Exercise description

The participants should imagine themselves having to explain to someone why we need reconciliation and find arguments in support of it. One person from the training team takes a sceptical position regarding reconciliation and asks that every argument is explained until it is completely clear and acceptable. The arguments are written on a wall newspaper/board.

The post Why Reconciliation? appeared first on CNA Priručnik.

Exercise description

The participants are split into two groups of seven people and they work in separate spaces. Two or three people are observers in each group (depending on the total number of participants). Slowly and clearly read the story about the context for the exercise, at least twice.

Story:

“You are two rival humanitarian organisations working with children. Both your organisations currently work on multiple important projects planned for the upcoming two years (one of the main projects is procurement of aids for children with disabilities). One officer from each of the two organisations has been arrested for using the privileges given to humanitarian organisations for personal gain (evasion of customs taxes). Importing technical equipment was at issue. All the other employees (all of you) knew about this but turned a blind eye. The public prosecutor suspects that the two officers cooperated in these illegal activities.

You are faced with the question: Is your organisation guilty as a whole?

The group votes by secret ballot and the decision is made by simple majority vote.”

The two groups then go work in separate spaces. It is important that they are in different room so that they cannot overhear each other.

It is explained to each group that the outcome of the vote on whether they are guilty as an organisation will have different illustrates the different outcomes:

Possible voting outcomes:

• If both organisations admit their guilt, they will be banned from working for 7 months.
• If both organisations deny their guilt, they will be banned from working for two months.
• If one organisation admits to being guilty, but the other does not, the organisation that admitted its guilt will be banned from working for one month, and the organisation that did not will be banned from working for 10 months.

You can download the voting outcomes chart suitable for printing on A4 paper

Voting plan:

1st round: Everyone receives a ballot paper to enter their vote (“Guilty” or “Not Guilty”). Everyone votes individually, without consultations within the group. The trainer delivers the verdict based on the results of the vote on both groups (to each group) and the corresponding punishment, as well as specifically how the other group voted. She writes this on the chart on the flipchart paper.

Example chart for recording the votes:

Each group receives a copy of the chart.

2nd round: Voting takes place again without prior consultation and the results are given to both groups. Only then does each group get five minutes to confer and nominate a negotiator to go negotiate with the other group. After negotiations, they again have a short time (two minutes or so) to confer within the group and then they vote. The trainer again delivers the verdict based on the results of the vote of both groups (to each group) and the corresponding punishment, as well as specifically how the other group voted. If from this point the voting results remain the same three times in a row and the same sanction is pronounced, whatever the ration of votes, the exercise ends.

If the exercise does not end by the fifth round of voting, the trainer announces that the next round will be the last. The negotiators should have a chance to meet again, and a short time to confer within the groups, followed by the final round of voting and the end of the exercise.

Some people may decline to vote during the exercise, which can lead to the vote being tied. If the results of the vote within the group are tied, the following rule is applied: the result will be determined in relation to the previous vote by making the tied vote opposite to the previous vote (if the results of the previous vote were “Not Guilty” then the result of the tied vote will be “Guilty” and vice versa).

Exercise evaluation

Suggested questions to evaluate the exercise:

How did you vote? How satisfied are you with the result?

How satisfied are you with the process? What did the observers notice?

The post Voting on a Verdict appeared first on CNA Priručnik.

Exercise description

Set up five chairs next to each other (like seats on a tram) so that the whole group can see them. The second and fourth chair are reserved for women and the other three for men. Ask three men (volunteers) to imagine they are on public transport (a tram) and to sit on the chairs (the first, third and fifth) in typical male poses. Then ask two women to join the scene and sit down in typical female poses.

Ask the observers to keep quiet and note down their observations if they need to. Let the scene go on long enough for the actors to become uncomfortable and start interacting, and then let the interaction develop for a bit (two or three minutes).

Ask one of the three male volunteers to return to the plenary and ask for another female volunteer from the group. The actors are not tasked with taking on the role of the opposite gender. Ask them to sit in the chairs so that the women first take up typical male poses and the men take up typical female poses. Let the scene last a few minutes for interaction to develop. Ask the observers to comment on what they noticed and compare the scene now with the one before. Ask the actors what it was like taking on the roles.

The post Tram appeared first on CNA Priručnik.

Exercise description
A grid of squares is drawn on the floor, 6 x 8 squares It can be made by using masking tape.
Each square should be big enough to allow a person to stand in it. This grid
is a “swamp”. Only some squares are safe to stand on and “won’t sink”.
Only the trainer has the blueprint of safe squares (see illustration). All the participants stand on one side of the
“swamp”.

Peacebuilding Training Handbook

The following instructions are read out to them: “Your task is to get the whole group over to the other side of the swamp. Only some of these squares – “rocks” – are safe to stand on and won’t sink. You move in single steps and can only step on the
square that is touching the one you are already standing on, including those
positioned diagonally. There is only one safe path through the swamp. When you step onto the
wrong square you will hear a “splash!”, which means that you are sinking and have to start over. Those who manage to
go through the swamp remain on the other side of the it throughout the exercise. Only one person at a time can
go through the swamp.
You have 10 minutes to work out a strategy.
After that, all communication must stop and the group will have 20 minutes to get through the swamp.”

Evaluation
Suggested questions to evaluate the exercise:
How do you feel after this exercise? What was it like?
How did you agree on a strategy? Did you agree?

How much care did you take of others? Did you try to find a way to get everyone through the swamp?
What was it like for those who were left last?

The post Swamp appeared first on CNA Priručnik.

Set of Introductory Exercises for the Theatre of the Oppressed

Duration: 20 minutes. Descriptions of the exercises are given here.

Perpetrator, Victim, Observer

Type of exercise: Work in small groups Duration: 25 minutes Materials: Flipchart paper, markers Split into three groups. (You can use one of the creative division methods: see the section on Creative Division into Small Groups or Pairs on p. 259.) Each group is given one of the topics: perpetrator, victim, or observer. The groups are tasked with analysing these roles and preparing wall newspapers around the following questions: ͳ What does the perpetrator/victim/observer look like? (each group deals only with the role they were assigned) ͳ What are their characteristics? ͳ How do they make me feel? ͳ What are the strengths of this role?

• What does the perpetrator/victim/observer look like? (each group deals only with the role they were assigned)
• What are their characteristics?
• How do they make me feel?
• What are the strengths of this role?

Setting the Statues

Duration: 30–45 minutes

The participants remain in the same groups as for the wall newspaper. Each group is tasked with setting up a statue of the victim, perpetrator or observer (the same role they analysed previously).

Display, Analysis and Changes to the Statues

Duration: 225 minutes

Step 1. Display the statue of the perpetrator. The rest of the participants are the audience.

Step 2. The participants from the audience are asked: “What did you see?”

Step 3. The performers clarify what they wanted to show and answer the question: “What was it like playing that role?”

Step4. The performers present the wall newspaper they prepared in the first part of the workshop. (You will need about 40 minutes for steps 1 to 4)

Step 5. Then the next statue is presented, first the one of the victim, and then of the observer, and steps 2 to 4 are repeated.

Step 6. When all the statues have been presented and analysed, possible changes are considered. Theperpetrator statue is displayed again..

Step 7. The audience is asked to think about possible changes that could contribute to reducing violence and to try to replace one of the roles. (Do not replace the roles that are the source of the violence.) The other performers respond to the change and form a statue to accommodate the change and show their response.

Step8. All those on stage are asked: “How did you feel? What happened?” (start from the person whose role was most affected by the change)

Step9. Question for the audience: “What did you notice?”

Step 10. If there are more ideas, do a few more changes. For each change, repeat steps 8 and 9. Step 11. A round of applause for all who participated in the original statue and its changes. Make sure to have a break before

you move on to the next statue.

Step12. Move on to making changes to the other statues – first that of the victim and then the observer. For each statue, go through steps 7 to 11.

Evaluation

Suggested questions for the evaluation:

What was it like? What new questions opened up for you? What did you get out of this exercise?

The post Statues Theatre appeared first on CNA Priručnik.

Exercise description

The participants split into two groups: the “candidates” (five or six persons) and the “voters”. The candidates have two to three minutes to come up with their presentations – how they will campaign in the presidential elections to get the most people to vote for them. Then they have up to two minutes for their presentation.

This is followed by a “press conference” where the candidates respond to questions from the voters (10-15 minutes). Next comes voting by secret ballot. If more candidates have the same (highest) number of votes, a second round of voting is carried out. At the end, the elected president must sing a song together with his/her supporters.

Evaluation

Suggested questions to evaluate the exercise:

For the candidates: What was your guiding idea when you were coming up with a strategy? How did you feel?

For the voters: How did you decide who to vote for?

For everyone: Do you see any parallels with national presidential elections?

The post Presidential Elections appeared first on CNA Priručnik.

Participants are divided into four groups (of four or five participants). They have 10 minutes to come up with a short conflict role play. It would be best to do something from personal experience – a situation

where they were bothered by the manner of communication.

Step 1 – Everyone goes back to the plenary and the first group does their role play.

Step 2 – Brief discussion in the plenary: What did you not like in the role play?

Step 3– Switch-around. Invite the people who watched the role play to think about whose role they could take on and try to use a new way of communicating to change the role play. If only one or two roles communicate in an unpleasant or conflictual way, do not change those roles in the beginning.

Step 4 – Evaluation of switch-around: What changed in the attitude of the persons involved? What did the observers notice? How did a change in behaviour affect the person whose communication was unpleasant? What was it like for the others in the role play?

Then the next group does their role play and steps 1 through 4 are repeated until all groups have had their turn.

The post Practising “I-speech” through Role Play appeared first on CNA Priručnik.

Exercise description

Check that everyone has a paper and pencil and then slowly and clearly read the background story at least twice. Story: “A new planet has been discovered with excellent conditions to sustain life. It needs to be populated. You are members of the commission tasked with populating the planet. Your task is to identify three characteristics and three skills that the people who will populate the new planet should have. You have five minutes to think about it and write down the characteristics and skills.”

Process:

Step 1 – Everyone works individually identifying three skills and three characteristics: five minutes

Step 2 – The participants work in pairs and groups of three where they discuss and agree on the three skills and three characteristics for people who will populate the planet: 7 minutes

Step 3 – By combining the pairs and groups of three people, form groups of four or five people. The task is to determine a list of three characteristics and three skills: 12 minutes

Step 4 – By combining the groups, form two large groups (of nine or ten people): 15 minutes

Step 5 – Reconvene in plenary. The task is to determine a list of three characteristics and three skills: 20 minutes

Evaluation

Suggested questions to evaluate the exercise:

Did you reach an outcome? What is it? What was it like? What happened? How satisfied are you with the outcome? How satisfied are you with the process? Was the decision reached by consensus? Was it easier to reach a decision in pairs or in one of the subsequent steps or in the plenary? How and why? What was difficult?

The post Planet appeared first on CNA Priručnik.

Evaluation Suggested questions to evaluate the exercise: Ask each group: What happened? Then tell them about the instructions given to the new islanders. How did the newcomers feel about their role as rule-breakers, and how did the islanders feel about their system being disrespected? Who was the victim and who was the aggressor? How does this experience relate to real life?

The post Life on an Island appeared first on CNA Priručnik.

Pairs of participants are tasked with advocating (i.e. speaking in favour of) one of the following terms: justice, forgiveness (or mercy), truth, or peace. These are the four elements of the reconciliation process, according to Lederach. They have ten minutes to prepare arguments for why their concept (justice, forgiveness, truth, or peace) is the most important for reconciliation.

Then a volunteer from the group lines up the representatives of these concepts in the middle of the room in their order of importance (according to her own assessment of the priorities, she starts with the concept she sees as the most important, then next in importance, and so on). When she lines them up, she explains to everyone why she decided on that particular order. Then the representatives of the concepts are given an opportunity to say how they see their position, how they think they should be ranked and why.

If there is enough time, it can be interesting to have another volunteer rank the elements, i.e. to repeat the process with a new volunteer.

Evaluation

At the end, have a brief plenary discussion about our different contexts (how far along are these processes in our communities, what is missing, what is being treated as crucial, etc.).

The post Justice, Forgiveness, Truth, Peace appeared first on CNA Priručnik.