — the “individual” as in-dividuus — is not a universal given but a historical construction of Western culture, one that generates a structural inability to coexist with otherness. Remotti’s counter-concept of the condividuo — the subject constituted through sharing and mutual recognition rather than exclusion — reveals that what we call “identity” is always already a relational process. The idem-structure that Ricoeur describes phenomenologically is thus what Remotti diagnoses culturally. Both converge in showing that rigid identity sustains the logic of violence.

Yet neither perspective addresses the conditions under which the transition from idem to ipse — from the individual to the condividuo — can actually take place. This is the gap that the present article seeks to fill. It contends that militarised pedagogies (Galtung, 1969, 1990) — broadly understood as systems structured around competition and conformity — systematically produce idem-subjects or rigid identities predisposed to violence and incapable of democratic coexistence. In contrast, nonviolent education, conceived from a universalist humanist perspective, operates as a pedagogy of narrative identity oriented towards a shared future horizon: the construction of a Universal Human Nation (Silo, 1989).

It is in this dimension of futurity, and not in the conservative defence of the past, that subjects capable of navigating conflict without resorting to retaliation are formed, recognising the other as a constitutive dimension of their own narrative.

The demilitarisation of schools therefore appears not as mere institutional reform but as the fundamental political act through which a society decides whether reconciliation and authentic democratic coexistence will be possible.

This paper offers a theoretical and empirical reflection on nonviolent education, drawing on documentary analysis and qualitative research based on participant observation and the systematization of project materials developed by the association Energia per i Diritti Umani(EDU) in schools in Rome. These practices are examined as situated pedagogical practices, framed within the perspective of universalist humanism(Silo,1991), which conceives personal transformation and social transformation as inseparable processes.

The theoretical framework highlights that violence is not a biological destiny(UNESCO,1991) but rather a culturally and structurally constructed phenomenon(Galtung,2008). From this perspective, nonviolence is understood both as a method of action and as a relational approach grounded in coherence between intrapsychic and social dimensions—namely, coherence among thinking, feeling, and acting, and treating others as one would wish to be treated(Tato & Serfaty,2008). A key distinction is drawn between aggression, understood as a vital energy associated with self-assertion, and violence, its destructive and culturally codified expression(Oliverio Ferraris,2013). Within this framework, anger is not simply repressed but recognized and transformed into a generative force for change(Rosenberg,2006), capable of “extinguishing the fire”(Nhat Hanh,2022) while preserving its transformative potential, in continuity with Gandhi’s conception of nonviolence as an active social force(Gandhi,2017).

If violence is a learned behavior, institutional education represents a primary context in which such learning can either be reinforced or reoriented. Schools can be understood as multidimensional environments in which symbolic, competitive, evaluative, and relational forms of violence are often reproduced, embedded within disciplinary, hierarchical, and punitive logics that contribute to a broader cultural militarization of educational settings(Barnao,2024). Nonviolent education offers a way to counter these dynamics by transforming relational patterns, evaluative practices, and conflict management strategies toward dialogical, cooperative, and inclusive models(Coiro,2024).

Within this perspective, Ubuntu pedagogy(Blackwood,2025)—summarized in the expression “I am because we are”—reframes the school as a space of interdependence and shared responsibility, while Dewey’s experiential and democratic pedagogy(Dewey,1938) situates these practices within a vision of learning grounded in reflective action and active participation. In this framework, nonviolence is not conceived as a normative prescription but as a situated practice learned through cooperation, participation, and critical engagement with conflict. The pedagogy of intentionality(Aguilar & Bize,2018) further reinforces this transformative orientation by enabling individuals to act intentionally within social reality.

This paper analyzes the experience of EDU—active in Italy, Senegal, and India—in outlining a model of nonviolent pedagogy capable of fostering the cultural and symbolic demilitarization of educational contexts. Through the analysis of emotional literacy activities, experiential workshops, and participatory initiatives such as the Library of Nonviolence, the study highlights the generative and holistic nature of the association’s educational approach. This model operates across three interconnected levels: the personal level(emotional awareness and the transformation of anger), the interpersonal level(active listening, mediation, cooperation, and dialogue), and the collective level(the construction of educational communities). Finally, the study emphasizes the importance of systemic networks—from the Universal Civil Service to initiatives such as EDUMANA—identifying collaboration among local actors and volunteers as a key driver in fostering a supportive and socially aware society grounded in Patfoort’s(2013) principle of equivalence.

This study aims to explore how methods of active Nonviolence ca be merged in teacher training programmes to enhance the relational climate, teacher-student relationship and professional interactions in schools. Several studies suggest that positive relationships are predictors of teacher wellbeing, educational innovation and student learning outcomes. Nevertheless, managing relationships among students, colleagues and parents is one of the prevalent critical issues. Purposeful, non-occasional training in the development of interpersonal and communication skills and the integration of active nonviolent strategies into professional practice can enhance teachers' expertise and improve the quality of relationships in school environment.

Nonviolence is a direct action that positions itself as an alternative paradigm to violence, a term endowed with an autonomous, positive and active value, distinctly different from denying or opposing violence (Capitini, 2024; Muller, 2004). Nonacceptance of reality is much more than passive acquiescence; it represents deliberate political and educational action aimed at fostering a culture of peace. Nonviolence implies a unity of theoretical reflection, educational practice and professional self-reflection. Education for nonviolence is enacted daily in the classroom, but it also requires nonviolence in education itself: disarming language and glance towards oneself and others, recognising stereotypes and epistemic and cultural biases, resisting the normalization of logics of domination, judgment, performance and competition. In interdependence, every participant in the school system may be regarded as co-responsible for the entire community, contributing to the construction of a planetary humanism (Morin, 2015).

Through a narrative review of the scientific literature, designed in accordance with the SANRA (Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Reviews) guidelines (Baethge et al., 2019), this paper aims to investigate the ways in which theoretical-practical model of Nonviolence has been applied in teacher training, the tools, the transformations documented and the recommendations suggested in the reviewed studies. The objective is to highlight how nonviolent practices and tools - such as Nonviolent Communication (Rosenberg, 2017), dialogic practices (Dolci, 2012), Theatre of the Oppressed, restorative methods, conflict transformation strategies (Patfoort, 2014) and Communities of Inquiry (Manara, 2011) - are helpful for repositioning educational action within the framework of Nonviolence. This approachstrengthens the quality of the alliance between students, families and teachers, and facilitates the design of systematic training pathways that enable the practical application of tools for deconstructing structural and cultural violence (Galtung, 2011).

This contribution presents an exploratory study aimed at reflecting on the role of nonviolence as a public and political category of education within school institutions. Nonviolent education is considered a fundamental dimension for peace education (UNESCO, 2023) and for the sustenance of a democratic society. The objective is to examine the pedagogical and organizational conditions through which nonviolence can be adopted as a structuring principle of the School (Primary and Secondary), fostering the implementation of nonviolent educational practices.

This work is part of an ongoing process developed through facilitated meetings, communities of practice, and reflective groups across various schools and educational settings, involving the active participation of the adult school community—teachers, principals, administrative staff, parents, and educators—in dialogue with the National ‘Forum Scuole per un’Educazione Nonviolenta’ and the Scuola Sconfinata movement. The materials produced, consisting of shared notes and syntheses, are currently undergoing qualitative analysis to identify preliminary interpretive categories and strategic pathways for adopting nonviolent educational practices in schools.

Two primary research questions guide the reflection: how nonviolence can be transformed into a public category of education, and which practices and processes facilitate the adoption of nonviolent education within school institutions.

The study is structured around working groups addressing active, cooperative, and participatory didactic approaches (Dolci, 1987); the revision of knowledge through cooperative and demilitarized lenses alongside the structuring of shared decision-making spaces (Freire, 2011); nonviolent conflict transformation and restorative practices (Galtung, 2000; Patfoort, 2013); the care and self-awareness of educating adults (hooks, 2020); and school organization as a context for dialogue, participation, and peace.

Preliminary findings highlight several interpretive categories, including the semantic ambivalence of the concepts of peace and nonviolence, the centrality of adult relationships, the inconsistency between the explicit and implicit curriculum, and the necessity for shared decision-making spaces. These initial observations help delineate working hypotheses for nonviolent educational practices and peace promotion, providing conceptual and organizational tools to transform the school into a participatory, co-responsible environment oriented toward holistic human development (Silo, 1994).

Ultimately, adopting nonviolent education as an essential component of human development requires rethinking the school as a context dedicated to the well-being and flourishing of children, youth, and the educating adults alike.