You can leave a message using the contact form below.




Naghma Siddiqi*

The youth is the hope of our future.’

The above quote of José Rizal (1861-1896) makes us aware of the fact that youth of each generation of human civilization is its future. As responsible members of the academia we must invest in them today so that they ensure a bright future for the world tomorrow. Center for Ethics and Values, Ramanujan College, University of Delhi makes continuous efforts to invest in the future of their youth by intermittently educating them in ethics and values. One such effort on the part of the college was the introduction of Towards a Culture of Peace and Reconciliation personality development program—acronym TCPR—to nearly 700 first-year students of the college. The present article is the concluding part of a Case Study of Ramanujan College where the above program was administered from December 2013 to August, 2014.

UNESCO (1992) defined the culture of peace as ‘a growing body of shared values, attitudes, behaviours and ways of life based on non-violence and respect for fundamental rights and freedoms, on understanding, tolerance and solidarity’ (UNESCO: Learning to Be, p. 173). Professor Felipe McGregor (1914-2004) links the culture of peace (McGregor: Culture of Peace) with education for peace stating: ‘The concept of education for a culture of peace links it closely with educational themes, fields and concerns with a view to generating a holistic vision of quality education.’ The study developed culture of peace further to culture of peace and reconciliation as a culture which when adopted by individuals leads to their personal development and pragmatic peace and development in society at large.

KEYWORDS: Culture of Peace and Reconciliation, Freedom of Choice for Test, Pragmatism in Life, Duty-First, WE-WE Ethics, Unilateral Peace-First, Positive Striving, Non-Confrontational Path, Be the Change, Peace Quotient, Peace Quotient Transformation Scale.

* This is the concluding part of a Case Study carried out at Ramanujan College of the impact of TCPR Program (developed by the author) on the students of the college. The program was based on the findings of her doctoral research ‘The Role of Islam in Establishing Peace in the Contemporary World’ being conducted under Dr. Abroo Aman Andrabi at the Department of Islamic Studies in Hamdard University, New Delhi.,


The Case Study is part of the survey being conducted by the investigator to test the findings of her research on how to establish peace in the contemporary world and Islam’s role. The findings of the study were packaged as a 20-Module Intervention, Towards Culture of Peace and Reconciliation personality development program. This comprised of principles by which one can inculcate ethics and values to transform oneself at the level of the mind towards a culture of peace and reconciliation. The impact of the intervention was tested through research tools—pre-test and post-test questionnaire and response form (quantitative tools) and feedback form and postponed feedback form (qualitative). Together this formed the TCPR Program which is outlined below.

In the Culture of Peace and Reconciliation the term, ‘peace’ is being used as the English equivalent of the Arabic Salam, an ‘umbrella term’ to collectively refer to all the positive values such as belief and submission to God Almighty (our Creator and Sustainer) as well as love and well-wishing for our fellowmen which is expressed through ethics and values like non-violence, compassion, truth, justice, equality, tolerance, patience, good conduct, harmony, humility, togetherness, self-control, etc. ‘Reconciliation’ is being used as the English equivalent of the Arabic Sulh, referring to how, in a world of differences and problems (Quran 90: 4) positive relations can be maintained between individuals in society only on unilateral lines. As such duty-consciousness is the mainstay of the program which is considered as the root of all good in society with rights-consciousness as the root of all evil in society. When one becomes duty-conscious one is ready to unilaterally maintain ethics realizing, ‘it is in giving that one receives.’


The TCPR program aims to foster responsible behavior in respondents with a three-fold aim:

1. Transforming Individuals to a Culture of Peace & Reconciliation: The central premise of the intervention is that if establishing peace in society is the aim the only way to do so is by motivating and educating individuals—the building blocks of society— to become more duty-conscious and transform themselves towards the Culture of Peace and Reconciliation of their own choice.

2. Developing Attitude of Culture of Peace & Reconciliation: A Culture of Peace and Reconciliation is defined as a state of mind, a positive attitude; a Culture of Violence and Confrontation is a negative attitude. As such attitudes or mindsets can be either on a Culture of Violence and Confrontation or on a Culture of Peace and Reconciliation. What is required is a constant training and reengineering of one’s mental attitude from the former to the latter.

3. Towards a Pragmatically Peaceful and Developed Society: A basic principle of the program is that as more individuals become duty-conscious instead of rights-conscious; they form positive, peaceful attitudes on a culture of peace and reconciliation. As more individuals transform on positive lines they, develop intellectually and materially themselves and become an instrument of positive change as it percolates in world society making it more peaceful and developed.


Towards A Culture of Peace (Salam) and Reconciliation (Sulh), TCPR gives principles applying which individuals can one, transform themselves on positive lines to develop intellectually and succeed materially and two, motivate and educate others to transform themselves. Broad principles are:

FREEDOM OF CHOICE FOR TEST: The central tenet is the ‘freedom of choice’ of man for a test, not as a right. Problems are, therefore, not an evil; they occur due to the misuse of freedom.

PRAGMATISM IN LIFE: The misuse of one person’s freedom leads to the ideal being disrupted for others’. Future-oriented people opt for pragmatism in life realizing that the ideal is unachievable.

DUTY-FIRST; NOT RIGHTS-FIRST: The basis of a peaceful society is duty-consciousness (We-We ethics); while rights-consciousness (We-They ethics) only leads to violence and confrontation.

WE-WE ETHICS: The concept of WE-WE ethics means to give others’ their rights as a duty, being content with what one gets from others, not demanding ‘more and more.’

UNILATERAL PEACE-FIRST: Peace needs to be established unilaterally for development, not for social justice. Peace-first approach ensures one always finds opportunities to strive towards.

POSITIVE STRIVING is possible striving (Tom Peters, 1988) towards opportunities in spite of problems. Negative striving keeps one entangled in problems, leaving opportunities un-availed.

PATH OF NON-CONFRONTATION: A future-oriented person takes the non-confrontational path understanding that the confrontational path will only lead to stagnation and failure.

CONTINUOUS INTELLECTUAL DEVELOPMENT: Striving positively one continuously develops intellectually and materially by carving out a path for oneself without confronting with others.

RECONCILIATORY APPROACH: If development is the goal it can be done only in an atmosphere of peace, not violence and by people working together, not against each other (Khan, Moral Vision, 48). Using the reconciliatory approach people direct their pooled efforts towards continuous development; the confrontational path keeps efforts scattered and development staggered.

CHANGE YOURSELF, CHANGE THE WORLD: The beginning of change begins with oneself, not others: “Be the change that you wish to see in the world” (Gandhi, p. 241). We have to stop blaming others for one’s vows. We cannot control others; we can only control ourselves.

Teaching moral development (Sternberg, Robert and Williams, M. Wendy, 102) the TCPR Program gives the formula that if we adjust with others by being duty-conscious we tread the path of peace that leads towards success. On the other hand the rights-conscious path in which we force others to give us our rights only leads to confrontation and violence, thus, frustration and failure. As such the path of a peaceful person, of reconciliation leads to success and the path of a violent person, of confrontation leads to failure. This understanding makes a future-oriented person desirous of transforming oneself towards the culture of peace and reconciliation of one’s own choice without any outside compulsion. The basis of change is oneself of one’s own free will and it leads to success.


When the purpose of the survey of testing the findings of the research through the TCPR Program was explained to the administration of Ramanujan College they agreed to allow the investigator to administer the program in their institution as a case study. The TCPR was launched at the college in December 2013 through the Pre-Test Questionnaire which was administered to the first-year students of the college. The students took the program in two groups, Group A (n=323) and Group B (n=375). Overall 698 respondents took the pre-test of which 461 were males and 237 females from various streams and religious affiliations. Their demographic profile is given in the table below.

The students were given the option to take part in the TCPR Program by ticking on the box as token consent. It is interesting to note that when the pre-test was given elsewhere a 25-30% affirmative response was obtained. From the respondents of Ramanujan College nearly 90% affirmative response was obtained as can be seen from the table below.

The findings shown in the table indicate that prior to the administration of the TCPR program at the college the students already had a high level of enthusiasm and interest in inculcating positive change in themselves. This went to the credit of the institution and indicated that that the TCPR would have a positive impact at the college. This was corroborated through later findings.


Administering the TCPR on such a large scale presented a challenge for the investigator. The challenges were primarily of administrative nature: organizing a heterogeneous group from various courses at one place or at a number of places based on their availability; handing over the TCPR Booklets; collecting them once completed, etc. It was suggested that the program be first given to a primary group which would then take it to the larger, secondary group—thus forming two groups: TCPR Primary Group and TCPR Secondary Group, together termed as the TCPR Program Group.

Under the aegis of Delhi University’s INNOVATION PROJECT Ramanujan College was conducting the RC 201 Project—Learning Values through Community Service. The aim of the project was to help the students learn values through community service. This matched the objectives of the TCPR that aimed at helping students to develop positive personalities by imbibing values and ethics and, in turn, becoming an instrument of positive change in society. It was decided to give the TCPR to the students of the project, TCPR Primary Group with the understanding that after completing the program they would take it to a TCPR Secondary Group at the college. The purpose of the exercise was that students of the primary group: one, develop personalities towards a culture of peace and reconciliation; two, develop leadership skills essential for life management; to three, become an instrument of positive change in society at large towards pragmatic peace and development.


In January 2014 the TCPR was given to the students of college to the TCPR Primary Group who took the program to the TCPR Secondary Group through a snowball effect. The initial Questionnaire served as the pre-test for the first year students and the investigator herself gave the pre-test Questionnaire to the second year students. Subsequently she introduced the 2-Module Intervention through the TCPR Presentation and distributed the TCPR Booklets (with their unique IDs) to them.

The TCPR Primary Group, n=21 all completed the program in around five weeks and filled the various post-test forms: post-test questionnaire and response forms (quantitative) and feedback form (qualitative) compulsorily. Consequently an interactive session was arranged between the investigator and the students in which they submitted the duly-filled TCPR Booklets and took part in a Group Discussion which was to be recorded and transcribed for qualitative analysis.


The next step was for the TCPR Primary Group to take the program to the TCPR Secondary Group. For this the TCPR Presentation served as a training tool. The primary group trained themselves to present the program to others through the presentation under the supervision of the investigator. The modalities of the program administration at the secondary level are below:

1. Selecting Classes: The primary group decided to take the program to their class and if required to one more class.

2. Seeking Consent: The respondents of the primary group went to the selected classes to seek consent and made class-wise lists (name, class and contact details) of the secondary respondents. The signature of the secondary respondents was taken as token consent.

3. Organizing Material: The class-wise material comprising of Pre-Test Questionnaire and TCPR Booklet were organized by the investigator/coordinator class-wise (as per the list) and were handed over to the primary respondents the day before they had to administer the program further.

4. Administering TCPR: The primary group gathered the respondents of the secondary group class-wise to get the pre-test questionnaires filled. Having collected the duly-filled questionnaires they introduced the respondents to the TCPR program either through the TCPR Presentation or via an interaction. Then they handed over the TCPR Booklets (with Unique IDs) to the TCPR Secondary Group asking them to seek clarifications if any. It was mutually decided that the secondary respondents would complete the program in three weeks. Over a month the duly-filled TCPR Booklets were collected and handed over to the investigator.

It was suggested by one of the students of the project to give an additional incentive of TCPR Certificate of Participation. This proved beneficial for both the investigator as more respondents took part in the program as well as for the respondents as they received a certificate in ethics and values to add to their resume. The TCPR Secondary Group, n=189, all took part in the compulsory part of the program (pre-test, intervention and post-test), 187 filled the response form and 56 filled the feedback form and 56 filled the postponed feedback form during the TCPR Certificate Distribution Ceremony. As this was after three months of completing the program it indicated their retention of the program principles.


The sample size of the program at the college in the primary and secondary group was n=210 (21+189). All of the respondents filled both the Pre-Test and Post-Test Questionnaires. Of these 208 (99%) filled the Response Form; 56 (26.6%) each filled the Feedback Form and the Postponed Feedback Form.

Gender-wise Respondent Profile revealed a slight variation between the quantitative and qualitative aspects of the study. While more males filled the pre-test, post-test questionnaires, response forms and post-feedback forms; more females filled the feedback form. This may indicate that females may be more willing to fill detailed qualitative responses in comparison to the males.

Stream-wise Respondent Profile revealed that the maximum number of respondents from the science stream filled all the forms followed by commerce and then social science. An exception was seen in the postponed feedback forms in which there was hardly any variation between the three streams. The stream-wise respondent’s profile can be seen from the chart below.

The overall demographic profile showed that respondents were from various religious affiliations and streams. This is given in the table.

The demographic profile shows that the sample was well rounded and covered the broad denominations. The variations within the forms was in keeping with the trends seen when the program was administered at other institutions.


To find the effectiveness of the program (and in turn the findings of the research) empirical evidences were collected and analyzed for the various research tools. Due to paucity of space findings of the Questionnaire are being displayed to indicate the impact of the program. To analyze the Questionnaire responses quantitatively two concepts—peace quotient and peace quotient transformation scale—were developed by the investigator.

PEACE QUOTIENT: To test the impact of the intervention quantitatively it was decided to give a numerical value to the marks of the Questionnaire which comprised of 25 questions. 4 marks were given for each right answer (proposition relating to the culture of peace and reconciliation) and 0 for each wrong answer (propositions relating to the culture of violence and confrontation). This enabled the investigator to give the respondents marks out of 100 which was termed as the Peace Quotient (PD) by the study. As such peace quotient—PD—for the TCPR Program was defined as:

Peace Quotient is the value depicting ‘the state of peace in the minds of respondents’ as quantified by their response to propositions relating to the Culture of Peace and Reconciliation in the Questionnaire Items of the TCPR Program.

PRE, POST PEACE QUOTIENTS: The two questionnaires worked in conjunction with the intervention (TCPR personality development program) to arrive at the following:

1. PRE-TEST PEACE QUOTIENT—PRE-PQ—refers to the marks out of 100—defined as the level of peace in the mind of a respondent prior to going through the intervention.

2. POST-TEST PEACE QUOTIENT—POST-PQ—refers to the marks out of 100—defined as the level of peace in the mind of a person after going through the intervention.

3. PEACE QUOTIENT TRANSFORMATION INDEX—PQ TI—arrived at by deducting the PRE-PQs from the POST-PQs was an indicator to see the impact of the intervention quantitatively. A negative PQ TI indicated a negative impact while a positive PQ TI indicated a positive impact of the TCPR.

Peace Quotient Transformation Index, PQTI is defined as the quantitative change in the peace quotients (POST PQ minus PRE-PQ) of a respondent after the administration of the intervention.

PEACE QUOTIENT TRANSFORMATION SCALE: To analyze the trends towards to either Culture of Peace and Reconciliation or Culture of Violence and Confrontation a Peace Quotient Transformation Scale, PQT Scale was developed. The x-axis of the scaled depicted the respondent’s unique ID while the y-axis corresponded to the respondent’s PRE-PQs and POST-PQs (numerical marks out of 100 in the questionnaires). If the PQ was between 0-50 it indicated that the respondent was on a Culture of Violence and Confrontation. If the PQ was between 51-100 it indicated that the respondent was on the Culture of Peace and Reconciliation. The scale is shown below.

To Culture of Violence and Confrontation: A PQ between 0-50 indicated that respondents were Towards a Culture of Violence and Confrontation.

To Culture of Peace and Reconciliation: A PQ of 51-100 indicated that respondents were Towards a Culture of Peace and Reconciliation.

The peace quotient, PQ and peace quotient transformation scale, PQT Scale served as essential parameters to measure the effect of the TCPR Program in transforming individuals towards a culture of peace and reconciliation through the Questionnaire. For this the Unique IDs of the respondents in the two groups—TCPR Primary Group, n=21; and TCPR Secondary Group, n=189 were represented in the x-axis with their actual PQs graphically represented in y-axis (PRE-PQs depicted in gray and POST-PQs depicted in black). The graphs of the primary and secondary groups clearly revealed the extent of the transformation and, as such, the impact of the intervention.


The graph of the primary group below shows PRE-PQs from 24-68 and POST-PQs from 56-96 showing a shift of the respondents from the culture of violence towards the culture of peace.


In the scattered graph below of the secondary group we find that the majority of the PRE-PQs ranged from 20-50s and the POST-PQs ranged broadly from 40s to 80s. While both the PQs were slightly lower than the primary group; the POST-PQs of the secondary group were substantial considering that respondents had no interaction with the investigator.

The graphs showed a positive transformation in both the primary and secondary groups indicating a positive impact of the program on the TCPR Program Group, n=210 at Ramanujan College.


What was the extent of the impact? The PQ TI was developed to test the transformation quantitatively. As an indication of the impact of the program the PQ TI of the primary group was analyzed in detail which is given in the table below. The PQ TI of the primary group, n=21 ranged from 4 to 56. This indicated a substantially high positive transformation of the respondents towards a culture of peace and reconciliation with some being higher than others.

Some of the salient features of the impact of the program on the primary group are:

  • PRE-PQs: The PQs of respondents who entered the program in the primary group, PRE-PQs were 24 to 68 which were normal at the entry point but considerably high at the upper end.

  • POST-PQs: After being trained in the principles of the TCPR the respondents had POST-PQs of 56-98. This was normal at the lower end and higher on average at the upper end.

  • PQ TIs: The actual transformation of the respondents of the primary group while being less at the lower end (4) was considerable at the higher end (56).

The PQ TI Means of the TCPR Program was 13.58 (next section). In comparison the PQ TI of the primary group was 4 to 56 (as seen in the table above), is substantially higher than the PQ TI Mean (13.58). The Peace Quotient Transformation Index of the primary group revealed that they did substantially well in transforming themselves towards a culture of peace and reconciliation. This showed a positive impact of the TCPR in the respondents of the primary group in the Case Study of Ramanujan College.


The PRE-PQ, POST-PQ and PQ TI Means of the total TCPR Program Group (n=210) were calculated to see the impact of the intervention across the entire group of respondents at Ramanujan College. The change in PQ Means shown graphically in the chart below reveals the effect of the intervention.

The PRE-PQ Mean of the respondents, n=210 was 41.73 (less than 50) indicating that on an average the respondents were Towards a Culture of Violence and Confrontation prior to the intervention. After going through the intervention the POST-PQ Mean was 55.31 (more than 50) indicating that on an average the respondents had been transformed Towards a Culture of Peace and Reconciliation to the extent of 13.58 units (PQ TI Mean).


The transformation was described qualitatively using the Group Discussion transcription, Feedback Forms and Postponed Feedback Forms. Many of the respondents called the TCPR ‘innovative’, ‘motivational’ and ‘useful in personal life’. Some said that (TCPR) ‘had definitely changed my attitude’, ‘helped … to realize what peace means’ and ‘shown the path of success.’ Others said it helped in introspection, stress, anger management and behavioural modifications. In the words of one of the respondents of the primary group: “our own improvement led to social improvement.” All these indicated the positive impact of the TCPR program in transforming the students of Ramanujan College towards a culture of peace and reconciliation.


If building our youth for the future is the aim; the Case Study at Ramanujan College has proved that the TCPR is effective in transforming individuals on positive lines. The TCPR can be applied by other individuals and institutions to transform people towards a culture of peace and reconciliation. The program is one, simple—comprising of a Pre-Test Questionnaire and a TCPR Booklet so two, it can be easily used by individuals to usher in positive change in oneself (as was done by the primary group); and three, it can be easily used to motivate and educate others to usher in a positive change in themselves (as was done by the investigator on the primary group and the primary group on the secondary group). The program can, therefore, be used to build our youth (and people of all groups) for the future. And as our youth become more peaceful at the level of their minds they will develop positive personalities that succeed materially. As they train themselves in the principle of the Culture of Peace and Reconciliation they will become an instrument of broader change—towards a pragmatically peace and developed society.


Balasooriya, A. S.: Learning Ways to Peace: A Teacher’s Guide to Peace Education, UNESCO, New Delhi, 2001.

Besterman, Theodore: UNESCO: Peace in the Minds of Men, Mehuen & Co. Ltd., London, 1951.

Galtung, Johan: Theories of Peace – A Synthetic Approach to Peace Thinking, International Peace Research Institute, Oslo, 1967.

Gandhi, M. K.: “General Knowledge About Health” in The Collected Works of M. K. Gandhi, The Publications Division, New Delhi, Vo. 13, Ch. 153

Khan, Wahiduddin: The Moral Vision, Goodword Books, New Delhi, 1999.

Macnair, Rachel M.: The Psychology of Peace – An Introduction, Praeger Publishers, London, 2003.

MacGregor, Felipe: Culture of Peace, Peru, 1986.

Peters, Tom: Thriving on Chaos, Harper Perennial, New York, 1988.

Sternberg, Robert and Williams, M. Wendy: Educational Psychology, Allyn & Bacon, Boston, 1960.

UNESCO Asia Pacific Regional Bureau of Education: Learning to Be: A Holistic and Integrated Approach to Values Education for Human Development, UNESCO, Bangkok, 2002.

UNESCO IIEP: Globalization and Educational Reform.