Against the backdrop of the end of the Cold War and the rise of internal conflicts along ethnic, religious, and civilizational lines, UNESCO anticipated the increasingly pivotal role of teachers in sustaining peace. Its landmark 1996 report “Learning: the Treasure Within” emphasized teachers as agents of change in promoting understanding and tolerance in divided societies (Delors et al., 1996). In conflict-affected contexts, children’s recovery and resilience are fostered less through individualized interventions than through the sustained, relational presence of teachers embedded in everyday school life (Machel, 1996). A quarter-century later, UNESCO reaffirmed this vision by placing teachers at the center of a renewed social contract for education and emphasizing continuous professional learning (UNESCO, 2021).

   Responding to this normative agenda, this study examines the potential and limitations of non-formal teacher training for peace (NFTP) through a case study of an in-service program implemented by a local civil society organization (CSO) in a divided, post-conflict society. While teachers are increasingly expected to contribute to peacebuilding in line with SDG 4, which stresses inclusiveness and equity, formal education systems in conflict-affected contexts often remain politically constrained, institutionally fragmented, and resistant to transformative pedagogies. In such settings, non-formal professional development may offer alternative spaces for reflection, agency, and peace-oriented practice.

   The research site is Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), a country shaped by violent inter-group conflict in the 1990s and governed through a decentralized political structure that entrenches ethno-national power sharing. This settlement is mirrored in fragmented education systems characterized by segregated schooling, parallel curricula, and competing historical narratives. Leaders of the Muslim, Orthodox Christian, and Catholic communities continue to influence education in ways that undermine social cohesion (Kolouh-Westin, 2004; Kreso, 2008; Soldo et al., 2017; Komatsu, 2023). History education remains particularly contested: recent textbook analyses show that each community’s narratives differ in emphasis but share patterns of self-glorification, denigration of others, and self-victimization (Kovač, 2025).

   While textbooks reflect ethnocentric perspectives, teachers occupy a mediating position within classrooms. Research suggests that, when supported by adequate training and professional autonomy, teachers can soften divisive narratives and create spaces for dialogue (Kovač, 2025). At the same time, teachers’ own war-related experiences, unresolved trauma, and political constraints shape what is pedagogically possible (Emkić, 2023). Limited expectations for systemic reform underscore the importance of grassroots initiatives as spaces that sustain innovation and hope (Wansink, Dujković Blagojević, & Forić Plasto, 2025).

   Within this context, NFTP has gained prominence as a flexible and context-responsive mechanism for professional learning. CSO-led programs enable critical reflection on identity, power, and historical grievance—issues often marginalized within formal curricula (Bush & Saltarelli, 2000; Bajaj, 2011). Conceptualized as mid-level peacebuilding actors, CSOs can facilitate cross-ethnic collaboration and bridge institutional and grassroots spaces (Lederach, 1997). However, empirical research remains limited regarding how teachers experience NFTP and translate it into formal school practice in politically contested environments. This shortage of evidence makes its potential difficult to assess.

   This study addresses this gap through a narrative inquiry of an in-service NFTP program in BiH, focusing on teachers as active agents rather than passive policy implementers. The study addresses the following three research questions:

(1) What motivates teachers to participate in NFTP?
(2) How does participation shape their professional identities, agency, and pedagogical orientations?
(3) How do teachers perceive the role and limits of NFTP in advancing peace education within formal schools?

   The findings have broader implications for conflict-affected societies where education is heavily politicized and alternative modes of teacher professional development are needed to advance peacebuilding.

This study adopts a qualitative case study design to explore the impact of NFTP in post-conflict BiH. The research site was Sarajevo, the capital city, which has historically functioned as a multicultural urban center and continues to host a range of civil society initiatives aimed at promoting inter-group dialogue and social cohesion. Data were collected through in-depth, semi-structured individual interviews with 10 schoolteachers who had participated in an NFTP program implemented by a local NGO. Participants were drawn from diverse ethnic communities, school locations and types, and subject areas, including teachers of social sciences and religious education. Interviews were conducted in English with the help of a local informant either onsite or online for those residing in other regions during the summer of 2023. The program was designed to strengthen teachers’ capacity to foster students’ critical citizenship competencies for peace. Its curriculum was explicitly aligned with Matthew Lipman’s educational framework, emphasizing “4C,” namely critical thinking, creativity, collaboration, and caring (Lipman, 2003). The program also incorporated dialogical learning, experiential activities, and opportunities for intercultural exchange among teachers from different ethno-national backgrounds. Data analysis followed a thematic coding approach guided by research questions and Lipman’s four pedagogical dimensions. Transcriptions were aided by an automated transcription tool (Notta) and unclear segments were checked manually by the researcher. An iterative coding process was used to identify patterns related to teacher agency, pedagogical transformation, intercultural learning, perceived risks, and institutional constraints. Analytical procedures drew on established qualitative research design principles to enhance interpretive rigor and conceptual coherence.

The findings indicate that participating teachers highly valued the opportunity of professional development in a non-formal space and demonstrated curiosity, a willingness to take pedagogical risks, and a sense of mission to revive the more harmonious society BiH experienced before the war. Many participants described themselves as educational “mavericks” operating at the margins of formal institutional expectations. They perceived their professional role as instrumental in reshaping students’ perspectives on society and in challenging dominant ethno-national narratives. They found a space in and out of formal school curricula to implement learning activities inspired by the program. For example, one teacher organized an inter-entity panel discussion with religious scholars from different backgrounds and assigned students active roles as moderators and hosts so they experienced dialogue as lived civic practice. Others replaced textbook-driven recitation with visual prompts, small-group dialogue, and multiperspective discussion to address sensitive topics more safely. There are cases reported, albeit not many, that formal schools adjusted or reformed their curricula in accordance with the components of the program (for example, in Sarajevo Canton). Participants emphasized that NFTP functioned as essential moral and professional support in a politicized and risk-sensitive school environment. The program gave them legitimacy and confidence to use nontraditional, dialogical, and intercultural methods that might otherwise attract criticism. Equally important was the nationwide network of like-minded teachers built through the program. Cross-ethnic peer exchange and continued post-training contact fostered trust and professional solidarity across regions. Overall, the findings suggest that NFTP can catalyze pedagogical transformation within formal education systems, even in highly divided societies. By strengthening teacher agency, intercultural competence, and critical pedagogical capacity, such programs support everyday peacebuilding. Some participants shared practices with colleagues, creating multiplier effects. Long-term impact, however, depends on sustained support and systematic pathways linking non-formal innovation to formal education structures.

Bajaj, M. (2011). Education for peace: Global perspectives and approaches. Bloomsbury. Bush, K. D., & Saltarelli, D. (2000). The two faces of education in ethnic conflict: Towards a peacebuilding education for children. UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Sage. Delors, J., Al Mufti, I., Amagi, I., Carneiro, R., Chung, F., Geremek, B., Gorham, W., Kornhauser, A., Manley, M., Padrón Quero, M., Savané, M. A., Singh, K., Stavenhagen, R., Suhr, M. W., & Zhou, N. (1996). Learning: The treasure within. UNESCO. Emkić, E. (2023). Teachers, memory, and post-war classroom realities in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In L. Kasumagić-Kafedžić & S. Clarke-Habibi (Eds.), Peace pedagogies in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Springer. Harber, C. (2019). Schooling for peaceful development in post-conflict societies: Education for transformation? Springer. Kolouh-Westin, L. (2004). Education and democracy in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Education in Transitional States, 24, 495-509. Komatsu, T. (2017). Education and peacebuilding. In Oxford research encyclopedia of education. Oxford University Press. Komatsu, T. (2023). Education and social cohesion in a post-conflict and divided nation: Bosnia and Herzegovina. Springer. Kovač, V. B. (2025). “Us” vs. “Them”: A systematic analysis of history textbooks in post-war Bosnia and Herzegovina across three ethnic educational programmes. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 57(3), 271–286. Kreso, A. (2008). The war and post-war impact on the educational system of Bosnia and Herzegovina. International Review of Education, 54(3–4), 353–374. Lederach, J. P. (1997). Building peace: Sustainable reconciliation in divided societies. United States Institute of Peace Press. Lipman, M. (2003). Thinking in education (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. Machel, G. (1996). Impact of armed conflict on children. United Nations. Soldo, A., Hodžić, E., & Šušnica, S. (2017). Education in Bosnia and Herzegovina: What do we (not) teach children? Promente. UNESCO. (2021). Reimagining our futures together: A new social contract for education. UNESCO. Wansink, B.G.J., Dujković Blagojević, B & Forić Plasto, M. (2025). Thirty Years After the Srebrenica Genocide: Reflections on History Education in Bosnia and Herzegovina. EuroClio