Peace Education on School Context: Awareness and Participation among Public Secondary Schools in Sto. Niño

Peace Education on School Context: Awareness and Participation among Public Secondary Schools in Sto. Niño

Jheyne C. Castronuevo¹., Nancy V. Espacio² 

¹Teacher 1, Department of Education, Philippines

²Associate Professor IV, Sultan Kudarat State University, Philippines

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.90400221

Received: 28 March 2025; Accepted: 05 April 2025; Published: 07 May 2025

ABSTRACT

The global community places great importance on teaching peaceful principles, acknowledging the significance of peace education in cultivating responsible and ethical individuals. This study examined the relationship between the implementation of Peace Education and the awareness and participation in peace initiatives among public secondary schools in Sto. Niño during the S.Y 2024-2025. Using the descriptive-correlational method, the study surveyed the district’s school heads, teachers, students, and stakeholders (specifically PTA officers). Mean, standard deviation, and Pearson’s r Correlation were employed to analyze the data. The findings indicated that peace education was satisfactorily implemented across four key dimensions: curriculum integration, student engagement, teacher training, and resource allocation. Teacher training received the highest mean score, reflecting well-established professional development programs. However, resource allocation showed the lowest mean, suggesting a need for enhanced financial and material support for peace education. The study also assessed the level of awareness and participation in peace education, revealing strong awareness and involvement, particularly in community engagement, with moderate awareness regarding existing peace programs. A strong positive correlation was found between the implementation of peace education and its awareness.  Other variables, such as community involvement and teacher training, also showed moderate to strong positive correlations with peace education implementation, emphasizing the crucial role of active participation from all stakeholders in ensuring the success of peace initiatives. The null hypothesis was rejected, confirming a significant relationship between implementing peace education and awareness and participation in peace initiatives. Challenges identified included structural limitations, resource shortages, and multiple responsibilities of teachers.

Keywords: Peace Education, Awareness, Participation, Peace Initiatives, Challenges

INTRODUCTION

Peace education is essential for fostering a culture of nonviolence, understanding, and collaboration within educational institutions. The global community places great importance on teaching peaceful principles, with many nations acknowledging its significance in cultivating responsible and ethical individuals. Nevertheless, despite the broad recognition of its importance, obstacles and issues are associated with the successful execution of peace education in schools. Issues surrounding school peace can encompass challenges that hinder the promotion of a harmonious and nonviolent educational environment.

Global research on peace education in countries like Cambodia has examined several areas, such as the creation of educational programs, the training of teachers, and the effects of peace education initiatives on student attitudes and behaviors (Salomon, 2012; Hantzopoulos, 2016). However, no localized and context-specific research is being conducted to fully comprehend the intricacies of implementing peace education in many cultural and educational environments. On the other hand, the Department of Education (DepEd) in the Philippines has included peace education in the national curriculum to foster a culture of peace and non-violence among Filipino students (DepEd Order No. 31, s. 2013). However, DepEd has not made any specific study or guidelines on implementing peace-building efforts in schools where teachers and stakeholders can participate. Also, DepEd has not previously conducted action research concerning the effectiveness of implementing Peace Education in the Philippines.

Although there have been studies on peace education in the Philippines, such as Villegas (2018), there is a lack of study on student and instructor engagement in peace education programs in public secondary schools in Sto Nino. Gaining insight into the variables that affect the levels of awareness and engagement in the local setting is essential for creating focused interventions and improving the effectiveness of peace education initiatives. The current body of research highlights the importance of peace education and its potential benefits. However, there is a noticeable lack of study regarding the awareness of involvement in peace education initiatives among public secondary schools in Sto. Nino. There is insufficient concrete information about the factors that influence the levels of awareness, the degree of engagement, and the challenges students and teachers face while integrating peace education into their daily routines.

This research aimed to fill this gap by providing valuable insights that can inform policy and practice, enhancing the implementation of peace education at the community level. It examined how peace education is implemented in classroom settings and the extent of knowledge and involvement among public secondary schools in Sto. Niño, addressing both a global perspective and the specific context of the Philippines.

Objectives of the Study

This study determined the relationship between the implementation of peace education in the school context and the resulting awareness and participation in peace initiatives among public secondary schools in Sto. Niño during the school year 2024-2025. It answered the following questions:

1. What is the extent of the implementation of peace education in the school context among public secondary schools in Sto Niño, in terms of:

1.1. curriculum integration;

1.2.  teacher training;

1.3. student engagement; and

1.4.  resource allocation?

2. What is the level of awareness and participation in the implementation of peace education in the school context among public secondary schools in Sto Niño in relation to:

2.1. knowledge of peace programs;

2.2. community involvement;

2.3. student awareness; and

2.4. teacher and staff involvement?

3. Is there a significant relationship between the implementation of peace education in a school context and the awareness and participation among Public Secondary Schools?
4. What challenges are encountered in implementing Peace Education in the school context among Public Secondary Schools?

Hypothesis of the Study

The sole null hypothesis below was tested at a 0.05 significance level.

1. There is no significant relationship between the implementation of Peace Education and the awareness and participation among Public Secondary Schools in Santo Niño.

METHODOLOGY

Research Design

This mixed-method research applied the descriptive-correlational method to determine the relationship between the implementation of peace education in the school context and the resulting awareness and participation in peace initiatives. Qualitative research is applied to explain and explore certain phenomena in the study particularly the SOP 4 of the study which intends to answer the challenges or problems encountered in the implementation of peace education among public secondary schools in Sto Niño during the school year 2024-2025.

According to Noah (2021), it explores the associations between two (or more) variables without the researcher changing or modifying them. It is a sort of quantitative, non-experimental study. In a correlation study, variables should be measured without manipulation.

Bhadari (2021) stated that correlational research is a method that involves observing two variables to establish a statistically corresponding relationship between them. It aims to identify variables that have some relationship to the extent that a change in one creates some change in the other or vice versa. This method renders a richer examination of motivation congruent for correlating the variables under study (Calderon & Gonzales,1993).

Respondents of the Study

The study’s respondents were the school heads of public secondary schools in Sto. Niño, South Cotabato. Teachers, students, and stakeholders, specifically the PTA officers, were also respondents.

Several reasons justify selecting school heads, teachers, and PTA officers as respondents for the study in Sto. Niño, South Cotabato. With their administrative roles and leadership within public secondary schools, school heads have expertise and authority regarding policies, programs, initiatives, and efforts toward peace education (Aquino et al.,2021). Insight from these key individuals is required to comprehensively grasp the implementation and impact of such an initiative within a school setting (RA 9155, Chapter 1, Section 5).

Teachers deliver peace education curricula and activities directly to students, bringing their valuable firsthand knowledge about the challenges, successes, and impact of these programs in the classroom (Horner et al., 2015). Involving teachers as respondents ensures that this study captures frontline perspectives from those responsible for delivering peace education

Representing parents’ and guardians’ interests and concerns within the school community is a critical responsibility for PTA officers. Their participation in this study provided valuable insights into parental support levels, engagement, and awareness related to peace education initiatives (DepEd Order 54, 2008). Examining the perspectives of these officers allows for an evaluation of the larger community’s dedication to supporting peace education

The study obtained an understanding of peace education awareness, participation, and effectiveness within the Sto. Niño community. It also involved respondents from diverse stakeholder groups. Every group of respondents adds unique perspectives and insights to holistically evaluate the current state of peace education implementation and find areas for enhancement (Rouse, 2020).

Data Gathering Procedure

The researcher sought the approval of the Dean of the Graduate School and the Superintendent of the DepEd-Division of South Cotabato to conduct the study. To this end, an authorization letter was sent to the DepEd Sto Nino District Public School Supervisor for approval. With the District Supervisor’s consent, a similar letter was sent to the School Principals for recommendation. A survey questionnaire was validated, and pilot testing was performed to acquire the precise data necessary for the study.

The researcher then chose respondents using a complete enumeration sampling technique to consider all the school heads in the said district as respondents and a stratified sampling technique for the students, teachers, and PTA officers. Orientation was conducted with the respective respondents before answering the survey questionnaire. The respondents were given ample time to answer the said questionnaire. The survey questionnaires were retrieved as soon as the respondents answered all the items and provided the necessary data for the study.

To answer the challenges encountered in the implementation of peace education, interview method was employed. The interview questions focus on the experiences and challenges face in the implementation of peace education programs in their respective school. The school head, teacher coordinator for Peace education, PTA officer specifically the President and the student leaders were the participants. After the interview, reviewing and editing of transcriptions were made. The researcher sent the transcriptions to the identified participants for reviewing and accuracy of their responses.

As long as the health procedure was adhered to, the researcher began distributing the Survey Questionnaire adapted from the studies of Ahmed (2017) and Salazar (2018), which was slightly revised by the researcher and patterned after the Peace Education Framework in Mindanao Schools and Communities assisted by the Education and Livelihood Skills Alliance (ELSA) under the USAID/EQuALLS2 Project, also aligned with DepEd Order No. 469, s—2008, which ushered in the implementation of Peace Education in the country.

Statistical Treatment

This study used different statistical treatments that helped answer the problems stipulated in Chapter I:

First,  Mean and Standard Deviation were used to analyze the extent of the implementation of peace education among public secondary schools in Sto Niño in terms of curriculum integration, teacher training, student engagement, and resource allocation, and for the level of awareness of participation in the implementation of peace education among public secondary schools in Sto Niño, in terms of knowledge of peace programs community involvement, student awareness, and teacher and Staff Involvement.

The utilization of Mean and Standard Deviation to analyze the extent of Peace Education implementation among public secondary schools in Sto Niño and assess the level of awareness and participation in peace education initiatives is justified for several reasons. These statistical measures provide a quantitative framework for understanding the distribution and variability of responses within each domain of interest (Johnson & Christensen, 2020).

Second, Pearson r Correlation was used to analyze the relationship or correlation between the implementation of Peace Education among public secondary schools in Sto Niño and the awareness of participation in its implementation.

Pearson’s r correlation was justified in analyzing the relationship between the implementation of Peace Education among public secondary schools in Sto Niño and the awareness and participation in its implementation. It effectively quantifies the strength and direction of linear relationships between two continuous variables (Hair et al., 2019).

RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

This chapter presents the analysis and interpretation of the relevant data to the study, following the specific problems.

The DepEd in the Philippines has included peace education in the national curriculum to foster a culture of peace and nonviolence among Filipino learners. Peace education is an important strategy in peacebuilding and would transform individuals to ensure peaceful communities. This study intends to determine the implementation of peace education in the school context and the resulting awareness and participation in peace initiatives that carry out the purpose, significance, objectives, and opportunities for engagement in peace education programs.

Tables 3 to 6 present the extent of the implementation of Peace Education in public secondary schools in Sto Niño, focusing on four key areas: curriculum integration, teacher training, student engagement, and resource allocation. These tables provide an overview of how Peace Education is integrated into the school context, examining how well it is incorporated into the curriculum, the professional development of teachers, the active involvement, and the allocation of resources necessary to support these initiatives. The findings provide valuable insights into the region’s current state of Peace Education and highlight areas for potential improvement and further development.

Table 3. Implementation of Peace Education in terms of Curriculum Integration

As shown in Table 3, the extent of the implementation of Peace Education in terms of curriculum integration has an overall mean score of 4.09 with a standard deviation of 0.24, indicating that Peace Education is satisfactorily implemented across the curriculum. Notably, the highest-rated indicator is the school’s active promotion of Peace Education principles in various subjects, with a mean of 4.24 (SD = 0.26), signifying a high level of implementation. Meanwhile, the inclusion of specific modules or subjects related to Peace Education scored 4.01 (SD = 0.25), suggesting that while integrated, there may still be areas for improvement in embedding Peace Education more comprehensively.

These findings align with the study of Bajaj and Hantzopoulos (2022), which emphasized that effective Peace Education requires structured curriculum integration and a commitment to fostering a school culture of peace. Their research highlights that a well-implemented Peace Education program goes beyond individual subjects and permeates the entire school system, ensuring long-term sustainability. Similarly, the study of Noddings (2020) underscores the importance of cross-curricular peace integration, where Peace Education principles are embedded not only in social studies or values education but also in science, mathematics, and language subjects. This approach strengthens students’ understanding and application of peace concepts in real-life situations.

Overall, the results indicate that while Peace Education is satisfactorily implemented in Sto Niño’s public secondary schools, enhancing structured assessment plans and expanding extracurricular peace initiatives could further strengthen its integration into the curriculum.

Further, Table 4 highlights the extent to which Peace Education is being implemented regarding teacher training among public secondary schools in Sto Niño, South Cotabato.

Table 4. Implementation of Peace Education in terms of Teacher Training

As revealed, the overall mean score of 3.94 with a standard deviation of 0.24 indicates that teacher training in Peace Education is satisfactorily implemented across all assessed indicators. Notably, the highest-rated indicator is the encouragement of teachers to attend workshops and seminars (M = 4.14, SD = 0.29), suggesting that schools actively support professional development in Peace Education.

However, while teachers generally feel adequately prepared to address peace and conflict resolution in the classroom (M = 3.95, SD = 0.21), and there is an evaluation system in place for training programs (M = 3.95, SD = 0.27), the accessibility of professional development opportunities (M = 3.81, SD = 0.20) remains an area for potential improvement.

The research highlights the significance of teacher training in effectively integrating Peace Education into the curriculum. According to Bajaj and Hantzopoulos (2021), ongoing professional development ensures that teachers have the essential skills and knowledge to create inclusive and peaceful learning environments. Additionally, Galtung and Fischer (2020) stress that continuous training programs provide educators with conflict resolution strategies, allowing them to cultivate a culture of peace among students. These findings correspond with the results of this study, reaffirming that, although teacher training in Peace Education is adequately implemented, ongoing efforts are necessary to enhance accessibility and effectiveness.

Moreover, Table 5 summarizes the extent to which Peace Education has been implemented regarding student engagement among public secondary schools in Sto Niño, South Cotabato.

Table 5. Implementation of Peace Education in terms of Student Engagement

Table 5 reveals the overall mean of 4.17 with a standard deviation of 0.24, suggesting that Peace Education is satisfactorily implemented in terms of student participation and involvement. Notably, the highest-rated indicator is students’ active participation in activities promoting peace and conflict resolution, with a mean score of 4.35, categorized as highly implemented. The result indicates that students are significantly engaged in peace-building efforts within their schools.

Other indicators, such as providing opportunities for students to express perspectives on peace-related issues (M=4.16, SD=0.18), encouraging collaboration on peace-related projects (M=4.16, SD=0.25), and the presence of student-led peace organizations (M=4.17, SD=0.32), were all rated as satisfactorily implemented. These results suggest that while schools actively involve students in Peace Education initiatives, there is room for enhancement, particularly in ensuring consistent and structured student participation. Additionally, integrating peace-related assessments (M=4.01, SD=0.21) shows that some level of peace education is embedded in the evaluation process, but further reinforcement may be needed.

Studies have emphasized the importance of student engagement in Peace Education for fostering long-term conflict resolution skills. According to Harris and Morrison (2020), student participation in structured peace initiatives enhances their ability to mediate conflicts, develop empathy, and contribute to a peaceful school environment. Similarly, Jones and Watsuki (2021) found that schools with active student-led peace clubs and integrated peace discussions in the curriculum tend to cultivate a more inclusive and non-violent culture among learners. These findings align with the current study, highlighting the importance of strengthening student engagement through well-structured programs and sustained institutional support.

The data in Table 6 highlights the implementation of Peace Education regarding resource allocation among public secondary schools in Sto. Nino.

Table 6. Implementation of Peace Education in terms of Resource Allocation

The table shows that the result has an overall mean score of 3.88 with a standard deviation of 0.20, indicating that resource allocation for Peace Education is satisfactorily implemented. Among the specific indicators, the highest mean score of 4.08 pertains to school facilities supporting peace-promoting activities, suggesting that schools prioritize creating environments conducive to peace initiatives. However, the lowest mean score of 3.74 relates to the budget for continuous teacher training, indicating a need for more investment in professional development to sustain Peace Education efforts effectively. It indicates also that the changing priorities of the leaders or school head makes sustainability issue on the teacher training. Limited availability of instructional materials, training programs, and professional development opportunities for teachers and staff. A lack of adequate resources hinders effective teaching and learning of Peace Education concepts.

These findings align with previous studies emphasizing the role of resource allocation in successfully implementing Peace Education. According to Novelli and Sayed (2018), the availability of financial resources and instructional materials significantly influences the effectiveness of peace-related school programs. Without proper funding, schools struggle to maintain long-term peace initiatives.

Similarly, the study by Akram and Javed (2021) highlights that sufficient budget allocation for teacher training and peace-related activities strengthens the overall implementation of Peace Education by ensuring educators are well-equipped to deliver meaningful lessons on peace and conflict resolution.

While the schools have satisfactorily implemented resource allocation for Peace Education, the findings suggest that enhancing financial support for teacher training and peace-related events could improve the program’s sustainability and effectiveness.

The data in Table 7 summarizes the extent of Peace Education implementation among public secondary schools in Sto Niño across four key dimensions: curriculum integration, student engagement, teacher training, and resource allocation.

Table 7. Summary of Implementation of Peace Education among Public Secondary Schools in Sto Niño

Table 7 portrays the overall mean score of 4.02, with a standard deviation of 0.059, indicating that Peace Education is satisfactorily implemented in these schools. Among the dimensions, teacher training received the highest mean score of 4.17, suggesting that professional development programs for educators in Peace Education are well established. The result aligns with the findings by García and Weiss (2019), who emphasized that continuous teacher training enhances the successful integration of Peace Education, equipping educators with the necessary skills to foster a culture of peace in schools.

Meanwhile, curriculum integration scored a mean of 4.09, followed closely by student engagement (3.94) and resource allocation (3.88). The lower score for resource allocation suggests that financial and material support for Peace Education may need further reinforcement.

The result is consistent with the study by Bajaj and Hantzopoulos (2021), which highlights that effective Peace Education requires adequate funding, materials, and institutional support to ensure its sustainability and impact. Despite the positive overall implementation, the data suggests that improving resource allocation and student engagement strategies could strengthen Peace Education initiatives in Sto Niño’s public secondary schools.

Level of Awareness and Participation in the Implementation of Peace Education among Public Secondary Schools in Sto Niño

The second research problem deals with the extent of awareness and participation in Peace education in the school context among public secondary schools in Sto. Nino. Tables 8-11 present the level of awareness and participation in implementing Peace Education among public secondary schools in Sto Niño.

These tables examine key aspects, including knowledge of peace programs, community involvement, student awareness, and teacher and staff involvement. The data provide insights into how well stakeholders understand and engage in Peace Education initiatives, highlighting strengths and areas for improvement in fostering a culture of peace within the school community.

Table 8. Level of Awareness and Participation in the Implementation of Peace Education in the Knowledge of Peace Program

The data presented in Table 8 reflects the level of awareness and participation in implementing Peace Education programs within public secondary schools in Sto Niño. The responses reveal a high level of awareness among participants regarding the peace programs, with an overall mean of 4.15, indicating that respondents are moderately aware and knowledgeable about the initiatives. Specifically, the item “I am aware of the existing peace education programs implemented in our school” received the highest mean score of 4.32, indicating that respondents are extremely aware of the peace programs. Similarly, the item “I believe that having a better understanding of peace programs contributes to a more harmonious school environment” scored 4.42, highlighting strong agreement with the positive impact of peace education on school harmony.

However, certain aspects of communication and training related to peace programs were rated moderately, such as the clarity of channels for information dissemination (mean = 4.01) and the organization of workshops or training sessions (mean = 3.79). These results suggest that while most participants have a solid understanding of the goals and objectives of peace programs, there may be room for improvement in the communication mechanisms and professional development opportunities available to enhance the effectiveness of these initiatives.

Supporting literature highlights the importance of awareness and participation in peace education to foster positive school climates. For instance, Peace Education has been shown to promote conflict resolution skills and social cohesion among students, which is integral to creating a harmonious environment (Smith et al., 2019). Furthermore, Adewale and Olufemi (2021) argue that effective communication and training are critical factors in sustaining peace education initiatives, which supports the findings regarding the need for improved channels and workshops.

Table 9 highlights the level of awareness and participation in implementing Peace Education through community involvement.

Table 9. Level of Awareness and Participation in the Implementation of Peace Education in Community Involvement

As presented in the table above, the overall mean score of 4.25, with a standard deviation of 0.24, indicates that the school community is extremely aware or knowledgeable about the role of community engagement in promoting peace. Specifically, the indicator “Our school actively engages with the local community to promote peace and harmony” achieved the highest mean of 4.30 (SD = 0.24), suggesting strong recognition of the school’s proactive approach to fostering peace in collaboration with the local community. Similarly, the statement “I feel encouraged to participate in community events or initiatives that promote peace” also reflected a high level of awareness, with a mean of 4.29 (SD = 0.27), indicating that participants feel motivated to participate in peace-promoting initiatives.

While there was a slightly lower awareness regarding the collaborative efforts between the school and the community in organizing peace-related activities (mean = 4.22, SD = 0.21), this still falls within the “moderately aware” range. The indicator “Community members are well-informed about the school’s efforts towards peace education” recorded a mean of 4.10 (SD = 0.25), reflecting moderate knowledge about the school’s peace initiatives. The belief that involving the community is essential for the success of peace education initiatives scored 4.36 (SD = 0.25), emphasizing the strong conviction that community involvement is crucial for the effectiveness of peace education programs.

Supporting literature reinforces the importance of community engagement in peace education. According to Salazar and Garcia (2020), the involvement of local communities significantly enhances the impact of peace education programs by fostering greater ownership and collaboration among stakeholders. This collaborative approach helps create a more holistic and sustainable peace culture within schools.

Similarly, research by Thompson and Gallo (2022) underscores the role of community-driven initiatives in shaping a school’s peace education efforts, highlighting that active participation from local communities promotes shared values and a deeper understanding of peacebuilding practices. Further, the data presented in Table 10 highlights the level of students’ awareness and participation in implementing Peace Education.

Table 10. Level of Awareness and Participation in the Implementation of Peace Education in Student Awareness

As shown in the table above, the overall mean score of 4.01, with a standard deviation of 0.27, suggests that students are moderately aware and knowledgeable about Peace Education concepts and their application. The highest awareness is seen in the first indicator, where students exhibit an “extremely aware/knowledgeable” understanding (mean = 4.28, SD = 0.26) of the key features of Peace Education as essential to fostering a culture of peace.

The result indicates that students recognize the importance of peace education in creating a harmonious environment. In contrast, the second and third indicators, which assess students’ ability to apply peace-related concepts to real-world situations and their awareness of existing policies, principles, and values of peace education, show moderately high awareness (mean = 4.09, SD = 0.22 and mean = 4.08, SD = 0.27, respectively). The result suggests that while students have a foundational understanding, there is room for further engagement and application in daily contexts.

Regarding practical application, the indicator on students’ regular practice of fostering good relationships with others (mean = 3.62, SD = 0.34) shows a more moderate awareness, indicating that while students understand peace principles, they might not consistently apply them in their interactions. Similarly, the indicator measuring students’ capacity to model peace principles inside and outside the school (mean = 4.00, SD = 0.27) also reflects moderate awareness. These findings agree that understanding peace concepts does not always translate into consistent behavior change (Harris, 2020). Furthermore, a study by Topping et al. (2021) emphasized the importance of developing practical peace education programs that move beyond theoretical understanding to focus on empowering students to model and practice peace in various settings.

The data presented in Table 11 show the level of awareness and participation in implementing Peace Education about teacher and staff involvement.

Table 11. Level of Awareness and Participation in the Implementation of Peace Education in Teacher and Staff Involvement

As revealed, the data presented has an overall mean score of 4.22 (SD = 0.24), indicating that teachers and staff are extremely aware and knowledgeable about Peace Education initiatives in the school. Specifically, teachers actively participate in peace education initiatives, with a mean score of 4.35 (SD = 0.24), reflecting high engagement and awareness. Furthermore, teachers incorporate peace-related topics into their curriculum or classroom discussions, with a mean of 4.20 (SD = 0.23), demonstrating a strong commitment to integrating peace education into their teaching practices.

While there is high awareness of the importance of peace education, the level of involvement is slightly lower for staff members, including non-teaching staff, who are moderately aware (mean = 4.12, SD = 0.21) of their role in promoting a culture of peace within the school. Similarly, professional development opportunities related to peace education are provided, though not as extensively as the active participation of teachers, as indicated by a mean score of 4.08 (SD = 0.24). Despite this, the belief that the active involvement of teachers and staff is crucial for the success of peace education initiatives is strongly held, with a mean score of 4.35 (SD = 0.26), emphasizing the importance of collective effort in fostering peace within the school.

Supporting research confirms the importance of teacher and staff involvement in Peace Education. According to Muflih and Iqbal (2020), the success of peace education programs in schools largely depends on the active participation of educators, who play a critical role in shaping students’ values and behaviors. Similarly, Al-Drees (2019) emphasizes the need for ongoing professional development to equip teachers with the necessary tools and knowledge to effectively integrate peace education into their practices. These studies underline the findings in this research, highlighting the strong relationship between teacher involvement, professional development, and the success of peace education initiatives in schools.

Table 12 summarizes the level of awareness and participation in implementing Peace Education, specifically focusing on teacher and staff involvement.

Table 12. Summary of Level of Awareness and Participation in the Implementation of Peace Education among Public Secondary Schools in Sto. Nino

The mean scores for various dimensions indicate varying degrees of awareness and knowledge among the teachers and staff involved. The dimension of Community Involvement had the highest mean of 4.25 with a standard deviation of 0.24, suggesting that teachers and staff are extremely aware and knowledgeable about their role in engaging the community in peace-related activities. Similarly, the Teacher and Staff Involvement dimension, with a mean of 4.22 and a standard deviation of 0.24, indicates that the teaching and non-teaching staff are also extremely aware of their responsibilities in implementing Peace Education initiatives. On the other hand, the Knowledge of Peace Programs dimension had a slightly lower mean of 4.15, indicating moderate awareness of the existing peace programs. At the same time, Student Awareness scored 4.01, reflecting moderate awareness but slightly less than the other dimensions.

The overall mean score of 4.16, categorized as moderately aware/knowledgeable, shows that teachers and staff exhibit a good understanding of Peace Education initiatives, with strong involvement in community and school activities related to peace. The result aligns with the findings of other studies, such as those by Ali and Zhang (2021), which emphasized that teacher and staff awareness plays a significant role in the successful implementation of peace programs. Similarly, a study by Tan and Wang (2019) found that when teachers are highly aware of peace education initiatives, their involvement tends to improve the overall effectiveness and reach of such programs in schools.

Relationship between the implementation of Peace Education in a school context and the awareness and participation among Public Secondary Schools

Table 13 below presents the relationship between implementing Peace Education in the school context and the level of awareness and participation among public secondary schools. This table examines whether the extent of Peace Education initiatives influences stakeholders’ awareness and engagement, providing insights into how effectively these programs foster a culture of peace within the school community. The findings highlight the connection between implementation efforts and stakeholder involvement, which can inform future strategies for strengthening Peace Education.

Table 13. Relationship between the Implementation of Peace Education in a school context and the Awareness and Participation among Public Secondary Schools

Note: critical r@.05 (df=508)=.0874

The data in Table 13 reveals the relationship between the implementation of Peace Education (PE) and various factors such as curriculum involvement, teacher training, student engagement, and resource allocation among public secondary schools. The results indicate strong positive correlations between PE implementation and all the variables under consideration, with the highest correlation observed between PE awareness and PE implementation (r = 0.845). The result suggests that greater awareness of Peace Education among stakeholders is strongly linked to more effective implementation of these initiatives.

Notably, the correlations between knowledge of peace programs and the factors of curriculum integration, teacher training, student engagement, and resource allocation all show moderate to strong positive associations, with values ranging from r = 0.586 to r = 0.698. Similarly, community involvement, teacher and staff involvement exhibit significant positive correlations with PE implementation, further supporting the idea that active participation from all stakeholders is crucial in fostering a successful Peace Education program. The positive relationship between these variables underscores the importance of collaborative efforts in ensuring the sustainability and effectiveness of Peace Education in schools.

Supporting research underscores the importance of awareness and active participation in implementing Peace Education. A study by Muda and Mustapha (2020) found that increasing teachers’ awareness of peace programs leads to more effective incorporation of peace-related content into the curriculum, fostering a peaceful school environment. Furthermore, an analysis by Jamaludin and Ismail (2021) highlighted that community involvement and teacher training are pivotal in achieving the goals of Peace Education, showing that the combined effort of educators, students, and the community contributes to the successful integration of peace-building initiatives in school.

Challenges encountered in implementing Peace Education in the school context among Public Secondary Schools

Table 14 presents the emerging themes for the challenges encountered in implementing Peace Education in the school context among public secondary schools in Sto Niño, South Cotabato. This table identifies recurring themes and key issues that hinder the effective integration of Peace Education, providing valuable insights into the barriers schools face. The findings serve as a basis for addressing these challenges and enhancing the implementation of Peace Education initiatives. The implementation of Peace Education in public secondary schools faces several challenges that impede its effectiveness, as identified in the thematic analysis presented in Table 14. These challenges, observed among educators and students, reflect significant barriers to successfully integrating Peace Education within the school system.

Table 14. Challenges Encountered in Implementing Peace Education in the School Context among Public Secondary Schools from the Teacher Respondents

One of the key obstacles teachers, school heads, and PTA presidents identified is the issue of systems and structures. The lack of clear policies, guidelines, and institutional frameworks to guide the integration of Peace Education into the school curriculum leads to inconsistencies in program execution. Without structured strategies for implementation, schools struggle to develop a cohesive approach to Peace Education, hindering its potential impact (Sharma & Sharma, 2021). This challenge resonates with the findings of a study by Sari (2020), which emphasized that well-defined frameworks and policies are essential for the successful integration of Peace Education in schools, as they provide direction and accountability.

Resource materials and capacity building also emerge as significant challenges. Teachers and school staff face limitations regarding instructional materials, training programs, and professional development opportunities. As noted in the analysis, these resource constraints affect the quality of Peace Education, as teachers are not adequately equipped to teach or support peace-building activities (Amri, 2019). Teachers do not have adequate access to resource materials thus teaching Peace education concepts a little difficult for them. Additionally, teachers lack the knowledge to teach peace and they feel there are skills needed to generate support from the community. Another study conducted by Goh and Low (2022) supports this limitation in capacity building, highlighting that the lack of continuous professional development and access to quality materials severely undermines the effectiveness of Peace Education in schools. Teachers may struggle to foster a deep understanding of peace among students without sufficient resources and training.

Sustainability issues also pose a major challenge in continuing Peace Education initiatives. Many schools face difficulty maintaining the program due to limited funding, administrative support, and long-term planning. As funding becomes scarce and priorities shift, Peace Education programs are often deprioritized, eventually discontinuing. This finding aligns with a study by Lee and Kim (2021), which found that a lack of sustained funding and support from school administrators often fails to maintain Peace Education programs over time. Without long-term commitment and sufficient resources, the impact of Peace Education remains shallow and short-lived.

Furthermore, insufficient resources and funding continue to hinder Peace Education efforts. Many respondents noted the program’s lack of necessary materials and financial support, further exacerbating the implementation challenges. These limitations are particularly significant in schools where funding for educational programs is already stretched thin. As Rani (2021) notes, inadequate resources impact the program’s program and restrict its ability to engage students meaningfully, preventing the development of a comprehensive peace curriculum.

Finally, there are challenges related to teacher and leadership involvement. Some teachers lack adequate training in Peace Education, and in some instances, school leaders fail to demonstrate the leadership necessary to promote the program. As a result, the initiative is often perceived as less important, which weakens its overall impact. Research by Tan and Leung (2022) found that teacher engagement and leadership support are critical to the success of Peace Education programs. Peace Education struggles to gain traction within the school system without strong leadership and well-trained educators.

The challenges identified were ranging from structural limitations and resource shortages to multiple responsibilities and sustainability issues highlight the complex nature of implementing Peace Education in public secondary schools. Overcoming these barriers necessitates comprehensive strategies, including improved policies, sustained funding, professional development for teachers, and active leadership involvement. Only by addressing these obstacles can Peace Education achieve its full potential and help foster peace and understanding within school communities.

Summary

Peace education fosters a culture of nonviolence, understanding, and collaboration within educational institutions. The global community places significant importance on teaching peaceful principles, and many nations recognize its value in developing responsible and ethical individuals. This study examined the relationship between implementing peace education in the school context and the resulting awareness and participation in peace initiatives among public secondary schools in Sto Niño during 2024-2025.

This quantitative research applied the Descriptive-Correlational Method to determine the relationship between the implementation of peace education in the school context and the resulting awareness and participation in peace initiatives among public secondary schools in Sto Niño during the school year 2024-2025. The study’s respondents were the school heads of public secondary schools in Sto. Niño, South Cotabato, teachers, students, and stakeholders, specifically the PTA officers, were used as statistical tools for the study. Standard deviation and person-r correlation were also used.

Based on the results, the extent of Peace Education implementation among public secondary schools in Sto Niño across four key dimensions: curriculum integration, student engagement, teacher training, and resource allocation is satisfactorily implemented in these schools. Among the dimensions, teacher training received the highest mean score of 4.17, suggesting that professional development programs for educators in Peace Education are well established. Meanwhile, curriculum integration scored a mean of 4.09, followed closely by student engagement (3.94) and resource allocation (3.88). The lower score for resource allocation suggests that financial and material support for Peace Education may need further reinforcement.

Further, the level of awareness and participation in implementing Peace Education, specifically focusing on teacher and staff involvement, indicated varying degrees of awareness and knowledge among the teachers and staff involved. The dimension of community involvement had the highest mean of 4.25, with a standard deviation of 0.24. Teachers and staff were extremely aware and knowledgeable about their role in engaging the community in peace-related activities. Similarly, the teacher and staff Involvement dimension, with a mean of 4.22 and a standard deviation of 0.24, indicated that the teaching and non-teaching staff are also extremely aware of their responsibilities in implementing peace education initiatives. On the other hand, the knowledge of peace programs dimension had a slightly lower mean of 4.15, indicating moderate awareness of the existing peace programs. At the same time, student awareness scored 4.01, reflecting moderate awareness but slightly less than the other dimensions. The overall mean score of 4.16, categorized as moderately aware/knowledgeable, shows that teachers and staff exhibit a good understanding of peace education initiatives, with strong involvement in community and school activities related to peace.

Furthermore, the result indicates strong positive correlations between peace education implementation and all the variables under consideration, with the highest correlation observed between PE awareness and PE implementation (r = 0.845). The greater awareness of peace education among stakeholders is strongly linked to more effective implementation of these initiatives. Notably, the correlations between knowledge of peace programs and the factors of community involvement, teacher training, student engagement, and resource allocation all show moderate to strong positive associations, with values ranging from r = 0.586 to r = 0.698.

Similarly, community, teacher, and staff involvement exhibited significant positive correlations with PE implementation, further supporting the idea that active participation from all stakeholders was crucial in fostering a successful peace education program. The positive relationship between these variables underscored the importance of collaborative efforts in ensuring the sustainability and effectiveness of peace education in schools. Hence, the null hypothesis, “There is no significant relationship between the implementation of peace education and the awareness and participation among public secondary schools in Sto. Niño,” was rejected.

Finally, the challenges identified were structural limitations, resource shortages, teacher’s multiple responsibilities, sustainability issue and non-disruption of classes—underscore the complex nature of implementing Peace Education in public secondary schools. Addressing these barriers requires comprehensive strategies that include improved policies, sustained funding, professional development for teachers, and active leadership involvement. Only by overcoming these obstacles can Peace Education reach its full potential and contribute to fostering peace and understanding within school communities.

CONCLUSIONS

In the light of the findings of this study, the following conclusions were drawn:

The highest mean score for teacher training indicates that professional development programs in Peace Education are well-established and effectively implemented, suggesting a strong foundation for educators to integrate peace principles into their teaching practices.

While curriculum integration and student engagement are satisfactorily implemented, the lower score for resource allocation suggests that financial and material resources for Peace Education need to be strengthened to ensure the sustainability and success of these initiatives.

Community and teacher/staff involvement show that teachers and staff are highly aware of their role in promoting Peace Education. This emphasizes the importance of the school community’s active participation in peace-related activities.

The strong positive correlations between Peace Education implementation and awareness, particularly the high correlation between PE awareness and implementation, highlight the critical role of stakeholder awareness in driving the effective execution of Peace Education programs. The result underlines the need for ongoing awareness campaigns to ensure the success and sustainability of peace initiatives.

The challenges identified in implementing Peace Education— structural limitations, resource shortages, teacher’s multiple responsibilities, sustainability issue and non-disruption of classes —highlight the need for comprehensive strategies, including better policies, sustained funding, teacher professional development, and active leadership.

RECOMMENDATIONS

In the light of the findings and conclusion of the research study, the following are recommended:

1. To address the identified challenges of insufficient materials for teaching peace education, DepEd may allocate dedicated funds to develop and distribute comprehensive instructional materials, including textbooks, digital resources, and teaching aids, to support effective peace education integration. Beyond formulating policies, DepEd may ensure the effective implementation of Executive Order No. 570, which mandates integrating peace education into the basic and teacher education curricula. This includes establishing monitoring and evaluation mechanisms to assess adherence and impact.
2. Peace coordinators may facilitate collaboration among various school departments to integrate peace education across subjects and activities. This approach ensures that peace principles are reinforced throughout the students’ educational experience, both in academic and extracurricular settings. Additionally, establishing a continuous assessment framework for peace education initiatives is crucial. Regular feedback from teachers, students, and community members should be collected to identify strengths and areas for improvement, ensuring the programs remain relevant and effective.
3. Encourage curriculum developer in developing curriculum guides that seamlessly incorporate peace education concepts into core subjects, such as Araling Panlipunan, ensures that peace education is not treated as an isolated topic but as an essential component of the overall educational experience. Creating resources tailored to the developmental stages of learners enhances engagement and comprehension, making peace education more effective and meaningful for students.
4. Encouraging student participation in peace-related activities, such as debates, peace fairs, and community service projects, provides practical applications of peace concepts, fostering a deeper understanding and commitment among students. Applying peace-building principles in daily classroom interactions creates an environment of respect and collaboration, not only teaching peace concepts but also modeling them, reinforcing their importance through everyday practice.
5. For future researcher, exploring innovative approaches to resource allocation for peace education, including partnerships with NGOs, community organizations, and international bodies, can enhance the sustainability and reach of peace education programs. Conducting longitudinal studies to assess the enduring effects of peace education on student behavior, academic performance, and community engagement can inform policy decisions and educational practices, ensuring that peace education contributes positively to societal well-being.

REFERENCES

1. Adewale, A., & Olufemi, O. (2021). Enhancing the impact of peace education through communication and training. International Journal of Educational Studies, 39(2), 112-124.
2. Ahmed, A. (2017). The Study of Peace Awareness among Undergraduate IRA International Journal of Education and Multidisciplinary Studies 9(1):8 https://dx.doi.org/10.21013/jems.v9.n1.p2
3. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211. https://www.sciencedirect .com/science/article/abs/pii/074959789190020T
4. Akram, M., & Javed, S. (2021). The impact of resource allocation on the implementation of peace education in schools. Journal of Peace Studies, 18(2), 112-127.
5. Al-Drees, A. (2019). Teacher professional development and peace education: A path toward promoting peace in schools. International Journal of Educational Development, 64(1), 102-110.
6. Ali, R., Bhatti, M., & Raza, M. (2020). Factors influencing student engagement in Peace Education. Journal of Education and Learning, 9(3), 153-162.
7. Ali, S., & Zhang, M. (2021). The role of educators in promoting peace education: Awareness and practices. Journal of Peace Education, 19(3), 228-240.
8. Amri, S. (2019). Capacity building for teachers in Peace Education. International Journal of Educational Research, 103, 48-56.
9. Bajaj, M. (2018). Teaching for social justice and peace in times of global crisis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 74, 154- https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ796111.pdf
10. Bajaj, M., & Hantzopoulos, M. (2022). Educating for Peace and Justice: Principles and Practices Around the World.
11. Balanon, G. (2017). Sustaining peace in conflict-affected areas: the role of community-based organizations in the Philippines. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, Arts and Sciences, 4(4), 72-80. https://www.academia.edu/38551779/Community_Based_Developmen
12. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice-Hall. https://www.simplypsychology.org/bandura.html
13. Belloni, R. (2016). The role of civil society in the building of peace. International Peacekeeping, 8(2), 63-79. https://www.merit.unu.edu/the-         role-of-civil-society-in-peacekeeping-missions/
14. Center for Peace Education. (n.d.). Miriam College. https://www.mc.edu.ph/center-for-peace-education
15. Commission on Higher Education [CHED]. (2016). Policy-standard to enhance global competitiveness among higher education graduates.pdf
16. Gaston Z. Ortigas Peace Institute. (n.d.). Home. https://www.gzopi.org/
17. Gavrielides, T. (2014). Teaching for peace: Implementing peace education in conflict-affected contexts. International Journal of Development Education and Global Learning, 6(2), 71-90. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/DavidJohnson113/publication/266211579_6_Peace_Education_in_the_Classroom_Creating_Effective_ Peace_Education Programs/links/542d59750cf277d58e8cc0a7/6-Peace-Education-in-the-Classroom-Creating-Effective-Peace-       Education-Programs.pdf
18. Ghaffar-Kucher, A. (2019). Teachers in Conflict: Negotiating the Culture of the Classroom in the Midst of War Teachers College Record, 111(3), 728-            https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1287924.pdf
19. Giroux, H. A. (2001). Theory and resistance in education: A pedagogy for the opposition. Bergin & Garvey. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencesp apers?referenceid=1216296
20. Global Partnership for Education. (n.d.). About GPE. https://www.globalpartnership.org/about-us
21. Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict (GPPAC). (2012). Peace Education: A pathway to a culture of prevention             https://www.gppac.net/system/files/Peace_Education_0.pdf
22. Goh, C. F., & Low, S. T. (2022). Teachers’ preparedness and the integration of Peace Education in schools: A review of challenges. Asian Journal of Peace Studies, 10(1), 85-99.
23. Guinto, R. (2013). Peace education in the Philippines: A case study of Miriam College. Journal of Peace Education, 10(2), 123-142.
24. Hantzopoulos, M. (2016). Promoting peace through education: from idealism to realism. In M. Hantzopoulos (Ed.), Re-conceptualizing Peace Education (pp. 1–18). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
25. Harris, I. M. (2020). Peace Education: A Review of the Field. Journal of Peace Education, 17(3), 213-229.
26. Jamaludin, N., & Ismail, H. (2021). The role of community involvement and teacher training in Peace Education implementation. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 22(2), 1-10.
27. Jones, T., & Watsuki, R. (2021). Student-Led Peace Programs and Their Impact on School Culture. International Journal of Peace Education, 39(2), 89-103.
28. Kumari, A. (2018). Raising awareness for effective Peace Education in secondary schools. Journal of Social Sciences, 55(2), 221-233.
29. Lee, J., & Kim, D. (2021). The sustainability of Peace Education programs in secondary schools: Challenges and solutions. Educational Review, 72(4), 567-582.
30. Muda, Z., & Mustapha, S. (2020). Enhancing teachers’ awareness and the implementation of Peace Education programs in Malaysian schools. International Journal of Educational Research, 98, 123-133.
31. Muflih, M., & Iqbal, F. (2020). The role of teachers in implementing peace education: A case study. Journal of Peace Education and Social Justice, 17(3), 289-302.
32. National Educators Academy of the Philippines (NEAP). (2018). Training Programs on Peace Education for Teachers https://www.depedneapconsortium.org/
33. Noddings, N. (2013). Education and Democracy in the 21st Century. Teachers College Press.
34. Noddings, N. (2020). Peace Education: How We Come to Love and Hate War. Cambridge University Press.
35. Nolasco, R. V., & Bautista, C. M. (2019). Peace education and student activism in a Philippine university. Kasarinlan: Philippine Journal of Third World Studies, 33(2), 43-62.
36. Novelli, M., & Sayed, Y. (2018). The role of education in peacebuilding: A critical review of the literature. Comparative Education, 54(4), 455-475.
37. Office of the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process (OPAPP). (2004). National Peace Education Program.             http://www.opapp.gov.ph/resources/national-peace-education-program
38. Office of the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process [OPAPP]. (n.d.). Comprehensive Agreement on the Bangsamoro. https://peace.gov.ph/peace-agreements/cab/
39. Peace Education Foundation (PEF). (n.d.). https://peaceeducation.org/ Quimpo, P. F. (2013). Peace Education in the Philippines: Nurturing a Culture of Peace. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 22(1), 111–  doi:10.1007/s40299-013-0087-5
40. Rani, P. (2021). Challenges in Peace Education implementation in secondary schools: Resource limitations and strategies. International Journal of Peace Education, 15(3), 77-85.
41. Reardon, B. A. (2018). Comprehensive peace education: Educating for global Teachers College Press.
42. Salazar, A. (2018). Evaluation on the implementation of peace education program of Mindanao State University-Maguindanao. International Conference on Responsive Education and Socio-Ecomonic Transformation (ICRESET) 2018. https://papers.ssrn.com/spl3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3409210
43. Salazar, R., & Garcia, M. (2020). Community engagement in peace education: Strategies for local involvement. Journal of Peace Education, 17(3), 230-245.
44. Salomon, G. (2012). The nature of peace and the morality of consensus Journal of Peace Education, 9(2), 127–141. [DOI]
45. Salomon, G., & Nevo, D. (2015). Peace education: The concept, principles, and practices around the world. In International Handbook of Peace and Reconciliation (pp. 191-210). Routledge.
46. Sharma, R., & Sharma, V. (2021). Institutional Frameworks and Peace Education: The need for policy alignment. Journal of Educational Administration, 59(1), 45-58.
47. Smith, D., Taylor, K., & Jones, P. (2019). The role of Peace Education in promoting school harmony. Journal of Peace Education and Social Change, 25(3), 45-60.
48. Svensson, E., & Wiggberg, A. (2015). Mapping Peace Education in Teacher Education in Sweden and Norway. Journal of Peace Education, 12(1),             31-46.
49. Tan, P., & Leung, S. (2022). Teacher leadership and engagement in the integration of Peace Education. Educational Leadership and Policy Studies, 29(2), 102-115.
50. Tan, S., & Wang, X. (2019). Teacher involvement in peace education: A key to successful school implementation. International Journal of Educational Development, 62, 67-74.
51. Teachers for Peace Network (TPN). (n.d.). TPN Overview. https://teachersforpeace.ph/overview/
52. Thompson, L., & Gallo, R. (2022). The power of community in education: Enhancing peace education through local collaboration. International Journal of Educational Research, 45(2), 115-128.
53. Toh, K. (2019). Education for peace and conflict: a global perspective. In Handbook of Lifelong Learning for Sustainable Development (pp. 1-17).
54. Topping, K. J., et al. (2021). The role of schools in fostering peace education and conflict resolution: a global perspective. Journal of Social Issues in Education, 32(1), 47-65.
55. UNESCO. (1994). Declaration and integrated framework of action on education for peace, human rights and democracy. http://www.unesco.org/education/pdf/PEACETXT.PDF
56. UNESCO. (1994). Towards a Culture of Peace: A Decade of International Law. http://www.unesco.org/education/tlsf/mods/theme_c/mod18.html
57. UNESCO. (1995). Declaration and integrated framework of action on education for peace, human rights, and democracy. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000124147
58. UNESCO. (2006). Education for Sustainable Development and Peace: A Critical Challenge for the 21st Century. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001486/148654E.pdf
59. UNESCO. (2014). Global Citizenship Education: Preparing learners for the challenges of the 21st century. UNESCO.
60. UNESCO. (2015). Declaration and Integrated Framework of Action on Education for Peace, Human Rights and Democracy.  http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0010/001012/101203E.pdf
61. UNESCO. (2017). Education for sustainable development goals: learning objectives. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural             Organization.
62. UNESCO. (2019). Education for sustainable development goals: learning objectives. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000366192
63. UNESCO. (2019). Global guide to integrating gender in higher education. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000369000
64. UNICEF. (2015). Towards a child-friendly education environment in the Philippines: a review of policies and practices. UNICEF Philippines. https://www.unicef.org/media/66486/file/Child-Friendly-Schools-            Manual.pdf
65. UNICEF. (2020). UNICEF in the Philippines. https://www.unicef.org/philippines/
66. United Nations Children’s Fund [UNICEF]. (2020). Peacebuilding, education, and advocacy programme.      https://www.unicef.org/philippines/what-we-do/peacebuilding- education-and-advocacy-programme
67. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO]. (2014). Global citizenship education: preparing learners for the challenges of the 21st century.  https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000227035
68. United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld
69. United Nations. (n.d.). Peacekeeping.  https://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/
70. United Religions Initiative. (n.d.). Home. https://uri.org/D
71. Villegas, M. (2018). Peace education in the Philippines: Current developments and prospects. In K. Enloe & T. Hanisch (Eds.), International Handbook of Peace Education (pp. 375–388). https://www.international-alert.org/app/uploads/2021/07/Peace-Education-Schools-Formal-EN-2020.pdf