• Creative teachers have realized that building peace behavior in the minds of men occurs in learning by doing combined with discussions.
• When human beings become parties in conflict they are caught in an adrenaline storm that sustains escalation of aggression. Training in mediation emerges as the realistic alternative in eliciting shared concern and shared solutions.
• If peer mediator training is given to selected pupils those with lower status become alienated. Mediation skills should be trained in role plays and discussions where everybody in the class takes part.
• When teachers realize that ACBM improves the atmosphere in the classroom supporting ACBM becomes a favorite project with those politicians who have time to think: here is a credible opportunity to promote peace and  prosperity in society.
• Teaching in the school subject English (or in the corresponding native  language) provides curricular opportunities for training in conflict resolution at theinterpersonal level so everybody in the class can join in.

Conflict-management-centered Peace Education develops verified techniques at interpersonal level but has so far been silenced by the viewpoint that the clefts from the interpersonal micro level to the international macro level are unbridgeable. This is an interpretation of an old political science that cannot handle the fact that a bridge between the levels already exists in the minds of common people. It is built by the communality between psychological structures in both politicians and private persons. At both levels constructive vs. destructive interpretations are possible and determine peace or war when listening to the antagonist. One can look for elements of common benefit or accentuate the encroachments made or allegedly made from the other side.

In the pedagogy for conflict resolution in the classroom the communality of the levels is brought forward.

Three principles of Peace Education for conflict management

• Peace can be created only between those who share concern about their discord (war, dissension).

• The foremost instrument for creating peace is a peace dialogue between the parties eliciting and increasing the insight that the discord (war, dissension) is a problem they have in common and evoking their endeavor to find a solution acceptable to both.

• Those who work for peace can initiate and facilitate the peace dialogue as mediators. They can act as judges only if they have the commission of both parties.

Finding the appropriate school subject where ACBM can be trained

Proposing managing conflicts tests the will of the authorities to support operationalising the ideals they publicly confess. Conflict management training can find its way into curriculum through teachers who realize that ACBM is for them not a new burden but a device lightening the existing burden.
 

Finding the appropriate school age

What does it mean that "all" become mediators

It is crucial that in order to secure equity-based democracy in the world community the school should take the chance of increasing the social skills of all in the area where all are dependent upon each other ó constructive conflict resolution. In other words: the mediators should not be chosen amongst high status pupils. Hopefully the school realizes that equity counteracts unrest in the school amongst those who are not selected. Some schools may even realize that equity as educational principle provides destructive conflicts in future society. Examples of recruiting elites (Note 3).
 
 

The above steps are derived from testing varying approaches I myself and teachers participating in my university courses have applied, discussed and improved. I will convey the results obtained as guide-lines to practitioners.
 
 

Experiences from Step 1. How to introduce the writing-task to the pupils?

Avoid giving examples of asymmetric conflicts, i. e. assaults, violence, theft, rape etc. where the guilt is so evident that mediation apparently is inappropriate. All unequivocally criminal acts are asymmetric; the task of ACBM is to train mediators but not future judges or fighters for justice.

If you have a tradition that the teacher always has to formulate topics, you do it. Here are just a few examples.

• "What I think of conflicts and of ways to solve them".
• "An eye-witness sees a conflict and thinks how to solve it."

"I cannot remember any conflicts right now". Then you may say that they may write something from their own imagination. When saying this you have to add the following: "But it is more important that you write something that really has happened. And specially interesting are your ideas about resolution of conflicts."

Then the teacher follows his normal routines which no doubt is to encourage those who finish early to think deeply and find something more to write.
 

Experiences from Step 2. Class discussions about conflicts aiming at their resolution

Take time to read thoroughly the essays or reports or film manuscripts or whatever you call the assignment. They provide an introduction to their way of thinking. Your know that behind their clumsy ways or telling and reflecting about conflict there are thoughts and observations that you will help them to verbalize. Consider whether some of their stories could be suitable as fictional conflicts for the role-plays later on.

Follow your usual routines for the school subject in which the writings take place. If you normally comment on their mistakes in writing you can do it now but give it less time.

Follow their problem formulation but lead them to strive for constructive solutions

The pupils usually tell more about the course of conflicts than about their solution. Pay attention to all the constructive endeavors you can discover. Be prepared to meet unexpected viewpoints from global problems to personal disputes. Avoid saying "We cannot discuss it here", be always ready to ask what are the constructive alternatives. Suppose that somebody maintains that population growth is the cause of the scarcity of resources which causes wars. Instead of refuting this opinion you may ask if war solves the problem by diminishing population. If not, could people who are better informed learn to settle conflicts by discussions leading to agreements?

If all the stories you have got from the pupilsí writings happen to be about symmetric conflicts (those between two students having approximately equal resources) and if mediation between symmetric conflicts is already in the minds of the students, then you may without further ado put the question "How does one solve conflicts?" The answers of the pupils will soon lead to the conclusion that "we need training mediation".

However, normally you have got stories from the pupils which do not fit to the forthcoming mediation training. The conflict stories which we are not going to train are (1) asymmetric conflicts, e.g. about violence exerted by a bully and (2) incidents which are not settled by just saying "Sorry!"

In the last case, it is rather simple to point out the difference between an "incident" and "real conflict". You say that the discussion will be about solving "real" conflicts, i.e. conflicts that are not solved by a simple excuses.

The difference between the "asymmetric" and "symmetric" conflicts is more complex but must be clear to everyone who is going to become a mediator. The reason is that parties who are involved in conflicts often regard themselves as innocent and offended and, in order to recruit allies, talk of themselves as being weak and being bullied by strong antagonists. In other words: the parties have the propensity of seeing their conflict as asymmetric.

Here follows a good example from a teacher who uses a blackboard when sorting out the above distinctions. We assume that the key-words on the board are clarifications written as conclusions after discussing the material the students have brought up and not statements that the teacher has written first and then explained later.

Beginners in mediation are easily trapped into the role of judge by a party who has the skill to make his suffering seem believable. What then happens is that the "mediator-judge" who supports one of the sides becomes a participant in the conflict. Your task as educator of future mediators is to distinguish between three cases (1) clearly symmetric, (2) clearly asymmetric, (3) unclear cases. The first and the third is the area of mediators but not the second.

These terms sound odd to the pupils and you have to use longer sentences. For example describing asymmetric conflicts: "conflicts between a strong bully (top dog, rowdy) and "the person who is weaker". For symmetric conflicts: "Conflicts between people who are approximately in equal strength".

As you see from our blackboard example, the teacher has called "asymmetric conflicts" simply "bullying". All examples the students give about situations where the attacking party is stronger are said to belong to the left part of the table and if the relationship is clearly equal they appear to the right.

I believe that the teacher has also taken the opportunity to ask: "What is the difference between the judge and mediator?" and, with some delicate prompting, elicited an answer something like this:

"A judge needs to decide which of the parties are guilty. A mediator is looking towards a constructive solution that both parties can accept."
 

Involving all in the class in the task-centering question

According to my experience it is thinking for oneself that has first to be stimulated in everyone the class and not in group-sessions where talkative ones outshine the timid ones. Only later, after every individual has answered, it is advantageous to check the ideas in group work.

The way I do it is to ask all the students to take a piece of paper and write three answers. On the board I write:
 

The students are told to write their own three suggestions giving everyone a chance to express his or her ideas.

After two or three minutes you say that you will gather all answers on the blackboard and discuss all the answers they have written.

You appoint one of the pupils as secretary, who writes the answers in the order they come, enumerating them. Begin by asking everybodyís first answer in the order they sit in the class. (If you would take them "in the order of spontaneity" it would not give all the same opportunity.) When all have answered the first round you ask them about their second answer and so on. If there are 20 students in the group this would theoretically mean 60 answers, but fortunately most of the answers are fairly alike so you ask the student who has given an answer resembling one already on the board if this could be combined with some of the previous answers. If this meets with agreement, the secretary indicates this by a short oblique stroke beside the same or similar answer provided by someone else. The number of answers on the board one can handle is not more than 15-20 so be prepared to omit a lot of conceptual nuances.

Condensing the students' answers

See to it that the secretary uses only the left part of the board leaving room for two other columns which you will write yourself. Tell the class that it will be necessary to condense these answers into three basic approaches to solving conflicts.

You then write on the board in column 2 (see the "blackboard" next page) (1) Avoidance, (2) Fighting back (aggression) and (3) Constructive discussion. Ask the students to explain these concepts in everyday language.

Do not to spend a lot of time on classifying all answers correctly. Spend it instead on discussing the assets and failures when applying the three basic approaches respectively. (Psychologically these "approaches" are considered as defense mechanisms against frustration.)

Certainly, we promote the group of answers that can be categorized as "Constructive discussion" but not with the intention to erect it as an ethical goal; discuss to begin with good and bad sides in all three approaches. I have a couple of examples that may appear in your discussion. I have organized them in a table just for your convenience, they are not to be written on the blackboard.
 

If you want condemn aggression, do it for rational reasons, e. g. that the most dangerous thing about violence as a means of solving conflicts is its escalation. When I illustrate the mechanism of escalation I use examples of recent conflicts which are known to everybody. This means that we analyze some actual international conflict. European youngsters know best the events in Yugoslavia. We state that before the civil wars started in the 90ís Serbs, Muslim Bosnians, Croats, Kosowars lived side-by side for many decades even though they had been in conflict some centuries before. Suddenly the leaders of the ethnic groups wanted to maintain their leadership over their own group and gave their backing to journalists who started to report some offences that a few members of the other ethnic group (say B) had committed towards their ethnic group (say at side A). When A people learnt this from mass media, some hotheads "gave back with interest". When mass media from B-side got these reports they also "gave back with interest" and so the conflict escalated.

What regards our favorite "Constructive discussion" we have to be realistic and recognize that it is difficult, nearly impossible, to listen constructively to the "the other side" when being a party in conflict.

Thatís why we need a mediator.

Asking all pupils about their opinion "How people solve conflicts" takes at least one hour; if the discussions are tense, allow two hours ó but not more. You need to keep their interest.

At the following page there is an example of condensing the studentsí answers on the blackboard.
 
 
 

How does a good mediator act?

If there is a favorable response, you put the question about mediator qualities but do not answer yourself it before you have waited for their answer. Write the good answers on the board.

Listing examples of all desirable mediator qualities would take much space in the present article. Just check that the students have a good answer upon the question: "Why should the mediator listen to the parties?" (It is, of course, to get materials from the parties themselves to be used in the final mediation session.)

Clarify the concept "shuttle diplomacy"

Experiences from Step 3.Training of mediation in triadic role plays

When the role-plays begin, the story is distributed to all the training groups on small pieces of paper. In is important that everyone in the class follow the same story, which will be of importance in comparing different mediation approaches.

The teacher gives play instructions: the class will be divided into three-person groups. Two students play the "parties", the third plays a "mediator". Say that the mediator is the one whose training is most important. If there is time to change the roles every member of a group will get the opportunity to play mediator.

It is desirable that the school should provide tape-recorders to all three-person groups. If not, let the available recorders be shared between the groups but without breaking complete sessions of mediation dialogues.

Role play poses a small problem of organization. As it is absolutely necessary that the mediator should prepare the parties separately in "shuttle diplomacy" it means that while the mediator talks with one of the parties the other is inactive. The teacher has, therefore, to find something for the idle party to do. Have just one mediator (Note 4)

Discussing the role of the mediator before and between the role plays

A degree of success is necessary in the studentsí first attempts, so you need to give for the mediators some elementary rules (often corroborating the principles they have got so far). On the other hand you should avoid disturbing their own initiative by giving too many instructions in advance.

In the following section you will find a sample of "distinctions" "answers-and-questions" and "guidelines" which may serve you as suggestions for your own ways to guide the young mediators. You decide which of them you need and in which order you take them. If you observe that mediators are going wrong you may also interrupt in a mild-spoken way and have a general discussion.
 

Note that the mediator is not obliged to do marvels. If one or both of the parties enjoy the conflict, the game concludes here. This seldom happens but you have to be prepared.
 

Differentiating between "peer adviser" and "peer mediator"

A tip for self-training for the teacher as a beginner in ACBM

This way of working with a "reference group" can be recommended as a good self-training device for all beginners in ACBM. But NB: (1) This group was just a temporary arrangement for the teacherís own acquiring of routines and not a standard method a teacher can use after getting experienced. (2) After working with this group we completed ACBM with the whole class.

Analyzing the most common reasons for mediator failure

I have not yet met a full-fledged mediator among the youngsters even if I can imagine that they may exist. However, all peer mediators have, sooner or later, grasped my points and fulfilled their mediator task with success. I believe that the reader will find it useful if I will begin by giving examples of the most common shortcomings at their first mediation.

All dialogues are translations of authentic tape recordings in Swedish. My comments are made to the students when we were listening to the tapes.
 
 

Medr.: How are you? Paul: OK. Something like that. Medr.: You look a bit downhearted Paul: Yeah. Medr.: Is there something special you have in mind? Paul: NoÖ Medr.: What about Susan and John? Paul: I donít know. Medr.: You havenít seen Susan for a long timeÖ Paul: No, she went with John.

Good beginning.
 

Medr.: I see. How do you feel? Paul: Not too good. Medr.: Do you miss John much? As a pal?

As Paul already has said "Not too good" there would be little point in the mediator putting a new question and certainly not two questions.
 

Paul: No, to hell with it! Medr.: Do you sometimes remember that you were once pals or something like that? Paul: No-o.

The mediator lost contact at the earlier passage and could not put it right later. Contact is lost.
 

Medr.: Did you enjoy being friends with him?  Could you talk about everything? Was he a good pal?.

The mediator notices that contact is lost and starts asking questions without waiting for an answer.
 

Paul: Perhaps he was. Medr.: Do you miss him a little? Paul: Nope. ÖI donít care a bit. Medr.: You donít?

The last line of the mediator just reinforces Paulís statement. True, the mediator has listened ó upon a failure he has caused! We analyze the reasons. The mediator understands. In the following section he finds, however, a new deal.
 

Medr.: Do you have some other friends you can talk with? Paul: Iíve lots of them. Medr.: Fine!. Once you had a nice time with John too. Can you remember any occasions where you had fun? Paul: Not exactly. Ö Well, we played video games. Medr.: What did you play? Paul: John had a cupboard full of games. Medr.: Oh, that sounds nice. So you often played games? Paul: Sometimes. When I wanted. Medr.: Do you have other good memories?

The wording is okay but when we listen to the tape we hear that the mediator uses the tone of voice of Gallup-interviewer whose aim is to put objective questions to customers on shopping habits. Further passages on the tape further illustrate a failure of contact.

The mediator and I discuss it. I ask: "Could you have asked Paul in some other ways?" The mediator answers: "I could have asked if he is missing John".
 
 

Teenage girls seem better mediators than teenage boys

The above was a good dialogue for preparing one of the parties before the meeting. "What do you think?" I ask the girls. The mediator herself thinks that "it went too fast". The other girls say: "Yes, but the dialogue is still genuine. Such short mediation happens sometimes".

I ask them what would happen if a party, say another Malin, says "We cannot become friends just because you want it"?

The girls say "That would have been a quite different case. Here the mediator observed that Malin was longing for a reconciliation. Thatís why the mediator went on with the suggestion."

We arrive at a conclusion: a mediator needs to develop a sense for how "mature" the parties are to become friends again. If they are not and a suggestion from the mediator comes too fast, the mediator loses his or her credibility.

The girls are constructive. I feel happy as the instructor. But the mediation process is not ended here. A private talk with other party remains and then the final meeting. We play this. It goes well, the play they have chosen makes the work of the mediator easy. But I have to remind the girls of something we touched upon earlier: after good mediation there is often a backslide. The girls remember it when I give a little hint. "Yes, we have to ask what will happen if one of the former conflict parties slips into the conflict behavior again." They recollect that they have to agree to certain signals which say: "Conflict is in the air, we must calm down and have a talk."

"Should we talk even at the slightest mistake?"

"No", the girls say. "Small annoyances have to be tolerated".

"I think that this is a new task, many professional mediators do not elaborate on this. We need an exercise about that."
 

A skilful boy mediator

My experience says that boys as mediators and conflict parties are more likely than girls to introduce and accept a solution "I will stop attacking him and leave him in peace (in a way that does not mean demonstrative exclusion)". The girls are more apt than boys to express feelings to reach a catharsis as the basis for conflict resolution.

The resolution of the conflict which we are exemplifying in this paper deals with a simple theme: re-establishing an old friendship. I will take passages from a boy mediator who was exceptional as mediator. His friendly interest in others problem was constructive in a relaxed manner, the non-verbal expressions of which are impossible to reproduce in writing. Here is a transcript from a tape in Swedish. I have not been able to translate the nuances in his speech that indicate a creative use of the language.
 

Medr.: How are things? Paul: Well, fairly OK. Medr.: I have noticed that Susan is no longer your girl friend. Paul: She is Johnnyís now. Medr.: How did this happen?

The mediatorís confident curiosity encourages Paul to tell. If Paul stops, the mediator waits some seconds before he asks very short questions that help his understanding of the case. Sometimes he just waits to see if Paul will send some non-verbal signs that he is going to tell more.

The main theme in Paulís story is that John has been unfair to Paul, but a second theme also appears ó Susan has been unfaithful to both Paul and John. An inexperienced mediator might adopt the simple expedient of making the antagonistic boys friends by putting all the blame on Susan. But let us see what our mediator made of this.
 

Medr.: So you are fellow sufferers? Paul: Yeah. Medr.: (Does not say anything but smiles discreetly.) Paul: (Looks away silently but there is a faint smile on his face) Medr.: I guess that Johnny has the same feeling. I will ask him. If I find that it is so, Iíll let you know.

After the above conversation, short in words but rich in non-verbal signals, I asked the mediator about his strategy. He revealed that he was ready to accentuate Susanís guilt but do it very gently and only temporarily; a condemnation of Susan would mean creation of a new conflict between Susan and both boys.

Why did the mediator succeed?

First of all, Paul himself was ready to restore the friendship and he could guess that John was also. So the mediator had an easy job. However, fumblers can destroy even a good chance but our mediator was not a fumbler.

I believe that an ethical attitude which is just implied and is non-verbally indicated is influencing the whole process. Strategies are formed intuitively in a few seconds in a good mediatorís mind. He is ready to accentuate Susanís guilt but just as a temporary therapeutic phase. This readiness is imperceptibly conveyed to the conversation partner together with a hint that this mediator, guided by his ethical conviction, is able to induce the boys to accept their common destiny and restore their friendship in some other way than an alliance directed against Susan.
 

"What makes it tick?"

ACBM applies the educational principle of learning-by-doing: the youngsters learn mediation by exercising mediation. At the start a teacher gives them at tasks that are easy to resolve. While they are succeeding their personal confidence increases and gradually they can solve more and more difficult conflicts.

However, the principle of learning-by-doing is not enough. In the beginning of the method development a teacher asked the teenagers to write plays of conflicts and their solution through mediation. Plays and mediations were recorded on videotape. There the students behaved like amateur actors usually do at the beginning saying their lines like a recital by heart. The plays always arrived at happy endings.

The teacher was proud of their performance work. I asked if it would be desirable for the young mediators to learn how to encounter disasters? Suppose we try to make them ready to apply the role of a mediator in real conflicts amongst peers? "It is probable ", she said "that the basic pattern of constructive dialogue they learn can help them to act in real conflicts. As you know, one can when young learn a poem by heart without actually understanding it. But when the poem crops up in adulthood its deeper meaning is understood."

I agreed. What they had learned was not in vain. But I realized that a common sense of a good teacher was not sufficient to enable analysis of "What makes it tick?" in the mediation process.

I still think that there are natural talents who understand the kernel of mediation intuitively. Our teacher training institutions are so firmly relying upon this gift of their students so that they do not have conflict resolution on their program. I have, however, learned from experience that this talent is not self-evident. The teacherís "mediating" in conflicts is liable to administer good advice to the parties on how to behave pointing out those of the parties who must listen more than others.

Interestingly enough usual training at departments of psychology does not normally contain mediation practice. I believe that the training they get for therapeutic talks could give them a good start and I have the impression that rounding off with shuttle diplomacy training indicated here could be useful for their professional training.

Usually teachers and school psychologists who are good mediators already are constantly on the lookout for new approaches and devices in the field of conflict resolution; they are aware that one never learns it fully. Let us take a closer look at the "mental chemistry" of the mediation process.

But first some clarifications as to what mediation according to ACBM is not.
 

Distinguishing between two "archetypes"

I do not explain the concept of archetype to the youngsters. As you have seen from the instructions to the young mediators I try to tell the difference between a "judge" and "mediator". They declare their intention not to play a "judge". But when observing their first mediations it is evident that they have difficulties to keep that intention. They not only give advice to the parties but are even tempted to pronounce a verdict against one or both parties. It is apparent that some extra training is needed to follow the ideals of mediator who is combining the interests of the parties.

Why is the role of judge so popular?

If we were faithful adherents of Jung we could say that the archetype of a "judge-king" is inherited from the distant past of humankind. The authoritative "judge" is so strongly in the minds of all human beings that it overwhelms the "mediator". The usual psychology of motivational reward explains the same phenomenon differently. A mediator is interpreted as having some kind of "power". This satisfaction of power is easily obtained when telling others what is right and what is wrong.

Independent of the explanatory model there is the fact that a judge-king behavior takes over in the young mediators. There are two reason why it should be replace it by a pure mediator. (1) The political reason: if we prefer equity in conflict resolution, we avoid educating mediator-elites who have the power to judge. (2) The practical reason: a mediator who is acting as a "judge-king" may succeed if his or her power is strong but causes rebellion amongst those who do not want to submit to that kind of mediator power.

Whether such a mediator of constructive messages already appears in the Jungian mythology or not is unimportant in our discussion. What counts is that such a pure mediator figure exists in reality and can be trained by the ACBM program.

We need to go further in exploring "What makes it tick?"

Developing students capacities as peer mediators rather than judge/referees

The teacher begins by explaining the main differences between judge/referee and mediator. When the students are able to clearly articulate their understanding of the difference between these two terms, it is time to introduce the related concept of "adviser".

"What is an adviser?"

They find that adviser is not so powerful as judge/referee but not so powerless as a pure mediator. Here we take a chance to a further explanation of the concept of the mediator. He or she may be very important and indispensable but has no power to decide what is wrong or what is bad. The adviser has more influence. The adviser is "something between" judge/referee mediator.

The teacher asks: "Why is it OK when teachers and parents give advice?" Well, they can back up their responsibility for kids behaviour with resources. Likewise it could be explained to students that if student peer advisers can back up their advice with similar resources then their advice is valid.

As stated earlier the teacher should decide intuitively  when it is time to elaborate further on these kinds of conceptual nuances. I would suggest trying it to some extent before the students have attempted mediation and continue more fully after their first mediation experiences. If you have recorded these mediations, play them back in the class discussion of mediation. After affirming their attempts introduce the distinction between the adviser and the pure mediator.

As a rule the students tape-record their mediation sessions and we listen together to them. Here is an example of my comment:

-- Maria sounds like someone who works in the helping profession. Can anyone guess to what profession I am referring to?

    No, not a teacher but someone who can get their confidence by listening. Yes, a counsellor or social worker!

There is a positive laugh about the role-players performance. I say further:

 -- I do think it is good for people in their day-to-day lives to give advice to one another. However, it is risky when a piece of advice is given to a conflict party. Why?  --  Yes, the parties in conflict are agitated. They need someone to be listened to. Still, they want to control the solution and, hence, nothing else has validity for them than their own proposition. Later on, the mediator in shuttle diplomacy prepares the negotiation of their propositions. All this procedure takes longer time than giving advice.

 --  What can happen if you give advice that you cannot support with resources? Can you give an example of this?

It is important to recognise that there is always a risk that a party will reject the advice. The peer adviser is then in trouble.  It is possible that a fight may ensue  and the peer adviser may become involved in the fight as the supporter of one of the parties. At this point he/she is no longer a mediator in the conflict.

 -- What is the reward of a mediator? No power but there is a reward. Can you guess what it is?

The expected answer is: a person who succeeds to mediate is an an appreciated person. This is a well-served popularity.

No mediator can make wonders. It is not always possible to find the common reconciling elements between the parties. Sometimes one has just to give up the attempt to mediate. It is better that the adults who have the resources of law reinforcement take over.

In peer mediation training we have to accept that students who show a clear understanding of the role of peer mediator, may not necessarily initially apply these understandings in the mediation sessions. This is simply because the reward for their ego as a judge or adviser is quicker than the reward of a mediator. I have frequently observed assertive and socially competent adolescent girls who, if they had been selected as peer advisers (that is, if we had a selection process) would most certainly act like chicken mothers revealing their strong sense of social responsibility as they told the parties the correct solution to the problem. Such a way of responding to problems may well be useful and appropriate if they were taking care of junior elementary school students. They could be seen as cute young mothers.  However with their own peer group the situation is different. Whilst their solutions and advice as chicken mothers may well be objectively right, it is most certainly inappropriate and ineffective in the context of peer mediation.

However we must be careful not to criticise those students who show chicken mother behaviours in peer mediation training. These young peoples attempts at care giving should be affirmed as valid in their own right. Developing the students concept of peer mediation is a gradual process from quick rewards to long term rewards for the young mediators as well as the old ones.
 

Mediation as an expression of Shared Concern method

This is a juridical-intellectual explanation that challenges some people to follow laws and others to cheat them. We need emotional identification to "make it tick" in individuals.

I have found a practicable road to such identification when applying the Shared Concern method (SCm) in tackling bullying reported to the anti-bullying teams in the schools. The core of SCm is that bullying is seen as an asymmetric conflict.

What triggers the members of a bully group to join into a shared-concern-view with the bully therapist? It is, primarily, their subconscious fear of becoming an object of attack from other group members. Or in other words: a potential self-interest elicits an identification with the victim of the group. That identification motivates the bullies to apply the laws and values which they, in fact, already know: bullying is bad. The bully therapist just brings it up in a trustful atmosphere.

My collaborators and I have practiced SCm in tackling bullying since the 80ís. Many of the ideas outlined in this article emanate from experience in the field in which shared concern led to shared solutions. Publications about the Shared Concern method (Note  5).

What else could create identification with the other side?
 

When is it advisable to express identification with the adversary as a commandment?

Compared with the sermon, in ACBM two improvements are made. Firstly, the ethical rule is arrived at in genuine two-way communication in individual talks. Secondly, application of the rule happens, without loss of time, in the final meeting with the both parties.

Could we have something to learn from the Eastern philosophy expressed by the teacherís words to the disciple in Sanskrit: tat tam asi ó it is you ("that thou art"). These words are said in a tone that among other things implies a strong suggestion to identify (1) with the suffering of the antagonist and (2) with the behavior of the disciple against his antagonist.

What "makes it tick" when the Eastern teacher of wisdom elicits a peaceful action in the disciple? In my understanding it is the guru authority the teacher has created. I believe that nowadays there are in Western schools charismatic teachers who have the same capacity. I wish them luck. I myself have tried to considerably diminish the impact of authority when developing ACBM. The reason is that all mobilizing of authority means risk taking. If the authoritative suggestion to reconcile fails the failure is greater than before the suggestive attempt to reconcile started.
 

Reconstructing the transfer between micro and macro levels

Nobody can maintain that his or her know-how is the best simply because the validity of real professional approaches is always restricted to the stages in the development of the students. ACBM, as described here is one of possible devices based on experiences applying ethics with feedback from action. This statement is theoretical, assuming that there must be other developers who have discovered similar means independently of each other for reaching the same ends.

Those who understand our brief reasoning on transfer between micro and macro levels need no further explanation. Those who deny it are, one hopes, glad if we who believe in the communality between the micro and macro levels meet success in our work.
 

When the parties are brought together

The important thing to be said about the final meeting concerns its conclusion. Usually the mediators consider the meeting closed when the parties have reached an agreement. Whether they afterwards keep their agreement, written or not, is left to Providence. In ACBM, after agreement between the parties has been reached, the mediator asks:

"What is to be done if somebody does not keep his (or her) promise?"

This question must not be put until all have basked in satisfaction over the agreement for a while. The question will be put by you not as a prophet of doom but in the spirit of shared concern. You wait for the pupils' ideas.

Some usually suggest strict punishment. I usually shake my head and say something which implies "violence breeds violence". I introduce the concept "communication contract in emergency". That means that "when some of the parties feels that the conflict is in the air" they have to consider: "It can be a misunderstanding, it has to be cleared up. According to the contract the parties have to say: "We agree to calm down and talk". If the talk cannot take place calmly and constructively one or both parties have to go to the peer mediator or to the teacher.

"How to avoid some of the parties watching the otherís every step? Should you sound the alarm immediately?"

I put this question to the youngsters. If there is no clear answer I do not say a word but write on the board, slowly with large letters:
 
 
 

Those who know are given the opportunity to explain and I make comments so that we bring out the words' usual meaning. Then I say:

"Tolerance is important when we deal with the rules we recently agreed about. In what way?"

Sooner or later we find an agreement between the various contributions.

This is the end of an ACBM training session. Tolerance was one of the aims we implied in ACBM. Th methodical point is that we realized that tolerance should not be brought into the picture until we had uttered the word in a context in which it solved a problem.

Depending on the interest of the students after some months the teacher gives again an essay with the theme: "When I tried to mediate in a conflict". The essays are discussed and the principles are confirmed.

The success of ACBM is dependent on the whole being in harmony with its details which may seem "insignificant" to those who have not understood the whole. I would like to give an example concerning the final meeting: to invite the parties something eat and drink (within the limits of the convention at the school). The youngsters think it is fun. Help the young mediators to organize the practical arrangements, if necessary.

In that way you will get the same pleasant atmosphere as at a conference on creating peace.
 

Notes
1. An example of interpreting "justice"
The following is probably the most common case. Both parties in a conflict are deeply convinced of the value of "justice" as general guide-line but both maintain that their antagonist does not follow the principles of justice. It is, unfortunately, also common that a peace educator finds objective reasons that the stronger of the parties, A, is the one who violates this principle more than the weaker B. In the name of justice the peace educator blames A and tries to help B. Objectively the value-centered peace educator is promoting justice but has become a participant of the conflict. As a mediator has be accepted by both parties and if one of the parties does not accept him as such he is, consequently disqualified as mediator despite the fact that he or she is a fighter for justice ? at least according to the party B.

2. The term "Peer mediator"
 The term peer mediator was developed as an expression of arbitration processes in the legislative and commercial world which found  its way into schools, above all in Australia. Interestingly enough, the training materials for the youngsters following that juridical tradition most often contain more substance about self-development than the negotiation techniques and examples about it. According to this juridical tradition the parties are from the beginning brought together by the mediator who asks the parties ìto define the conflict issueî. Shuttle diplomacy is not a self-evident part of the mediation.
Here is an example used in handbooks for mediators:
gives the following 9 steps in the mediation process.

1. Establishing credibility and trust in both parties.
2. Explaining the mediation role and outlining the process.
3. Instilling confidence in the process.
4. Agreed rules.
5. Getting to know how each sees the problem.
6. Finding out what is really important to each of them.
7. Focusing on common ground.
8. Finding acceptable solutions.
9. Reaching an agreement.
(Dale Bagshow. Paper at the International Conference on Children's Peer Relations: Co-operation and Conflict, 1994)

3. Examples of recruiting elites
The distinguishing characteristic of all training of young mediators is that they are selected according to their social ability and self-reliance which is still more strengthened in the exercises. One Student Workbook for peer mediation begins with the following words:
 "Congratulations!  You have been chosen to train as a School Peer Mediator. This is a very special position with lots of challenges and opportunities. Ö You will learn many new skills useful in everyday lift with friends and family. Some of you may even wish to use the skills in future work-related fields".
The first exercise which the selected pupils go through is the "Boasting Exercise".  They throw a ball to each other and whoever catches it shouts out one of his good characteristics, like "friendly" "clean"  "sympathetic" etc.. The concept which is said to lead to a "win-win-solution" is assertive behavior, which is said to keep a balance between aggressive and passive behavior.
About 90% of the workbook for students and teacher's manual are on understanding emotions, analyzing the levels of conflict and other activities which certainly are useful to master conceptually the elements of the conflict but I question their big proportions compared with the rather tiny exercises in playing the role of mediator.
I miss is the author's discussion of these proportions. I have a hypo-thesis that many who presume to sell mediation sell firsthand the old values-clarification exercises from the 70's which were abandoned by its creators who saw that they had opened a way to narcissism. If you really want to educate listening mediators, peers who are interested in the problems of their fellows' instead of their own emotions, you should diminish considerably the self-realization part of the activity and increase the mediation exercises between parties who really appear in reality or at least in role-plays.

4. Have just one mediator
In the beginning of the experiments with the ACBM I had two mediators, each of them talking simultaneously with one party and then have a mediatorsí meeting where they discuss together what they have found. That is hardly a solution because  then, instead of one of the parties being alone two are free and communicate with each other in a way they do not in real conflicts.

5. Publications about the Shared Concern method
So far, others have in their books on tackling bullying given accounts on my Shared Concern method. The most known of them are

Rigby, Ken Bullying in Schools and what to do about it.  Melbourne: The Australian Council for Educational Research Ltd., 1996.  (299 p.) (Also published in GB  by Jessica Kingsley, London, 1997.)
Smith, Peter and Sharp, Sonia School Bullying, Insights and Perspectives,  London: Routledge 1994  (264 p.)
Sharp, Sonia and Smith, Peter, Tackling Bullying in your School. A practical handbook for teachers. London: Routledge 1994  (184 p)
Sullivan, Keith, 'The Anti-Bullying Handbook' to be published by Oxford University Press, Melbourne, London and New York, 2000.

So far the Shared Concern method explained by myself is in a book in Swedish: Anatol Pikas Gemensamt-Bekymmer-metoden. Uppsala: Ama data-service förlag 1998. (295 p.) However, my linguistic corrector and I have been working on an English edition during the last years and I hope to offer it to English publishers during the year 2000.