PADDLE

Culture, Literacy and Livelihoods:
Reconceptualising the Reform of
Education in Oceania

Paper prepared for a Commonwealth of Learning Consultative Meeting
“Literacy & Livelihoods: Learning for Life in a Changing World”
Vancouver, Canada, 15-17 November 2004

Prepared by Bob Teasdale, Epeli Tokai, and Priscilla Puamau

The PRIDE Project
Institute of Education
University of the South Pacific
www.usp.ac.fj/pride

Culture, Literacy and Livelihoods:
Reconceptualising the Reform of Education in Oceania

Purpose: This paper seeks to reconceptualise the strategic planning and implementation
of education in Oceania and to develop principles to guide curriculum reform. It pays
particular attention to programs in the field of Literacy and Livelihoods (L&L) in the
TVET sector, and to the delivery of such programs using ICT and/or DFL.

Definitions: In this paper we use the term Literacy & Livelihoods (L&L) to refer to
educational programs that prepare youth for life and work in Oceania, with an emphasis
on the development of literacy. Work is defined not only in terms of paid employment
but of self-sufficiency, self-reliance and/or self-employment. It is assumed that L&L
programs are offered by TVET providers in both the formal and non-formal sectors.

Introduction

In referring to our region we use the name Oceania quite deliberately. Those who occupy
continents on the rim have tended to view the Pacific Ocean as a vast expanse of water
dotted with tiny, isolated islands, their inhabitants disadvantaged by smallness and
remoteness. Pacific Islanders are now rejecting this colonial assumption, arguing that
they do not occupy “islands in a far sea”, but “a sea of islands” (Hau’ofa, 1993:7). Their
ancestors clearly did not view the sea as a barrier, but as their livelihood. They were
seafarers who were equally at home on sea as on land. They lived and played and worked
upon it. They developed great skills for navigating its waters, traversing it in their sailing
canoes, and forming “… a large exchange community in which wealth and people with
their skills and arts circulated endlessly” (Hau’ofa, 1993:9). In this way the sea bound
them together rather than separating them.

The name Oceania captures this holistic sense of people sharing a common environment
and living together for their mutual benefit. Many of the inhabitants of Oceania are
reactivating this ethos, seeking ways to help and support each other, rather than
constantly turning to the nations on their rim for aid and advice. It is a slow and uneven
process, however, much hindered by regional politics, by the insistent pressures of
globalisation, and by the continuing impact of colonialism. The latter has divided
Oceania linguistically, creating a significant gulf between groups of Anglophone and
Francophone islands, and politically, with France and the USA still ruling their colonial
empires in Oceania in ways that isolate their people from many regional fora and
networks.

This paper focuses only on those countries in Oceania that are politically independent and
therefore able to participate in the dominant political and economic policy organisation,
the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat (PIFS): Cook Islands; Federated States of
Micronesia; Fiji; Kiribati; Nauru; Niue; Palau; Papua New Guinea; Republic of the
Marshall Islands; Samoa; Solomon Islands; Tonga; Tuvalu and Vanuatu. To this list
should be added Tokelau, which is in the process of achieving self-government in free
association with New Zealand, a similar status to that enjoyed by Cook Islands and Niue.
Australia and New Zealand also are full members.

1

Culture, Literacy and Livelihoods:
Reconceptualising the Reform of Education in Oceania

At its meeting in 1999 the Forum directed its secretariat to bring together the Ministers
for Education of the region. They have since met three times, deliberating initially on
what they referred to as “basic education”, which they defined as all educational
provisions for children and youth, both formal and non-formal, except for higher
education. The definition thus includes TVET, and thereby the delivery of Literacy and
Livelihoods programs. The major outcome of their first meeting was the development of
the Forum Basic Education Action Plan (FBEAP), a short (9pp) but significant document
setting out visions, goals and strategies for the future of basic education in Oceania. Its
vision is clearly specified:

Basic education as the fundamental building block for society should engender the broader life
skills that lead to social cohesion and provide the foundations for vocational callings, higher
education and lifelong learning. These when combined with enhanced employment opportunities
create a higher level of personal and societal security and development.

Forum members recognised that development of basic education takes place in the context of
commitments to the world community and meeting the new demands of the global economy,
which should be balanced with the enhancement of their own distinctive Pacific values, morals,
social, political, economic and cultural heritages, and reflect the Pacific’s unique geographical
context (PIFS, 2001:1-2).

Subsequently the Ministers developed a proposal that was accepted by the EU for
funding of €8 million over a five year period for a new project to be called ‘Pacific
Regional Initiatives for the Delivery of Basic Education’, abbreviated to: ‘The PRIDE
Project’. The University of the South Pacific (USP) agreed to manage the Project on
behalf of PIFS, and the New Zealand Government, through NZAID, agreed to join as a
funding partner with an initial grant of NZ$5 million over three years.

The PRIDE Project

Essentially the Project is designed to implement the Pacific vision for education
encapsulated in FBEAP in the fourteen Pacific member states of PIFS, together with
Tokelau. Its overall objective is:

To expand opportunities for children and youth to acquire the values, knowledge and skills that
will enable them to actively participate in the social, spiritual, economic and cultural development
of their communities and to contribute positively to creating sustainable futures
(www.usp.ac.fj/pride, 2004).

To achieve this objective the Project seeks to strengthen the capacity of each of the
fifteen countries to deliver quality education through formal and non-formal means. The
key outcome will be the development of strategic plans for education in each country.
Ideally these plans will be developed following wide consultation with all stakeholders
and beneficiaries, including parents, teachers, students, NGOs, private providers,
employers and other civil society groups. The Project also will assist countries to
implement their plans and to monitor and evaluate the outcomes. Capacity building
activities will be provided for educators at national, sub-regional and regional levels. To

2

Culture, Literacy and Livelihoods:
Reconceptualising the Reform of Education in Oceania

further support these activities the Project will develop an on-line resource centre to
encourage the sharing of best practice and experience amongst countries.

In discussing the PRIDE Project with educators throughout the Pacific and beyond, a
frequently asked question is: “How is it different? We have seen many donor-driven
education projects and initiatives come and go: why is this one unique?” Their cynicism
is justified. The history of educational aid in the Pacific, as elsewhere, is an ambiguous
one with at least as many negatives as positives (see, for example, Luteru & Teasdale,
1993). The present project, however, does have a number of unique features, and there is
considerable optimism that it can achieve its goals in ways that others have not. These
features include:

(i) The fact that the Project was designed and approved by the Ministers of Education:
the process started with them, not with the donors. It was very clear at their third
PIFS-sponsored meeting in Apia in January 2004 that Ministers saw this as their
project, and were determined to guide and direct it according to their priorities.
Subsequent meetings with individual Ministers have reinforced this view. The donors,
in turn, have shown quite remarkable preparedness to allow this to happen.

(ii) The significance of the acronym: its choice clearly was deliberate. Each country is
being encouraged to build its education plans on a stronger foundation of local
cultures, languages and epistemologies, thus enabling students to develop deep pride
in their own values, traditions and wisdoms, and a clear sense of their own local
cultural identity.

(iii) The strong emphasis on mutual collaboration and support: the aim of the Project
is to help countries to help each other. Earlier projects brought consultants from
outside the region, and therefore became donor-driven as they responded to donors’
priorities and preferences. The PRIDE Project will source most of its consultants
from within the region, and already has built up an impressive data-base of qualified
people from Oceania. Furthermore, it will fund local educators to go on study and
training visits to each other’s countries, not to those on the rim and beyond.

(iv) The encouragement of consultative and participatory approaches to educational
planning within each country: there is a clear wish to avoid top-down models of
planning and policy-making, and a strong commitment to bottom-up processes
involving parents, teachers, students, private providers, NGOs, employers and other
civil society groups.

(v) The fact that Ministers want the Project to promote a more holistic and lifelong
approach to education, with effective articulation between sectors, and between
school, TVET and the world of work.

(vi) The commitment of the PRIDE team to building a strong conceptual foundation
for the Project. Earlier projects brought outsiders to Oceania with western ‘recipes’
for the reform of education. The PRIDE team is committed to helping countries

3

Culture, Literacy and Livelihoods:
Reconceptualising the Reform of Education in Oceania

develop their own theoretical foundations, doing so via the creative syncretism of
their own epistemologies, values and wisdoms with the most useful educational ideas
and approaches of the global world beyond their shores.

Conceptualising the reform of education in Oceania

In seeking to develop a conceptual foundation for the PRIDE Project, the PRIDE team
turned to the Report to UNESCO of its International Commission on Education for the
Twenty-first Century (Delors, 1996). From our own experiences in countries as diverse as
Thailand, Japan and Indonesia, as well as the fifteen Pacific countries that are the focus
of our work in the PRIDE Project, it remains the most useful blueprint for reform,
regardless of the economic, demographic and social indicators of each nation. In the eight
years since it was published the Delors Report has stood the tests of time, critical analysis
and practical application. It has been widely debated in both educational and political
circles, and its ideas used as a springboard for education reform in a wide variety of
settings. It continues to offer the most coherent, inspiring and relevant conceptual
foundation for education of any international document published in recent years.

From teaching to learning

Ever since the invention of mass compulsory schooling in the early years of the industrial
revolution in Europe, the focus of education has been on the delivery of knowledge to
children and youth by adults with the necessary training and/or community recognition.
The architecture and routines of the school, and the content and processes of the
curriculum, were primarily designed to prepare the young to be compliant and productive
workers in the burgeoning factories of Europe.

This new form of mass schooling was almost entirely teacher-centred: the podium and
blackboard at the front of each classroom facilitated control of students and the delivery
of knowledge. A system of examinations and reporting regulated progression through the
school, providing incentives to acquire knowledge and the formal credentials for having
done so. These credentials also were linked to subsequent employment. The higher the
credentials the more prestigious and better paid the job at the end. It was this system of
education that was exported to Oceania, as elsewhere in the world, during the colonial
era, often by well-intentioned Christian missionaries, and that has proven so deeply
resistant to change in many countries.

While the above is an oversimplified account of a much more complex reality, it does
highlight the view that the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, educationally speaking,
can be described as the ‘centuries of the teacher’. The teacher was central to educational
discourse and process. This has been especially the case in Oceania, and still is in many if
not most settings.

The current change in focus from teacher to learner, as exemplified in the Delors Report,
is highly significant. Even though many might argue that teaching and learning are
simply opposite sides of the same coin, and essentially one and the same, the reality is

4

Culture, Literacy and Livelihoods:
Reconceptualising the Reform of Education in Oceania

that education is undergoing a profound transformation. The shift in power from teacher
to learner is just one element of this. Another significant shift is from education as the
acquisition of knowledge, to education as learning how to learn. And a third is from a
view of education as preparation for the world of work to education as a holistic process
of lifelong learning. From these perspectives the twenty-first century might well be
described as the ‘century of the learner’. The implications for L&L programs are
significant:

(i) The ICT revolution has ensured that teachers and lecturers are no longer
dispensers of knowledge. Their students now have access to an exponentially
expanding array of information that they can access quite independently. Teachers
have responsibility to help students make effective and appropriate use of this
knowledge, which requires a capacity to critically appraise all of the material
available to them, and to make value judgments of it, often from moral and ethical
perspectives. L&L programs therefore should focus on developing the critical
capacities of students, enabling them to know themselves, to think for themselves,
and thus become active and confident learners.

(ii) Knowledge is power. As teachers lose their authority as holders and dispensers of
knowledge, their relationships with students are transformed. They need to become
facilitators of learning, providing students with the skills and motivation to become
lifelong learners. The delivery of L&L programs therefore requires a much stronger
focus on curriculum process. How to teach becomes equally important as what to
teach. And for these new relationships to be effective teachers need a new kind of
moral and even spiritual authority. They must become respected as exemplars of right
living within their colleges and communities. This requires a profound shift in the
mindset of teachers and lecturers, and even more importantly of their trainers, as they
reconceptualise their roles and functions.

(iii) Most TVET curricula in Oceania have been driven by the demands of the work-
place and the need for specific, job-related credentials. Many TVET teaching staff
have been recruited from the workplace, with limited if any teacher training, and have
an instrumental view of their responsibilities; i.e., they view their role as the
development of specific technical capacities in their students. Once again a profound
shift in the mindset of teachers and lecturers is necessary if they are to contribute
effectively to a holistic process of lifelong learning. Every TVET teacher needs to be
confident in helping students learn how to learn. And every TVET teacher needs to
promote L&L as an integral part of each student’s preparation for life and work.

(iv) In adopting a more holistic approach to learning the old boundaries between the
various sectors of education (pre-school, elementary, secondary, TVET) need to be
reviewed, and the question of effective articulation between them addressed. There is
a particular need to explore how secondary and TVET curricula might be planned
together in a more holistic and interconnected way. In Oceania, TVET programs,
including L&L, need to be brought down into the secondary school, and even to
upper primary settings. In some countries the seventh and eighth years of schooling

5

Culture, Literacy and Livelihoods:
Reconceptualising the Reform of Education in Oceania

are the last for many students, and it is vital that relevant and meaningful TVET and
L&L be available to them, and that such programs articulate with subsequent learning
opportunities, especially in the non-formal sector.

Tensions and change

Jacques Delors, in his preface to Learning: the treasure within (Delors, 1996), identifies
and discusses seven tensions that he believes characterise most education policy,
planning and learning environments in a rapidly changing world. He revisits these and
adds further insights in a later paper (Delors, 2002). Among the tensions he identifies are
several that have deep resonance with communities in Oceania, including the tensions
between tradition and modernity, cooperation and competition, the spiritual and the
temporal, the universal and the individual, and the local and the global.

In neither of the above documents does Delors elaborate on the idea of tension itself. One
assumes he is not using the concept of tension in the sense of conflict between opposing
factions or ideologies, the kind of tension that can lead to rivalry and war, but is referring
instead to a functional or positive tension. We like to explain this kind of tension using
the analogy of guitar strings that need to be kept in a constant state of tightness if they are
to produce pleasing music. One of the tasks of the guitarist is to maintain a functional
tension by regularly adjusting and readjusting the strings to ensure harmony. Likewise
educators have the constant challenge of achieving a functional or creative balance
between the tensions confronting them as they plan and deliver education.

The concepts of tension and balance are highly relevant to curriculum development and
reform. As we travel within Oceania almost every educator we speak with believes that
the balance is wrong in school and TVET curricula: that the global, the competitive and
the temporal have a disproportionate influence in most learning environments. Once
again, we find analogy a useful explanatory device. In the realm of visual arts, music,
drama and dance there are currently some remarkably creative initiatives in the region.
Individuals and groups within local communities are creating new forms of expression
from the fusion of the traditional and the modern.

The group that comes most readily to mind is Yothu Yindi, an internationally renowned
Indigenous Australian band based in Yirrkala, in north-east Arnhem Land. Its leader,
Mandawuy Yunupingu, established the group during his tenure as principal of the local
school. Its music is vibrant and contemporary, yet is deeply grounded in traditional
Aboriginal culture. As one listens to the rhythms and lyrics one senses a dynamic
syncretism between the local and the global. In watching the audience during a Yothu
Yindi concert in northern Australia, the music was enjoyed equally by older Indigenous
people and young non-Indigenous people. The former found a deep resonance with
traditional Aboriginal music, the latter appreciated the modern western rock rhythms.

In the realm of TVET education, whether in curriculum reform, values education or in the
classroom itself, we should strive for the same dynamic syncretism between tradition and
modernity, the spiritual and the temporal, and the local and the global. Young people

6

Culture, Literacy and Livelihoods:
Reconceptualising the Reform of Education in Oceania

need to grow up with the skills and confidence to live successfully in a globalising world.
They need to survive economically in a global marketplace, and take their place in the
modern, global workforce. Yet it is becoming increasingly recognised in Oceania that
they also need to grow up with a clear sense of their own local cultural identity, built on a
strong foundation of their own cultures, languages and spiritualities, and with a deep
pride in their own values, traditions and wisdoms. This can best be achieved if the
content and the processes of the TVET curricula reflect this same creative fusion of the
local and global.

As mentioned earlier, one of the core principles of our own Project is the need to build
the planning and implementation of education on a strong foundation of local cultures,
languages and epistemologies, thus enabling students to develop deep pride in their own
values, traditions and wisdoms. Many educators in Oceania share this view, suggesting
that the primary goal of education “…is to ensure that all Pacific students are successful
and that they all become fully participating members of their groups, societies and the
global community” (Pene, Taufe’ulungaki & Benson, 2002: 3). L&L programs likewise
need to be firmly grounded in the local while at the same time achieving an effective
syncretism with the global world beyond. How might this be done? Let us suggest a few
principles:

(i) In many settings it may be appropriate to adopt a bilingual approach, with English
and the local language(s) used equally but separately in the learning environment.
This implies that English literacy and vernacular literacy are equally promoted. A
significant challenge here is the development of vernacular literacy materials of a
suitable standard and interest level for youth and young adults.

(ii) A culture of literacy has not yet developed in most settings in Oceania. People do
not read for pleasure and relaxation. Nor is written material a primary source of
information gathering: most local knowledge is not stored and transmitted in writing,
but continues to rely on oral traditions, with story telling playing a significant role.
L&L programs need to recognise, value and build on these oral traditions, yet blend
them with modern ways of communicating. For example, L&L students could
undertake research in their villages on oral traditions and local ways of knowing and
document their findings in written form. They could then learn to share their research
findings and stories and carry on conversations with each other using ICT, with chat
rooms and one-to-one emails supplementing face-to-face communications, especially
when distance hinders the latter.

(iii) Networks of human relationships are profoundly significant in Oceania,
especially within the extended family and local language groups. Mutuality, not
competition, is all important. This needs to be recognised in L&L learning
environments, most particularly in the context of DFL programs where students are
often working in isolation. The challenge here is for teachers to promote strong
linkages between students using ICT, developing learning networks where students
can support and learn from each other. Group activity and group assignments often
can replace individual learning programs.

7

Culture, Literacy and Livelihoods:
Reconceptualising the Reform of Education in Oceania

‘Learning to be’ and ‘Learning to live together’

One of the most widely recognised and discussed features of the Delors Report is its
notion of four pillars of learning: learning to know, learning to do, learning to be and
learning to live together. While it has been criticised by some in Oceania, Konai Helu
Thaman, for example, arguing that it leads to the very conceptual fragmentation that the
Report itself so strongly criticises, the idea that all learning is built on these four
foundations seems readily accepted in most cultures. For example, the design and
construction of many traditional homes and meeting places in Oceania are based on four
large timber uprights, usually tree- or palm-trunks, one in each corner, these supporting
the remaining structure. The idea that each upright needs to be of similar size or scale in
order to ensure structural strength and stability is readily transferred to education, and to
the view that all pillars should receive equal emphasis in an individual’s learning. In
reality, however, the representation of each pillar in most education systems in Oceania,
as elsewhere, is far from balanced, with ‘learning to know’ and ‘learning to do’
occupying disproportionately large parts of the curriculum, especially at secondary
school and TVET levels. As Jacques Delors (2002) himself acknowledges, these two
pillars have long been self-evident, and are the dominant focus of most education
systems.

The ‘learning to be’ pillar has posed particular challenges for educators. It is the least
understood, and the least represented in most curricula. Even though the idea achieved
considerable recognition following publication of the 1972 UNESCO report of the same
name (Learning to be, or the Faure Report), it had not become prominent in education
discourse prior to release of the Delors Report. Basically, it has to do with the formation
of identity, both individual and collective, and with the achievement of self-knowledge,
self-under-standing and self-fulfilment, and ultimately with the development of wisdom.
Jacques Delors (2002, p 151) stated that the full recognition and implementation of
‘learning to be’ will require “… nothing less than a revolution in education that will be
expensive in terms of time”. Nevertheless, he makes clear that we cannot afford to
overlook this aspect of learning, for through it people are empowered to learn about
themselves, and to become more fully human.

Likewise the ‘learning to live together’ pillar challenges those engaged in secondary
school and TVET curriculum reform. The tendency is to relegate it to the Social
Sciences, and to the teaching of international relations. Yet one of our primary goals
surely is to learn to live together within a nation state. Again, Jacques Delors (2002, p
151) expresses this aptly:

This newer pillar has a special resonance in the twenty-first century as countries
grapple with the difficulties of co-existence among different religious communities,
different ethnic groups and others. Education bears a tremendous responsibility to
bring to blossom all the seeds within every individual, and to make communication
between people easier. Communication does not simply mean repeating what we have

8

Culture, Literacy and Livelihoods:
Reconceptualising the Reform of Education in Oceania

learned: it means also articulating what is in us and has been combined into a rounded
whole through education, and understanding others.

In a deeper way these two pillars also have to do with the nurture and development of
spirituality, not just in a religious sense, but also through the broader quest for meaning in
life and for explanations of reality, both individual and communal. It is interesting that
secular education discourse – that of UNESCO and other international agencies, for
example – is starting to emphasise the spiritual, and to advocate a role for education in
the spiritual development of children and youth (see, for example, Zhou & Teasdale,
2004). But how do we introduce the development of the spiritual into the secondary
school and TVET curricula, especially in the context of L&L programs? Certainly not by
creating an extra ‘box’ somewhere, and slotting it in alongside other content areas.

It is our own view, that the teaching of spirituality, and more broadly the teaching of
‘learning to be’ and ‘learning to live together’, cannot be superimposed on existing
curricula and taught purely as content. We therefore suggest the following principles:

(i) The teaching of these elements is the responsibility of each and every teacher and
lecturer. They should be woven into the very fabric of the curriculum in all subject
areas in a fully integrated way.

(ii) They cannot be taught just from a content perspective. Curriculum process is
equally important (see, for example, Teasdale & Teasdale, 2004).

(iii) Teachers themselves should be exemplars of good living in these areas. Their
own behaviour and relationships should inspire and guide students.

(iv) School and college administrators also have significant responsibilities here, in
particular for ensuring that the organisation of the institution, and all relationships
within it, are exemplary of ‘learning to be’ and ‘learning to live together’.

(v) Teacher training institutions will need to rethink their curricula, pedagogies,
structures and organisational culture to bring about the expected transformation at the
learner level. The aim here is to ensure that the pre- and in-service training of TVET
teachers effectively incorporate these elements.

From a traditional perspective, these two pillars, until the colonial era, were a
fundamental part of a holistic process of lifelong learning throughout Oceania. If we
could return by time capsule to the villages of our ancestors, say three hundred years ago,
most of us would find that ‘learning to be’ and ‘learning to live together’ indeed
accounted for at least fifty percent of the learning experiences of the children and youth
as they prepared to take their place in the adult life of the community.

Hopefully global thinking about education may be coming full circle, returning to the
subjective and the spiritual, and to a more holistic and lifelong approach. Certainly if we
are to capture the essence of the Delors Report in the development of curricula, and

9

Culture, Literacy and Livelihoods:
Reconceptualising the Reform of Education in Oceania

especially L&L programs, ensuring that ‘learning to be’ and ‘learning to live together’
occupy at least half of the energies of teachers and students, then we need to radically
transform the way we conceptualise curriculum content and process, and the roles and
responsibilities of teachers.

Conclusion

In this paper we have sought to reconceptualise the strategic planning and
implementation of education in Oceania and to develop principles to guide curriculum
reform, paying particular attention to L&L programs in the TVET sector, and to the
delivery of such programs using ICT and/or DFL. The latter is a particular challenge in
Oceania, as many ICT and DFL approaches tend to isolate students from each other in
cultural contexts where mutuality and shared learning are valued. Another challenge in
this context is that the ICT revolution has only been of benefit those in Oceania who are
privileged enough to have access to electric power, a computer and an internet
connection. Even now, only a small proportion of TVET students has this access,
especially in rural areas. Many DFL programs therefore need to continue using print
media as the primary means of instruction.

References

1. Delors, J. (chair) (1996) Learning: the treasure within. Report to UNESCO of its International
Commission on Education for the Twenty-first Century. Paris: UNESCO.

2. Delors, J. (2002) Conclusion. In Learning throughout life: challenges for the twenty-first century.
Paris: UNESCO, pp 149-160.

3. Hau’ofa, E. (1993) Our sea of islands. In A new Oceania: rediscovering our sea of islands. Suva:
SSED, USP.

4. Luteru, P.H. & Teasdale, G.R. (1993) Aid and education in the South Pacific. Comparative Education,
29(3), 293-307.

5. Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat (PIFS) (2001) Forum Basic Education Action Plan (FBEAP). Suva:
PIFS.

6. Pene, F., Taufe’ulungaki, ’A. & Benson, C. (eds.) (2002) Tree of opportunity: rethinking Pacific
education. Suva: IOE, USP.

7. Teasdale, J. I. & Teasdale, G. R. (2004) Teaching core values of peace and harmony in Asia and the
Pacific: a process approach. Chapter 11 in Zhou, N. & Teasdale, G. R. (eds) Teaching Asia-Pacific
core values of peace and harmony: a sourcebook for teachers. Bangkok: UNESCO, pp 263-280.

8. Zhou, N. & Teasdale, G. R. (eds) (2004) Teaching Asia-Pacific core values of peace and harmony: a
sourcebook for teachers. Bangkok: UNESCO.

10

last updated Sat Sep 01, 2012