Looking for peace in the Swedish National Curricula

ABSTRACT

This study analyses, in the light of peace educational theory, the presence and absence of peace elements in the Swedish national curriculum for compulsory schooling. Using the theoretical framework developed within the international Peace Education Curricular Analysis Project, content analysis and mixed methods we identify how the Swedish curriculum underscore and lack the peace elements of recognizing violence, non-violent conflict transformation and positive peace. Our analysis shows that the Swedish curriculum supports teaching and learning which may help pupils to identify violence in society and internationally, lack many aspects of non-violent conflict transformation (especially conflict resolution) and emphasize positive peace in numerous but limited ways. We find that many dimensions of peace are underscored in the syllabus of civics, making peace education primarily a concern for a few teachers. Noting how peace in education is a wide-ranging concern for all educators, we highlight how peace may in more nuanced ways become a part of the Swedish curriculum, today and in the future.

KEYWORDS:

• Positive peace
• recognizing violence
• non-violent conflict transformation
• content analysis
• mixed methods
• PECA project

The Swedish Ministry for Foreign Affairs stated in 2005 that ‘[e]ven if Sweden with its bicentennial peace is known as “peace-loving” …it seems like the image of this international role needs a refresh’ (Ministry for Foreign Affairs, 2005, 50).¹ Clearly Swedish authorities wish to promote an image of Sweden as a peaceful country and an important agent in peace building. In 2016 the government worked hard, and succeeded, to be elected as a non-permanent member of the UN Security Council in 2017–2018. And, on April 8 2017, after a suspected terrorist attack in the centre of Stockholm, the Swedish King stated that ‘Sweden is, has long been, and will continue to be a safe and peaceful country’ (Westin, Nilsson, Granlund, Eriksson, & Ek, 2017).

Figure 3. Number of formulations coded as sub-categories of NVC.

Figure 4. Number of formulations coded as sub-categories of PP.

Figure 5. Distribution of coding references for sub-categories of wellbeing.

Sweden as a peaceful country promoting peace nationally and internationally is today a central part of the Swedish self-image and as a part of this Sweden holds a long and strong commitment to implement peace and international understanding in school curricula (Elmersjö & Lindmark, 2010; Andersson & Johansson, 2010; Nygren, 2016). The Swedish curriculum has previously been described as moving towards more democratic values (Englund, 2005). Peace education in Sweden has been described as a complex venture underlined in the curricula during the cold war era (Hägglund, 1996; Thelin, 1993). In the curricula of 1994, formulations like democracy, equity and solidarity replaced the term peace education, but this has been interpreted as a development to promote positive peace (Hakvoort, 2010). The current Swedish curriculum from 2011 has been noted to have an instrumental focus interpreted as, at least partly, a result of new international directives, standards, assessments and tests like PISA (Sundberg & Wahlström, 2012). This political and market-driven change beyond national borders has been criticized for overlooking important ideals in education (Ball, 2012; Biesta, 2009). But reforms in education may differ across national borders and what is foregrounded and backgrounded need to be studied in more detail in a global world (Rizvi & Lingard, 2009). In Sweden, peace education is closely connected to education for international understanding, human rights and sustainable development (Savolainen, 2010; Andersson & Zaleskienė, 2011) and so far, not a fore fronted part in the international assessment trend. However, a new PISA assessment testing ‘Global Competency For An Inclusive World’ (OECD, 2017), suggested for 2018, may be interpreted as a way to focus more on ideals of peace and understanding. Today Sweden is an active partner in UNESCO acknowledging the international importance of what UNESCO (2015, 15) labels global citizenship education which ‘aims to be transformative, building the knowledge, skills, values and attitudes that learners need to be able to contribute to a more inclusive, just and peaceful world’. But even if peace is acknowledged as important in the political discourse, future PISA tests, and in international guidelines, we still need to better understand the currents situation of peace in Swedish education.

Previous research has highlighted the importance of peace in education but also how important elements of peace may be missing in curricula in different countries (Standish, 2015, 2016; Standish & Kertyzia, 2015; Standish & Talahma, 2016). Swedish pupils have been found to perceive peace as primarily the absence of war, absence of quarrels and as positive social activities, much in line with pupils from other countries (Haakvoort & Hägglund, 2001). Education in Sweden has also been studied as an example of teaching conflict resolution in a country of relative tranquillity (Haakvoort, 2010). The Swedish curriculum has also to some extent been studied in the light of global citizenship education² (Symeonidis, 2015), but a more systematic study of the current curriculum in the light of theories of peace education has so far not been conducted.

Thus, what we find is that peace is emphasized as an important part of the Swedish identity and central in international guidelines signed by Sweden, but we lack a more systematic understanding of how values of peace are communicated in the Swedish curriculum. With an aim to better understand this and map out ways forward we ask in this study: To what extent does the current Swedish compulsory curriculum hold formulations that may promote peace and what elements of peace may be further developed in the curriculum?

This study is limited to an in-depth analysis of the Swedish curriculum. We also use previously analysed curricula in the international Peace Education Curricular Analysis (PECA) Project as a background. The cross-national comparison is limited to outcomes from previous studies and serves as a background to the more detailed analysis of the Swedish curriculum.

PECA project

To make it possible to analyse peace education in a structured and systematic way, Katerina Standish has initiated and developed the PECA Project. This project focuses on the research question: What values do nations communicate in their national curricula related to peace education? The PECA Project acknowledges the importance of an updated global understanding of how dimensions to promote peace are present and absent in guidelines formulated to direct educational practice. With an aim to build a global longitudinal database of mandatory curricula, the project is currently active in collecting, analysing and sharing information on peace education within and across nations and regions. A current limitation is the focus on written compulsory curricula. This limitation is necessary to reach as many countries as possible, at this point in time, and to provide a solid framework for further more in depth case studies of peace education. Even if educational practice is more complex than any curricula, we find that analysing written curricula provide insights into social constructions and framing factors of importance to promote peace in education. In this study, we use the PECA project to place the Swedish curriculum in an international context and we use the theoretical framework developed within PECA to identify dimensions of peace, and lack thereof, in the Swedish national curricula.

Theoretical considerations

Our analysis of the Swedish curriculum is based upon an understanding that this is a social and political construct which may be investigated for cultural elements (Goodson, 1992). We acknowledge that education in situ is far more complex than any curricula (Apple, 1992; Goodlad, 1979; Gundem, 1994; Nygren 2016), but formulations in the curriculum provides important insights into what is emphasized and ignored on the arena of formulations (Lindesjö & Lundgren, 2000). In this study, we focus on the formal curriculum which we see as a cultural construction closely related to ideological power struggles (Apple, 1992; Sundberg, 2005; Nygren, 2011). What is formulated in the curriculum do not automatically ‘seep down’ into practice, we instead perceive this as a dynamic process including transactions and interpretations (Goodlad, 1979; Gustafsson, 1999; Nygren, 2011). Thus, the curriculum is, as we see it, an important cultural construct which politicians, teachers, students and parents relate to in their perceptions of what is important (Apple, 1992; Goodlad, 1979; Goodson, 1992; Gundem, 1994). If something is in the curriculum then it is more likely a part of the conversation, and vice versa.

In theory, peace education holds three elements of importance for this study (see Figure 1). This conceptual framework has been developed within the systematic global peace education curricular analysis project (PECA) to support analysis of curricular statements for elements commonly found in peace education, namely recognition of violence (ROV), nonviolent conflict transformation (NCT) and positive peace (PP) (Standish, 2015, 2016; Standish & Joyce, 2016; Standish & Ketyzia, 2015; Standish & Talahma, 2016).

Figure 1. Conceptual framework of the PECA project.

ROV is based upon theories of Galtung (1990), which underline how cultural, structural and direct violence are important to identify and deal with to support peace. The difference between these three conceptualizations of violence may be challenging to grasp but Galtung delineated a set of criteria with which each category can be appreciated:

• Direct violence refers to acts of physical harm (or threats of the same) done by an identifiable agent to a recognizable victim. It is an action (or threat of an action) that ‘takes place’.

• Structural violence refers to systemic frameworks of discrimination that create harm to individuals by blocking resources they need to meet basic human needs. It is a structure or institution (not an individual) that ‘denies’ resources.

• Cultural violence refers to mind-sets or beliefs (values, ideals and norms) that are socially transmitted and both conceive of and legitimise structural and direct forms of violence. Cultural violence is not the result of direct or structural violence; it is the ‘root’ of violence.

From a temporal standpoint, direct violence is an ‘event’, structural violence is a ‘production’, and cultural violence is an ‘enduring worldview’. From an illustrative perspective, direct violence is a ‘punch’, structural violence is ‘discrimination’, and cultural violence is (for example) ‘racism’. There are overlapping and intersectional activities and experiences of violence to be sure (racial discrimination in particular), but the goal in this analysis is to draw out subtle distinctions between forms of violence to conclude (usually) that while direct forms of violence are routinely identified as undesirable in school curricular statements, denunciations of structural (discrimination) and cultural forms of violence (for example racism) are found less frequently.

NCT draws from theories noting the importance of learning how to deal with conflicts in peaceful and constructive ways (Harris, 2004). PP (Galtung, 1996) is based upon theories highlighting how positive peace is more than just absence of violence, which can be labelled negative peace. Instead PP is a matter of positive mindsets, behaviours, beliefs and perceptions (Boulding, 2000; Galtung, 1996; Harris & Morrison, 2013; Noddings, 2012; Synott, 2005) (see Table 1).

Table 1. Element descriptions in the PECA project.

Element one: recognizing violence (ROV)	This study defines violence as a deliberate, harmful and unnecessary human acts or mindsets. Violence is conceptualized in this study to include violence that is part of a worldview (cultural), violence that is a social process (structural) and violence that is an incident (direct).
Element two: nonviolent conflict transformation (NVC)	Tools to transform conflict without violence can include dialogue, mediation, negotiation, collaboration, etc. and the PECA Project codes for NVC even when the tool is not being used to transform conflict.
Element three: positive peace (PP)	Peace Zone: schools as violence-free spaces Peace Bond: positive human relationships characterized by kindness and empathy Social Justice: fairness, equality and/or human rights Eco Mind: harmonious living between humanity and nature Link Mind: perception of interconnectivity and/or interdependency Gender Mind: awareness of gender as an important facet of understanding Resilience: ability to manage crises: personal, social or environmental Wellbeing: health, wellness and/or taking responsibility for self or other Prevention: stopping violence before it starts

Peace education is a matter of educating to promote a more peaceful world in a variety of ways (Boulding, 2000). This is a transformative pedagogy with principles of knowledge, skills and attitudes supporting hope, human rights, environmental sustainability, equity and harmonious relations (Freire, 2001; Harber & Sakade, 2009). Peace education should help pupils to identify violence and war, learn how to deal with problems in peaceful and constructive ways and actively engage in creating a more peaceful world (Boulding, 2000; Harber & Sakade, 2009). In this study, we see peace education as a platform for engaging with the possibility that education and educational settings can also be sources of violence in society (Harris, 2004). Through recognizing that schools and schooling can contribute to violence, the field of peace education aims at working towards both countering violence with nonviolence and inhibiting violence by sharing tools and techniques which address conflict (a normal facet of human life) and delegitimizing violent responses that can include direct (physical), structural (indirect) and cultural forms of violence (Galtung, 1990).

Data and methodological considerations

In this study, guided by the theoretical elements of peace education outlined above, we investigated the Swedish Compulsory Curriculum (SWE-COM). We used the official English translation of the national compulsory curriculum for school, preschool and recreation centre (Skolverket, 2011). This curriculum holds mandatory guidelines and syllabi for all schools in Sweden, both public and private schools, educating pupils aged 5–16. Upper secondary schooling is not compulsory in Sweden and was therefore not part of this study. Our content analysis was conducted with a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods (Krippendorff, 2013). A mixed methods approach was used since we find this pragmatic approach useful for combining philosophical orientations of objectivism and constructivism helping researchers to see data from multiple perspectives (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004). Coding elements were all in line with the dimensions described in Table 1 and codes for recognition of violence (ROV) highlighted phrases where aggression, discrimination, injustices and racism were deemed as harmful and how this should be avoided; this means not just noting slavery as phenomena but also describing it as an act of violence which is deliberate and negative. Directives to promote nonviolent conflict transformation (NCT) included, for instance, sentences stating that pupils should learn to collaborate and listen actively, not just present their own point of view. Positive peace (PP) codes were given to formulations supporting positive human activity such as awareness of fairness and health as a basis for living together in positive ways. More specific codes were also given to sub categories of the three elements to give a more detailed understanding of each element in line with the theoretical framework of PECA (see further description below). Using a problem- and theory-driven method, we first coded the material individually to support inter-reliability (Krippendorff, 2013; Weber, 1990). By comparing data, we noted how [second author name remove] coded peace bonds in line with UNESCO recommendations for international understanding but not in the more strict way outlined in the theoretical framework. After re-coding, we discussed and reached consensus in the coding. The oscillatory process of close reading formulations and aggregated data was supported by the qualitative data analysis software NVivo (Johnston, 2006). Reliability and validity of the analysis was supported by collaboration between a researcher with extensive experience from peace and conflict studies of curricula with a researcher with previous experience from analysing content and values in the Swedish curricula.

To make it possible to also make comparisons across curricula, Standish has also developed comparative report cards. Noting how curricula may be very different regarding number of documents and words, it is important to score curricula recognizing the dimensions of peace and not just giving a high score to a country with a curriculum with many words. Therefore, the report cards hold a limitation of points given in each category and total score. ROV scores may be a maximum of 38 points where recognition of up to five different forms of direct, structural and cultural violence gives additional points, NCT scores may give a maximum of 26 points for guidelines focusing on a wide range of techniques to promote nonviolent conflict resolution, and PP statements noting the importance of positive peace in the nine sub-categories may give up to 36 points. Scores are weighed to echo the importance of different factors to promote peace in education (see http://pecaproject.org/peca_points.html). Total score is a maximum of 100 points. As with other curricula implemented in the PECA Project, the Swedish codes with references to peace dimensions were translated by Standish into comparative report card scores possible to compare with scores for other countries.

Coding the curricula in the dimensions and sub-categories described in Table 1 made it possible for us to see the balance between dimensions in the number of codes and the score cards makes it possible to place the Swedish curricula in an international context.

Sweden in relation to other countries

This section reports the empirical findings from the analysis of the Swedish compulsory curriculum (SWE-COM) of the three peace education elements sought in this study: (1) recognition of violence (ROV), (2) nonviolent conflict transformation tools (NCT) and (3) nine facets of positive peace (PP). Element one: ROV refers to passages that do more than just communicate forms of violence but indicate that the type of violence raised is undesirable. Element two: NCT are methods of transforming violence ‘without violence’. Such tools are coded when identified in the text regardless of whether or not their employment in the curriculum is during the actual act of transforming conflict. Element three: the nine facets of PP refer to the qualities of peace ability that were defined in the conceptual framework of the PECA Project and include wellbeing, peace bond, peace zone, eco mind, gender mind, link mind, resilience, prevention and social justice (see also Figure 1 and Table 1 above).

To place the Swedish curriculum in an international context, we will start with a short presentation of SWE-COM in comparison to other PECA Point scores in the PECA Project. As mentioned above, the PECA Project has two methods of evaluating national curricula: 1. evaluating curricula individually in depth and 2. by PECA POINT report cards (derived from the in-depth analysis) using a scale from 1–100 and assigning a letter grade to make cross-national comparisons possible. In Table 2, the total average PECA Points in each category are revealed (PECA Report Cards do not value frequency of inferences but quantity of various content – large reference scores do not necessarily translate to a higher-grade award). The basic logic behind this is that it is important to underscore elements of peace numerous times, but it is also important to emphasize a broad range of dimensions of importance to promote values of peace. The codes from our content analysis were converted into scores by the developer of the PECA reports cards [first author name removed] who have implemented this system across all curricula to guarantee a reliable comparison.

Table 2. Average point scores and letter grades of all curricula in PECA.

Country	Australia	England	Israel	Mexico	New Zealand	Northern Ireland	Kingdom of Saudi Arabia	Scotland	Sri Lanka	Sweden
ROV p. avg. (max. 38)	13	9	0	17	19	0	2	17	23	23
NVC p. avg. (max. 26)	4	4	2	6	7	4	4	6	6	3
PP p. avg. (max. 36)	8	5	3	15	7	6	4	7	6	8
Total p. avg. (max. 100)	25	17	4	38	31	9	10	30	32	34
Letter Grade (F-A+)	C	C-	E	C+	C+	E	D	C+	C+	C +

Note: PECA Report Cards do not value frequency of inferences but quantity of various content – large reference scores do not necessarily translate to a higher grade award. Point scores are average scores if the country has multiple curricula for compulsory education. Total scores are also averages based upon all compulsory curricula and may therefore not add up exactly from the averages of the three elements. See http://pecaproject.org/report_cards.html

Sweden with a history of international understanding in schools make numerous references coded as elements of peace and also get a pretty high grade in comparison to other countries in the PECA Project. The SWE-COM total score of 34 is a higher score than most other countries in the PECA Project (see Table 2).

The comparative PECA report scores of Sweden shows how formulations to promote recognition of violence ROV (23 of 38) are quite evident in the Swedish curriculum in comparison to other countries in the PECA Project. This means that the Swedish guidelines identify violence as deliberate, harmful and unnecessary human acts or mindsets (ROV) more often, and in more varied ways, than especially the Israeli, Northern Irish and Saudi Arabian curricula (see Table 2). The level of this element of peace education is much in line with other countries with the total letter grade C+, namely Sri Lanka, New Zealand, Scotland and Mexico. However, formulations promoting NCT are rare and far between in the Swedish curriculum (3 of 26 points). This is a general problem of curricula in PECA. Across all countries, we find a lack of content promoting nonviolent conflict transformation. No country gets a higher score than 7 out of 26, 27%, (New Zealand) and Sweden has the second lowest score in this category, only Israel has a lower score. The Swedish score is only 12% of the total possible points. The Swedish score regarding positive peace (PP) is in line with six of ten countries in the PECA Project, which all get scores ranging between six and eight. The curriculum of Mexico gets a far higher score, highlighting how positive human activity is more emphasized in this curriculum than other curricula in the PECA Project. We find that Saudi Arabia and Israel hold low scores also in this element indicating that the nine sub-categories of positive peace (see Tables 1 and 2) are not underscored in numerous and varied ways. The total score indicates that the Swedish curriculum is far from perfect even if it gets a higher total score than most the other countries in PECA.

Peace elements in the Swedish curriculum

To better understand the presence and absence of peace in the Swedish compulsory curriculum (SWE-COM), we need to take a closer look into the three elements.

The SWE-COM analysis identified 31 ROV references including structural violence (N = 14), direct violence (N = 14) and cultural violence (N = 3) (see Figure 2). As violence is defined in the PECA Project as avoidable and deliberate, forms of harm (or threats of harm) in order to be classified as ROV, the passage had to indicate the undesirability of violence whether direct (an action or threat of action), structural (systematic violence seen in social structures) or cultural (comprised of perceptions or mindsets but not necessarily actions) (see also Table 1).

Figure 2. Number of formulations (references) coded as elements of peace education and sub-categories.

Structural violence passages in the curriculum assert for instance that discriminatory tendencies ‘should be actively combated’ (p. 9) and reject ‘the subjection of people to oppression’ (p. 14). The curriculum directs a struggle: ‘against slavery’ (p. 167) and ‘segregation in society’. SWE-COM underlines how it is important for pupils to learn about structural problems based upon ‘people’s financial resources, power and influence related to gender, ethnicity and socio-economic background’ (p. 193). The curriculum also urges students to recognize ‘the meaning of human rights and their importance, and provide examples of how such rights are violated and promoted in different parts of the world’ (p. 197).

Direct violence passages (N = 14) in SWE-COM charge students to, for instance, ‘prevent and counteract’ (p. 15) and actively resist ‘degrading treatment of individuals of groups’ (p. 14). References to cultural violence (N = 3) assert, for example, that ‘xenophobia and intolerance must be confronted with knowledge, open discussion and active measures’ (p. 9) and that students should encounter ‘daily moral questions concerning identity, roles of girls and boys, and gender equality, sexuality, sexual orientation, and the exclusion and violation of rights’ (p. 179).

The SWE-COM analysis identified 218 Nonviolent Conflict Transformation (NCT) references in three categories: collaboration, dialogue and conflict resolution (see Figure 3). Collaboration is the action of ‘working with others’ towards a shared objective, dialogue is ‘purposive conversation’ and involves both listening and speaking to others who may hold dissimilar views, and conflict resolution refers to the technique of using an ‘intervention to settle disputes’.

Dialogue was the most numerous NCT tool in SWE-COM (N = 166) with multiple passages urging students to for instance ‘openly discuss different values’ (p. 14) and ‘respond to views in a way which…takes the dialogue and discussions forward’ (pp. 125, 126, 127) or ‘deepens or broadens the conversation’ (pp. 113, 128).

SWE-COM contains numerous (N = 49) passages that relate to the act of working with others (collaboration), for instance frequent references to the importance of cooperation and working together in democratic ways. The Swedish curriculum encourages working together in participatory groups like ‘ensembles’ (p. 95), ‘councils’ (pp. 152, 165, 178, 189, 190, 191) and teachers are encouraged to aim at ‘enabling pupils to develop skills for creating and working…together with others’ (p. 211). The two references in SWE-COM that refer to conflict resolution mention ‘the purpose of the UN…international conflict resolution and international law in armed conflicts’ (p. 176) and that ‘teaching should in a balanced way illuminate the role that religions can play in society, both in the pursuit of peace and resolving conflict’ (p. 193).

The SWE-COM analysis identified 474 Positive Peace (PP) references (see Figure 4). Wellbeing was a very common code with 306 references (65%) (see Figure 5). Wellbeing is coded for text that indicated health, well-being (defined in holistic terms) and taking responsibility for the self or others. The analysis of SWE-COM resulted in six subcategories of wellbeing including: health (N = 126), physical exercise (N = 77), taking responsibility (N = 22), development (N = 14), caring or helping others (N = 4) and craft (N = 63). Health content in SWE-COM, for instance, urges students to be mindful of ‘nutrition, hygiene, and cleaning’, (p. 44) the curriculum affirms that ‘pupils should be given an opportunity to develop knowledge about what factors affect their physical capacity, and how they can safeguard their health throughout their lives’ (p. 50) and asserts the importance of ‘recreational and outdoor life’ (p. 50). Physical exercise in the Swedish curriculum includes numerous physical activities, indoors and outdoors. References to responsibility communicates, for example, that students should ‘develop their ability to take personal responsibility’ (p. 10) and to be considerate of others (p. 52). References that emphasize a commitment to development in SWE-COM state that education should include the ‘acquisition of knowledge’ (p. 18), building ‘a sense of community’ (p. 44), ‘ecological development’ (p. 47), and the development of ‘mental and physical health’ (p. 107). Pupils are also supposed to be caring or helping others. The text encourages pupils to assist in helping other people, to act with their best interests at heart and to take care of themselves as well as the environment. Finally, the curriculum contains a syllabus for craft that communicates the beneficial outcomes of mental/dexterous activity intoning that ‘working with crafts is a type of creativity…that involves a combination of manual and intellectual work, which together develop creativity, and strengthen belief in the ability to manage tasks in daily life’ (p. 203).

The Social Justice (N = 66) facet of PP includes text that refers to fairness, equality and tenets of equality such as the doctrine of Human Rights and other Rights-based content. The facet of Social Justice is repeatedly underlined in SWE-COM with multiple references to rights, minority and indigenous people’s rights, equal rights, the doctrine of Human Rights, Rights of the Child and gender equality.

SWE-COM relates content that affirms the importance of preparing students for participating and ‘taking responsibility, and applying the rights and obligations that characterize a democratic society’ (p. 17), to ‘further equal rights and opportunities for women and men’ (p. 10), and ‘the status and rights’ of minorities (p. 197). Pupils are also supposed to be stimulated to reflect upon ‘life issues of importance for pupils, such as good and evil, right and wrong, friendship, gender roles, gender equality and relationships’ (p. 177).

Gender Mind (N = 61) is coded for texts that indicate gender in the curriculum (man, woman, boy girl or the word ‘gender’) but not to biological terms that indicate sex, such as male or female. The Swedish curriculum repeatedly mentions the importance of gender equality. The curriculum frequently asserts that students should understand the role of man (humans), women and men, girls and boys at different time periods in human history. It also communicates that ‘the way in which girls and boys are treated and assessed in school…contributes to their perception of gender differences’ (p. 10), that the ‘school has a responsibility to counteract traditional gender patterns’ (p. 10) and should ‘work towards ensuring that both girls and boys have equally great influence’ (p. 17). The curriculum also states that ‘teaching should help pupils to develop their knowledge about, and giving opportunities to reflect over gender equality and the distribution of work in home’ and reflect upon ‘the relationship between socio-economic background, education, housing and welfare…to concepts of equality and gender equality’ (p. 193). SWE-COM avers ‘the inviolability of human life, individual freedom and integrity, the equal value of all people, equality between men and women and solidarity with the weak and vulnerable’ (p. 9) and affirms that the ‘school should provide scope for pupils to explore and develop their ability and their interests independently of gender affiliation’ (p. 10).

Peace Bond (N = 15) refers to passages that contain content that characterize positive human relations characterized by kindness and empathy. SWE-COM states that the school should promote a ‘spirit of solidarity’ (pp. 14, 178) with ethics and values that connote consideration to others, compassion, friendship and love. The curriculum urges students ‘to empathise with and understand the situation other people are in and also develop the will to act with their best interests at heart’ (p. 14), to ‘express their feelings and thoughts, and understand how others feel and think’ (p. 83) and how ‘teaching should create the conditions for pupils to develop a personal attitude to life and an understanding of how they and others are thinking and living’ (p. 176).

Link Mind (N = 11) refers to text that indicates a multi-polar (more than two) connectivity and refers to interrelationships, interconnectivity or interdependencies. Passages communicating content reflective of Link Mind intone, for instance, that ‘the school works closely with the upper secondary schools’ pupils will later attend [presupposing] close co-operation between working life and the local community’ (pp. 18, 20). Swedish students are encouraged to understand how the greater community is ‘linked together’ (p. 193) and establish contacts outside the school with multiple social poles. The curriculum also underline how it is important that ‘pupils are given opportunities to develop their skills in a process where thinking, sensory experiences and action work together’ (p. 203) and are given chances to ‘make connections to their own experiences, other works and phenomena in the surrounding world’ (pp. 25, 26, 27) and to see the world from a holistic perspective.

Text is coded under the category of resilience (N = 10) when it contains content suited to the managing adversity is some form. Resilience was frequently coded in SWE-COM in passages that communicated the importance of pupils being prepared to handle emergency situations. The curriculum also formulated the intention that ‘every pupil has the right to develop in school, to feel the joy of growth and experience the satisfaction that comes from making progress and overcoming difficulties’ (p. 11).

Prevention (N = 2) is coded in this study as an act that deters violence (violence is distinct from hazards in the environment). SWE-COM encourages pupils to ‘prevent and counteract all forms of discrimination and degrading treatment’ (p. 15) and to understand ‘ways in which vulnerable places can be identified, and how individuals, groups and society can reduce risk’ (p. 154).

Peace zone (N = 2) refers to text that denotes schools as safe spaces free from violence. SWE-COM avers that ‘the school should strive to be a living social community that provides security and generates the will and desire to learn’ (p. 13) and that, although ‘a sense of security, and self-esteem are established in the home…the school has an important role to play in this context’ (p. 13).

Eco mind (N = 0) maintains the standpoint of Arcadian Ecology, which intones that nature and humanity are equally significant and that the natural realm is not subordinate to the human one. SWE-COM contained no references that communicate the importance of harmonious living between humanity and nature.

Peace in subjects

Formulations in the curriculum focusing on elements of peace have an uneven distribution across the fundamental values and tasks for school, overall goals and guidelines and subjects (see Appendix 1). Evidently elements of peace education are part of the fundamental values and overall goals of teaching and learning in all subjects in the Swedish curriculum. However, references to peace are slightly more common in the syllabus for civics than in the chapters formulating the fundamental values and overall goals, 91 versus 90 (see Appendix 1).

Recognition of violence (ROV) is primarily evident in civics (N = 15) where the syllabus sets forth the violations of human rights and structural economic injustices. ROV is also part of the syllabus in geography, history and religion, making recognition of violence as a concern for social studies in a broad sense. But it is apparently not a concern for other subjects according to the guidelines (see Appendix 1).

Nonviolent conflict transformation (NCT) references are more evenly distributed across the 20 syllabi of the curriculum (see Appendix 1). Syllabus for Swedish as a second language, civics, physics, chemistry, mathematics, biology, Swedish and English all emphasize the importance of dialogue. But references to dialogue are absent in the syllabi of physical education, music, home and consumer studies, crafts and technology. Collaboration is emphasized mostly in the overall guidelines (N = 19) and in the civics syllabus (N = 14) while less so in ten other subject only (one or two references) and not at all in another ten subjects. The only two references to conflict resolution can be found in the syllabus of civics and religion (see Appendix 1).

We find a number of references to positive peace (PP) in the fundamental values and overall goal sections, distributed across all elements but eco mind. PP references are numerous in physical education and health (N = 112) and also in for instance crafts (N = 63), home and consumer studies (N = 46), civics (N = 46) and biology (N = 39). The numerous references to PP in physical education, crafts, and home and consumer studies can often be found in the wellbeing sub-category of PP, but resilience (N = 9) can only be found in the physical education and health syllabus and once mentioned in the fundamental values chapter (see Appendix 1). The civics syllabus holds 29 references to social justice while gender minded formulations are quite common in the syllabus of history (N = 12) and civics (N = 11) underscore the importance of gender. Also, the syllabus for religion holds a number of references to social justice (N = 8) and most references coded as peace bond (N = 4) (see Appendix 1). In contrast, syllabi of all languages hold only one or nil references to PP.

Discussion

Sweden as a ‘peace loving’ country is to some extent reflected in the curriculum. In comparison to other countries in PECA, we find that the Swedish curriculum with a total of 34 out of 100 is among the countries getting a C+ in the comparative PECA report (see Table 2). The total score indicates a presence of elements in line with theories of peace education in line with a mix of countries with different cultures and histories of peace and violence, namely Mexico, New Zealand, Scotland and Sri Lanka. In a global world in an ‘age of measurements’ (Biesta, 2009) we find that values of peace are still evident. Differences across national boundaries underline how education today may differ and need to be carefully considered from different perspectives (Rizvi & Lingard, 2009). The score indicates that the historical focus on peace in education is still present in the Swedish curriculum, at least in the formulations.

In light of UNESCO (2015) recommendations to promote knowledge, skills and attitudes we find how in theory, peace education holds three dimensions underlining the importance of knowledge about peace violations, skills for peaceful conflict resolution through non-violent actions and worldviews promoting positive peace building attitudes. Our more detailed content analysis highlights how in the curriculum knowledge, skills and attitudes are tightly interlinked. All three dimensions hold potentials to identify the challenges and opportunities in teaching to promote peace education ideals. Especially skills for conflict resolutions are today lacking in the curriculum, but the curriculum may also befit from focussing more on content helpful to promote recognition of violence and a promotion of attitudes making students more active in line with theories of positive peace.

Recognition of violence in the Swedish curriculum

The presence of ROV in the Swedish curriculum is a contrast to countries of recent and current conflicts like Northern Ireland and Israel. Thus, could it be that a peaceful history makes it possible to acknowledge violence in the curriculum? Apparently not, since Sri Lanka, a country with a recent past of civil war,3 also holds a curriculum emphasizing ROV. This highlights how ROV in the curricula is more than just a reflection of a peaceful or violent past.

We find that the Swedish curriculum in an international comparison is a curriculum which recognizes violence, but all elements of peace can be further developed. Our investigation shows how ROV passages in SWE-COM reflect a conceptualization of violence as predominantly direct (composed of physical threats or harm) or structural (systematic discrimination based on identity) (Galtung, 1990). Despite a small number of cultural violence references, the majority of the curriculum does not address violence as a mindset that leads to discriminatory or aggressive behaviour (Galtung, 1990). In addition, the curriculum tends to characterize violence as ‘interpersonal’ instead of societal or individual meaning that typical incarnations of violence such as racism, sexism and other ‘isms’ that delegitimize persons based on prejudices, stereotypes or negative contact (which lead to discriminatory behaviour that can be both structural and direct) are left unexplored as are personal harming where the ‘victim’ of violence is not others (whether groups or individuals) but the pupil (or teacher) themselves. Opportunities exist to increase both the multiplicity of violence recognized in the curriculum in future iterations as well as deeper engagement of the subjects of violence. Also, the transformation of violence in the society is linked to the transformation of personal violence (Boulding, 2000) (not merely interpersonal violence) and the next SWE-COM edition could include more references that include auto-violence (self-directed violence) by combining the notions of health and wellbeing to the inclusion of prevention of violence to the ‘self’.

SWE-COM contains (32) references considered instances of violence in this study (where the coded text was not recognized as violence (ROV) but an example of violence) and include: the Gulag, oppression and displacement of people, World Wars, Imperialism, colonialism, European dominance, dictatorships (p. 167), the Holocaust and other forms genocide, and crime, violence and organized crime (pp. 170, 171) and use of the word ‘Man’ to indicate ‘human’ in the text in multiple places. The 7–9 History core content (pp. 166–168) includes many forms of violence without describing such past actions as forms of deliberate but avoidable harm. To recognize such passages as forms of violence (ROV), in cases where the curriculum is presenting experiences or constructions of violence in the past, these illustrations could replace neutral or ‘absent’ language (where the violence is not contextualized) and communicate each instance of violence as violence (Derrida, 1974; Galtung, 1990). While it is not possible to transform violence in the past, it is possible to recognize past actions as forms of violence thereby contributing to a comprehensive understanding of forms of violence in the present that should be combatted currently and in the future.

Finally, though not considered in this analysis as a form of violence, the text does contain a passage that supports learning ‘names and location[s]of more important countries’ (p. 113) leading the examiners to presume the inference that geography includes both more and ‘less important countries’. Quantifying terms (more, less) may also indicate terms of ‘quality’ which would suggest discrimination otherwise challenged in the text.

Non-violent conflict transformation in the Swedish curriculum

The international comparison highlights how all curricula in PECA lack formulations to promote non-violent conflict transformation (NCT). And the Swedish score is among the lowest (see Table 2). In the Swedish curriculum, we find that the three forms of transforming conflict non-violently (NCT) uncovered in this study (collaboration, dialogue and conflict resolution) are left undefined in the text. While the techniques of working, talking and listening with others were repeated in multiple passages there is an opportunity in future curriculum statements to fully define the techniques identified in this study as forms of NCT. In passages that intone the importance of fostering democratic processes such activities are mentioned (and/or alluded to) in the text but not specifically connected to the practices of democracy (Howards, 2003). As dialogue, collaboration and group conflict resolution are democratic techniques future curriculum could more fully illustrate the tools of democracy as a process and include these three vital methods of working towards nonviolent conflict transformation (Howards, 2003).

While the PECA Project codes for NCT tools despite their utility in the text (we code NCT tools even if they were not being used in the transformation of conflict) there is a chance to introduce a nonviolence toolkit into the curriculum in the future that builds upon the three techniques already identified for example negotiation, mediation, reflective dialogue and active listening. The techniques presented as appropriate and desirable in this curriculum are equally applicable in conflict transformation and as conflict is a normal (and ubiquitous) condition of humanity both pupils and teachers may benefit from concretizing these techniques purposively (Sharp, 2005). Thus, teaching and learning conflict resolution could certainly be emphasized more in the curriculum to promote peace.

Positive peace in the Swedish curriculum

The international comparison highlights how the Swedish curriculum may promote positive peace (PP) in more diverse ways. Still, numerous facets of PP are present in this curriculum. Wellbeing includes a variety of considerations and values that lead to a more robust and capable human body as well as some mention of emotional, ecological, environmental (termed as surroundings) and intellectual development. It does not define these facets of development and what it means to work towards, for example, ‘ecological development’, or ‘emotional development’ and left unexplored the terms designate a drive for ‘more’ of something without fully stating what that ‘something’ (in this case development) means.

Additionally, while the curriculum mentions hygiene and nutrition and has multiple references to physical movement, sports and swimming, it presents the activities of recreation as largely fitness based and while physical well-being is an important facet of human well-being there are other, non-physical pursuits suitable for individuals with different interests and capabilities. The inclusion of content that supports holistic conceptualizations of well-being are encouraged in the future as wellness is much more than a physical attribute and can also include, emotional, relational, mental, financial and spiritual wellness.

This curriculum supplied frequent references that make gender (gender mind) prescient both referring to gender (and various gender identities) and espousing gender equality in repeated passages. The word ‘gender’ appears routinely in the text and although ‘gender’ is not defined specifically there are passages that refer to girls, boys, men, women and gender in combinations. The PECA Project codes for language that indicates gender, however, future curricula could clearly delineate what gender refers to (Reardon & Snauwaert, 2015) and provide techniques for further learning about gender. Gender is the social expectation of the sexes relative to how we perform our certain parts of our individuality (Reardon & Snauwaert, 2015). As gender is a facet of identity that all humans embody there is room for additional content in forthcoming iterations engaging with this perspective.

Correspondingly, the English language curriculum was analysed in this study although the Swedish language document is available. In the English text, the word ‘Man’ was used routinely to indicate ‘human’ and although this may be a translation concern (where the direct translation from ‘human’ in Swedish becomes ‘Man’) in future English editions, in order to strengthen the foundational equality witnessed in this curriculum in places where it specifically refers to all persons despite their membership in the male category the more gender-inclusive word ‘human’ should replace all usage of the word ‘Man’. Despite several segments where the English word ‘human’ was used in SWE-COM (human being, human body, human life, human relationships, human sexuality, human puberty, human activity, human culture, human condition and human needs) the English word ‘Man’ was used to refer to ‘human’ in 20 separate instances. Future iterations in English would do well to excise this term to include non-male gender in their comprehensive descriptions of humanity and practice broad inclusivity. Examples of how the English word ‘Man’ is used to refer to all humanity include: ‘the sciences have their origins in man’s curiosity’ (p. 105), ‘describe parts of Man’s early history’ (p. 154), ‘Man’s understanding of the past is interwoven with beliefs about the preset and perspectives of the future’ (p. 163), and, ‘technological solutions have always been important for man and for the development of society’ (p. 254). Communicating equality to people in Sweden who do not have Swedish as a native language would benefit from an English translation more in line with the original formulations regarding human beings. Pupils and their parents from other cultures should not meet a more gender biased document than their peers and other parents.

The theme of interconnectivity or interdependence (link mind) has only limited content in SWE-COM and while some passages refer to ‘dependence’ the subject of ‘interdependence’ (two-way dependence) is not perceived. The majority of link mind text related to multi-pole connectivity’s which gather positions without recognizing them an intrinsically interconnected. Holisticism is concerned with complete systems not individual facets that are dissected from the greater whole. Holistic thinking leads to responsible thinking as discrete effects are understood as the result of partial standpoints rather than genuine isolation.

Moreover, as mentioned above, several types of ‘development’ are mentioned in the text. Future curriculum could locate the purpose of developing various capacities as well as the desired outcome to meaningfully explain how, for instance, intellectual development (long the focus of education) relates to ecological development. The holistic opportunity to ‘link’ these facets of well-being is conceivable in order to integrate the developmental objectives in the text and present a comprehensive interconnectivity of well-being

The only facet of PP missing from the text in total is that of eco mind, the perception or declaration of equality and harmony between humanity and nature. The text does refer to understanding ‘relationships between people’s dependence on and their impact on nature and draw parallels to the life and ecological relationships of organisms’ (p. 111). This passage is an example of Imperial Ecology (Van Koppen, 2000) where the purpose of nature is to benefit humanity and while this statement alludes to the human dependency on nature it does not position the importance of nature as equal to humanity. And in the numerous references to environmental sustainability nature is always described with this imperialistic perspective. Future curriculum could expand upon terms of dependency sustainability (where the natural world is managed for humans) to espouse the Arcadian ecological viewpoint that values nature and humanity equally, recognizing that harmony between the two spheres results in a rejection of the human dominance model employed in Imperial Ecology. The current global crises of climate change, pollution and resource depletion are related to conceptualizations of dominion and private property that Arcadian Ecology can address. Eco mind was not present in this curriculum but re-conceptualizing sustainability facets to the purpose of sustaining nature would be a suitable step towards including this facet in future curriculum. In future research, it would be interesting to further investigate the relationship between eco mind and other formulations of sustainability further.

Overall, this curriculum has only scant references that relate to the PP facets of prevention and peace zone and limited content that relates to peace bond and resilience. Stating that schools should be places where violence is absent is a deliberate deed that names schools as places where violence occurs. Acts of prevention require recognition (you cannot prevent a violence you do not initially perceive) so increasing these facets of PP relates to the quantity of violence recognized (communicated) in the text. Just as a fire is prevented by the awareness of the possibility that flames can become dangerous, violence is prevented when one becomes aware that violence is possible. Schools can be declared violence-free safe-spaces after recognizing that schools can be places where violence occurs whether bullying, acts of cultural omission or other forms of discrimination. And, while environmental hazards direct pupils to the values of caution and responsibility stating violence as avoidable and preventing violence requires primary recognition, forethought and then forewarning. In these themes, future curriculum could specifically add content that both identifies (recognizes) violence and then unambiguously work to prevent the form(s) of violence communicated.

Likewise, resilience requires the exposure of pupils to problems, disappointment and failure. The purpose of resilience is to diminish negative consequences of disaster. This means helping pupils to see problems as opportunities for creative encounter. Similar to First-Aid training, the more pupils are exposed to a crisis the more capable they are at addressing the crisis in the future. Resilience means incorporating the human capacity to overcome obstacles and explicit content could be added in the future that foster this valuable capability.

Finally, the PP facet of peace bond was found in passages in the text that refer to relationships in affirmative light but the idea that positive encounters and caring and affectionate relationships was a goal of learning (a common tenet of peace education) is less clear (Bajaj, 2008). The content in this curriculum asks pupils to consider the qualities of relationships and future curricula could go further to relate personal development to positive personal, interpersonal and community relationship building and specifically contemplate empathy as the call to understand others can come from a place of calculation (to predict and maximize an advantage) or compassion and the PECA Project encouraged future SWE-COM curriculum to engage with the difference between these two goals. The current curriculum holds a number of formulations emphasizing international understanding in a non-direct way; for instance, the syllabus for history could easily be rephrased to better support peace bonds across borders, not just hope for bonds to be made without explicitly setting this forth in the curriculum.

Peace in subjects

Analysing the presence of peace elements in the subjects highlights how the presence and absence of peace elements in the curriculum is also a subject matter. Civics is at the centre of peace education in the curriculum with more references to peace elements than what is formulated in the value base and overall goals of the curriculum. This syllabus makes it possible for teachers to design learning to stimulate pupils to learn how to recognize violence in society. However, the lack of ROV in the overall aims and values and in other subjects risks making recognition of violence a matter of structures and international relations, not a matter of identifying problems in the local personal context, which is also important to support peaceful living conditions. It is also a challenging fact that conflict resolution is only described as a matter for studies of civics and religion to deal with. Making such an important element of promoting peace a small part of only two syllabi is highly problematic in the light of peace educational theories (Howards, 2003).

Dialogue to support teaching and learning is evidently central in many subjects, including subjects of the humanities and sciences. This focus may very well support a learning environment empowering pupils to actively engage with learning. However, the lack of dialogue in subjects with a strong focus on theoretical knowledge and practical skills is problematic in the light of theories of peace education (Harris, 2004). The syllabi for instance crafts, technology, music and home and consumer studies could certainly involve dialogue in the teaching in learning. The many references to wellbeing in physical education and health could certainly be combined with a promotion of collaboration, dialogue and conflict transformation.

Positive peace is today not a part of any syllabi of languages. The general promotion of positive peace in the fundamental values, and overall goals may be used in the languages to support positive peaceful connections to foreign cultures. An emphasis on positive peace when studying foreign languages should be a part of any syllabi. Not acknowledging conflicts (ROV) and positive peace when designing the teaching and learning of foreign languages is problematic. Combining the learning of a language with a cultural understanding could promote peace and should therefore be a more emphasized party of future, more peace-focused curriculum.

It is certainly a positive fact that wellbeing is set forth in many subjects, but this promotion of peace could certainly be combined with a variety of ways to promote positive peace.

Conclusions

For teachers, it may be useful to note that the curriculum holds a number of recommendations useful to promote peace through education. However, in practice, it may also be valuable to bear in mind that some important aspects of peace education are lacking or missing in the current curriculum. Helping pupils to identify violence also as an individual problem is one such aspect. It is important in peace education to identify how conflict is a natural part of being human, but violent conflict (mindsets and behaviours) can and should be handled in nonviolent and constructive ways. Promoting peace is not just about international engagement.

We find that the Swedish curriculum, in line with many other curricula, would benefit from a stronger focus on non-violent conflict resolution strategies. Promoting peace is not least a matter of acknowledging violence and problems in the classroom, and transforming conflicts into peaceful relationships and this matter is today on the shoulders of the teachers with lacking support from the curriculum. Teachers of civics today have a tall order with the many of elements of peace underscored in this subject. However, all teachers can implement peace in their classrooms by paying attention to the findings of this study. And language teachers may very well find that they wish to promote positive peace even if the syllabus does not emphasize this explicitly.

Recognizing violence, nonviolent conflict transformation and promoting positive peace are central concerns in education, and in the world, today. And a ‘peace loving’ country like Sweden would benefit from paying better attention to this when designing future curricula.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Knut och Alice Wallenbergs Stiftelse;Matariki Fellowship Program;

Notes

1. Translation from Swedish by author.

2. Global citizenship education may be defined in many ways but they all hold elements of peace, see for instance Jorgenson & Shultz (2012) and Stein (2015).

Appendix 1. Distribution of peace references in chapters of the Swedish curriculum

	Fundamental values & tasks	Overall goals & guidelines	Art	Biology	Chemistry	Civics	Crafts	English	Geography	History	Home & Consumer Studies	Mathematics	Modern Languages	Mother tongue	Music	Physical ed. & health	Physics	Religion	Sign lang for hearing	Swedish	Swedish as second lang	Technology	Total
ROV	4	5	0	0	0	15	0	0	2	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	0	0	0	0	31
Cultural Violence	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	3
Direct Violence	0	2	0	0	0	8	0	0	2	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	14
Structural Violence	2	3	0	0	0	7	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	14
NVC	4	22	2	14	15	30	1	12	5	7	0	16	8	11	2	0	18	8	5	14	22	0	216
Collaboration	3	19	0	0	0	14	1	0	1	2	0	1	1	0	2	0	0	2	0	1	1	0	48
Conflict Resolution	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	2
Dialogue	1	3	2	14	15	15	0	12	4	5	0	15	7	11	0	0	18	5	5	13	21	0	166
PP	23	32	6	39	23	46	63	0	16	17	46	1	0	1	4	112	11	22	0	1	1	7	471
Eco Mind	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Gender Mind	6	3	0	5	2	11	0	0	3	12	2	1	0	0	1	1	3	5	0	0	0	6	61
Link Mind	0	4	5	0	0	1	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	11
Peace Bond	3	2	0	2	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	2	0	4	0	0	0	0	15
Peace Zone	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2
Prevention	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2
Resilience	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	9	0	0	0	0	0	0	10
Social Justice	4	4	1	2	0	29	0	0	3	4	6	0	0	0	0	4	0	8	0	0	1	0	66
Wellbeing	7	18	0	30	21	4	63	0	8	1	38	0	0	0	3	96	8	5	0	1	0	1	304
Total	31	59	8	53	38	91	64	12	23	26	46	17	8	12	6	112	29	33	5	15	23	7	718

Note: References to peace in the table of contents is not included in this table (three PP references and two references to NVC).