Abstract
The first six chapters form Part I tell the story of the IBE. This first one shows that the International Bureau of Education (IBE) was the product of a collective genesis. It was the continuation of a plethora of initiatives which, in the nineteenth century already, were working towards the institutionalisation of networks dedicated to education and childhood, in order to pacify the world. The contours of the IBE were furthermore sketched out in a particular context, in effervescent post-war Geneva when the city was designated to host the League of Nations (LoN). The chapter describes the dynamics of this genesis in order to understand what led the intellectuals, psycho-pedagogues and educators grouped around the Institut Rousseau to conceive of their institution as one of the international agencies representing the values of peace, international solidarity and social justice, emblematic of the “spirit of Geneva”. An insert presents the Institut Rousseau.
This chapter is based on our earlier work, here summarised and brought up to date: Hofstetter (2015, 2022).
You have full access to this open access chapter, Download chapter PDF
The International Bureau of Education (IBE) was the product of a collective genesis. First of all, it was the continuation of a plethora of initiatives which, already around the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, were working towards the institutionalisation of networks dedicated to education and childhood, considering that it was through the transformation of young minds that peace on earth could be preserved. The contours of the IBE were furthermore sketched out in a particular context, in effervescent post-war Geneva, at a time when the city was designated to host the League of Nations (LoN) and the constellation of agencies that surrounded it.
Here, we focus on this period and we analyse the dynamics of this genesis in order to understand what led the intellectuals, psycho-pedagogues and educators grouped around the Institut Rousseau to conceive of their institution as one of the international agencies representing the values of peace, international solidarity and social justice, emblematic of the “spirit of Geneva”.Footnote 1 We pay particular attention to the way in which its promoters seized these exceptional circumstances to open up the field of possibilities in order to try to establish themselves as legitimate protagonists of events. The history of the genesis of the IBE is closely linked to that of the Institut Rousseau.
Compensating for the Shortcomings of the Treaty of Versailles
Already long convinced of the primacy of education in order to pacify the world, many pedagogues and intellectuals were astonished and even mutinous in the aftermath of the First World War: why did children not benefit, like workers with the International Labour Organisation (ILO), from an international body concerned with their fate, when it was generally agreed that the future of mankind depended on the education of new generations? The school was also in the dock during the Great War: steeped in nationalism and devoted to obedience, it was said to have trained pupils to become brave soldiers, meekly going off to the battlefields to die as patriots.Footnote 2 For the pacifist and feminist educators and intellectuals who pronounced this verdict, only a profound educational reform would preserve peace: the school’s mission must be to forge responsible, free and autonomous citizens, committed to the values of solidarity and international understanding.
Calls for a permanent International Bureau of Education were included in the Memorandum that the International Council of Women (ICW), the Allied Women’s Suffragists’ Conference of the allied countries and of United States of America presented to the highest officials of the League of Nations Commission in April 1919. In vain. Convinced that peace on earth could not be built solely through diplomacy but should also include the whole of civil society, requiring a transformation of mentalities, many associations and leagues mobilised to make up for the “inadequacies” of the Treaty of Versailles: they tried to bestow a mission of intellectual and educational cooperation on the so-called technical agencies of the LoN.Footnote 3
The representatives of the Institut Rousseau/École des sciences de l’éducation [School of sciences of education]Footnote 4 had their sights set on these movements and joined several of them, in order to have their voice and their work recognised. They now seemed convinced that they could link the destinies of their small institution with those of the world. Three of them in particular, established in Geneva while benefiting from a vast circle of intellectual solidarity, became the zealous promoters of an office aiming to preserve peace on earth through science and education. The doctor and psycho-pedagogue Édouard Claparède, holder of the chair of experimental psychology at the University of Geneva (since 1908), on whose initiative the Institut Rousseau was founded in 1912; the philosopher and pedagogue Pierre Bovet, who was the director of the Institute and was appointed professor of “science of education and experimental pedagogy” in 1920; the reformist sociologist and also pedagogue Adolphe Ferrière, who collaborated extensively with the Institut, and considered that the International Bureau of New Schools (IBEN),Footnote 5 which he had already set up in 1899, could be the foundation on which the new international bureau could be built.Footnote 6 They were supported by their families and close colleagues at the Institut Rousseau, by researchers, trade union practitioners and politicians, notably Alice Descœudres, Robert Dottrens, Max Hochstaetter, Albert Malche and Paul Meyhoffer.
Among their many networks of support was the Union of International Associations (UIA, founded in 1907; Laqua et al., 2019). In his Petit Journal Adolphe Ferrière told of how he joined the teachers’ section of the international Unions’ congress in September 1920 when it “addressed the wish to LoN to support education research laboratories”.Footnote 7 He nevertheless managed to get the IBEN recognised by the UIA and by the international bureaux section of the LoN, thanks to exchanges which the thinkers at the head of Institut Rousseau had with the Belgian pacifist internationalists Paul Otlet and Henri la Fontaine,Footnote 8 as well as with a number of diplomats who, in the early 1920s, were beginning to converge in Geneva.
Members of the Institut Rousseau also focused on the activities of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF, founded in 1915Footnote 9), which had recently been established in Geneva to enable it to more actively influence the work of the LoN. Through Claparède, Bovet and Ferrière, closer links were established with the energetic feminist Elisabeth RottenFootnote 10 who addressed the pacifists of the whole world and the representatives of the LoN in particular, urging them to ensure the “salvation of humanity” through emancipatory education. This “revolution”, she claimed, required the foundation of an international bureau of education, which she recommended be established in Geneva, more precisely at the Institut Rousseau, which she believed would already embody “die beste Inspiration” (Rotten, 1920, p. 67). From then on, regular meetings were held on this subject at the headquarters of the Institut, which welcomed notables, scholars and government delegates who passed through or settled in Geneva, as the diplomatic ballet of international conferences began.
Dithering at the LoN
At its first assembly in Geneva in December 1920, the LoN learned of some of these proposals and entrusted their processing to its representatives. In March 1921, the Frenchman Léon Bourgeois, president of the first LoN Council, endorsed the wish to see the LoN set up a bureau to spread the ideas of international cooperation, which were in fact in line with his philosophy of solidarity.Footnote 11 During the course of 1921, the project was supported by various diplomats in turn, notably the French, Belgian, Chinese, HaitianFootnote 12 and Japanese. At the same time, the UAI, led by Paul Otlet and Henri La Fontaine, mobilised at the Palais Mondial in Brussels in the summer of 1921, on the occasion of its International Congress of Intellectual Labour. Education appears in one of its resolutions in the wake of a convergent decision in favour of the “interests of intelligence”:
Appeal to the Assembly of the League of Nations to accept the demands of the Congress of Intellectual Labour and that the interests of Intelligence be represented in the Society like those of politics, finance and manual labour. […]
[On the proposal of Ferrière] That an International Bureau of Education for the comparative study of modern pedagogical data be set up in conjunction with the League of Nations and the proposed instance for Intellectual Labour.Footnote 13 (UAI, 1921, pp. 180, 165)
Was this request heard? Supported by a number of intellectuals, politicians and diplomats, Léon Bourgeois became its defender within the Wilsonian agency. This was evident in his report presented on 2 September 1921 in Geneva, which suggested the appointment of a commission to study international questions of intellectual cooperation and education. Once adopted, the Bourgeois resolution was first debated in committee and then submitted to the LoN Assembly on 21 September 1921. The Assembly dismissed the educational aspectFootnote 14: educational issues were the sole prerogative of states, which the LoN should not interfere with, even though the deleterious effects of nationalist teaching were recognised. After conflictual debates, only “intellectual cooperation” was chosen, laying the foundations for the creation, in 1922, of the International Commission for Intellectual Cooperation (ICIC), then, in 1925, of the International Institute for Intellectual Cooperation (IIIC), financed by France.Footnote 15 Its tasks were to include, on the fringes first, school-related matters and in particular teaching the LoN’s aims to young people as well as the revision of school textbooks, including history textbooks, in order to remove any bellicose spirit.Footnote 16
After the workers (ILO), here were the intellectuals endowed in their turn with an international organisation. Still nothing specifically dedicated to education and childhood? A succession of leagues and associations mobilised and worked together to fill this gap. The archives bear witness to the many steps taken in this direction, while also revealing the internal struggles and bitter negotiations to circumscribe the territories: childhood and education proved to be particularly coveted targets (Image 2.1).
The Institut Rousseau, Figurehead of Educational Internationalism?
A core group of pacifists and pedagogues from the Institut Rousseau decided to present themselves as legitimate founders of the International Bureau of Education. They activated their networks of relations, in particular teachers and their associations, as well as activists of the new education, the Esperanto and pacifist movements and representatives of the political and academic authorities and also certain ambassadors of the LoN and its technical agencies.
Among their most influential correspondents were Swiss political figures such as Gustave Ador, Giuseppe Motta, Friedrich Zollinger and international diplomats involved in social and educational issues such as James Eric Drummond, Inazō Nitobé, Léon Bourgeois, Henri Lafontaine, Robert Cecil and especially Albert Thomas.Footnote 17 The personalities who rallied to the cause of the Institut Rousseau, with it, seized on the dynamics set in motion in the salons and circles of Geneva, the “new capital of world diplomacy”. They tried to position themselves as figureheads of educational internationalism, in order to “pull the desired strings”, “to enter into unofficial contact with the delegates of the countries that we know to be interested in our subject”, as recommended in the preliminary drafts drawn up,Footnote 18 when the 3rd Assembly of the LoN was held in Geneva in September 1922. However, they were cautious: above all, they kept to a scientific and educational stance; they avoided any political compromising involvement by not placing themselves under the aegis of intergovernmental agencies; they approached technical organisations and prominent scientific bodies (the ILO, universities, scientific centres and laboratories). For example, fruitful collaborations multiplied with the ILO, above all in the field of vocational guidance, a particularly socially sensitive area of research.Footnote 19 Moreover, the Institut Rousseau mobilised the intellectuals in its vast scholarly networkFootnote 20 to encourage those personalities and institutions likely to contribute their scientific to the project.
At the same time, on the initiative of Ludwig W. Rajchman, Director of the LoN Health Organisation, international civil servants asked the Institut Rousseau to create the International School (1924), that is, “a good progressive school” for the children of international civil servants based in Geneva.Footnote 21 If Ferrière and his family were involved in this school, known as Ecolint, it was to attest the internationalist and pacifist mission of the new education and their Institute. This school—nicknamed the “League of Nations in miniature” by Ferrière—claimed to be an “example and model” from which the schools of the future would be inspired.Footnote 22 The first school class was established on an experimental basis, in Ferrière’s own garden, and he was the technical advisor. The Ecolint was sponsored by an association made up of about thirty personalities from the major international organisations and local elites whose social, financial and cultural capital served as a guarantee for the school. Among them were also the most fervent advocates of an IBE in Geneva. When it expanded, the school established its primary and secondary levels near the Institut Rousseau, explicitly claiming to be in the spirit of the active school in order to build the “Spirit of Geneva, this international spirit which reigned in the circles of the LoN and which the directors of the school also strove to instil in their pupils” (Dupuy, 1926, p. 18).
Having failed to obtain the resources and support needed to create the envisaged International Bureau from scratch, the leaders of the Institut Rousseau, once again assisted by a circle of strategic intellectuals and diplomats, agreed on a new tactic: to make people believe that the IBE already really existed. The Institut did in fact function as such; did not its inaugural concept present it as a centre for research, documentation and international information and propaganda for children and the preservation of their rights? Since 1912, had it not functioned as an international agency, with not only a research centre comprising a laboratory, a foreign information service, a series of publications (Bulletins, Archives of Psychology, book series) and experimental schools (including the Maison des petits and now the “School of the League of Nations”), but also the main functions devolved to this imagined bureau?
As the autumn of 1925 passed, the strategy of making it appear that the IBE already existed and that its formalisation depended only on recognition and available resources gained ground. In November 1925, Claparède learned that his efforts to get the Institut Rousseau a grant from the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial Fund had been successful.Footnote 23 This substantial sum (equivalent to CHF 25,000 per year Footnote 24), which could be renewed, gave the spokespersons of the Institut Rousseau the exceptional opportunity to create the much-dreamed-of International Bureau of Education. On December 18, 1925, dispatches officially announced the foundation (Image 2.2).
Insert 2.1 The Institut Rousseau: A “Temple Dedicated to Childhood”
In 1912, at a time when chairs, laboratories and institutes dedicated to an experimental approach to educational phenomena were multiplying throughout the world, the doctor and psychologist Édouard Claparède created the Institut Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Privately owned and under the direction of the philosopher and psychologist Pierre Bovet, the Institute opened its doors in October 1912, with about twenty students and the same number of staff.
Claparède’s programmatic text (1912) indicated the Institute’s four functions:
-
1.
A school allowing educators to orient, document and train themselves in scientific method and to collaborate in developing the science of education;
-
2.
A research centre to ensure the progress of this new science;
-
3.
An information centre collecting and disseminating research;
-
4.
A centre of propaganda for educational renewal.
The interrelation of these roles was significant: like many other psychologists, doctors and pedagogues (Alfred Binet, Ernst Meumann, Ovide Decroly and Maria Montessori in particular), Claparède was convinced that education had to be reformed. Invoking the “brilliant pedagogical intuitions” of Rousseau, who was held up as a precursor, Claparède called for “functional education”: a better knowledge of the child and the laws of his or her development was essential in order to take into account his or her needs, and the child should henceforth—in a “Copernican revolution”—become the “centre of the educational system.”
Psychology was the first discipline to be called upon to enrich this knowledge of the child, even if other disciplines were also incorporated into this new “School” that was significantly named with the plural “of sciences of education”: anthropology, biology, law, history, medicine, pedagogy, philosophy, psychoanalysis, and sociology.
In fact, the Institute was in tune with the “spirit of the age”, drawing ample inspiration from experiences elsewhere in the world, and constantly seeking information and inspiration from what was happening in Europe and the Americas, and even, from time to time, in Africa and Asia. The Institut Rousseau was closely connected to most of the sites (laboratories, schools, Institutes, associations, congresses) where new educational theories and practices were experimented with and tested. These circulated in a dynamic movement that transcended national, cultural and disciplinary boundaries. The members of the Institut Rousseau took advantage of this internationalist turn of events and the educational effervescence that characterised the inter-war period to invite educators and researchers from all parts of the world to combine their efforts in order to produce, collect, discuss and disseminate all the knowledge likely to fuel a “universalisable” educational revolution. Those involved in the Institute, both students and professors, travelled the world to examine new experiments and make their own pedagogical discoveries, in order to test, improve and disseminate them.
In 1929, an agreement linked the Institute to the Faculty of Arts of the University of Geneva. Under the direction of the triumvirate, Bovet (pedagogy), Claparède (psychology) and Piaget (administration), the newly named Institut universitaire des sciences de l’éducation redefined its functions: it cut back its militancy in favour of more academic commitments and henceforth took charge of the theoretical training of primary school teachers in the canton of Geneva. It moved to the Palais Wilson in 1937, together with the International Bureau of Education which it had founded in 1925, thanks to a donation by the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial Fund. During the 1930s and 1940s, despite the worsening international situation, the Institute consolidated its achievements and enjoyed a reputation which, according to its directors, was only equalled in Switzerland by that of the Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich. In Europe, moreover, while nationalism was on the rise, similar institutes were disappearing one after the other.
But the reduction and then the suppression of the Rockefeller subsidy and especially the repercussions of the Second World War,reducing student numbers and fees, raised the question of its survival. At the end of the world conflict, the Institute was drained, even though its reputation remained secure. Under the expert leadership of the new generation, Jean Piaget and Robert Dottrens, co-directors since 1944, a project took shape to attain full academic recognition for the Institute, its collaborators and the qualifications it awarded. Scientific research became more professional and led to disciplinary specialisations, allowing psychology in particular to expand its territory, thanks to Jean Piaget and his numerous collaborators. The Institute’s substantial contribution to the theoretical and professional training of primary teachers was decisive, as the issue of their professional qualification at a time of expansion of education systems was proving crucial everywhere. Its reputation, presented as unique in Europe, was unanimously recognised for its contribution to the development of Geneva as an international city. The principle of an “Inter-Faculty Institute” soon won over academic and political authorities, as well as representatives of the Institute itself. Officially adopted in February 1948, the Institute gained autonomy by becoming inter-faculty, attached to the humanities, sciences, social sciences and medicine, all fields in which it had built up its expertise.
At the end of the 1960s, the Institute was once again faced with a difficult situation. Insufficient resources, the lack of space and the dilapidated state of the premises in the Palais Wilson were among the difficulties that hindered the smooth running of the Institute from day to day. But this situation was symptomatic of deeper problems. Indeed, the academic and administrative structures of the Institute had become inadequate and did not allow it to meet the increasing and diversifying demands of training, and still less those of research. “Why doesn’t the Institute have the title of a faculty?” asked those who wanted more autonomy. With the support of both the rectorate and the State Council of the canton, this ambition was fulfilled. On 10 January 1975, the Faculté de psychologie et des sciences de l’éducation was created, the seventh faculty in the University of Geneva. This enabled it to gradually acquire academic credentials, especially as it experienced an impressive increase in its student population, and notably of women which, over time, would help to challenge the glass ceiling which still impinges on academic careers.
Notes
- 1.
One will of course recognise the title of the brochure written by Traz (1929), who sketches, not without bite, the contours of a pluralist humanism. In many studies, the role of Geneva as the seat of the League of Nations in the interwar years is problematised, also by relativising it and putting it into perspective: Droux (2018), Ghébali (1972), Gorman (2014), Grandjean (2018), Guieu (2012), Hidalgo-Weber and Lescaze (2020), Laqua (2011) and Marbeau (2017). Regarding some facets of the educational dimension: Dugonjić-Rodwin (2022), Fuchs (2007), Haenggeli-Jenni (2017), Hameline (2002b), Herren (2000), Hofstetter et al. (2020), Meyer (2013), Mole (2021) and Moody (2016).
- 2.
- 3.
Here we relay excerpts from Rosselló’s thesis (1943, pp. 131–139); he also argues for the inclusion of women in the LoN’s bodies. Grandjean (2018) has thoroughly documented these negotiations in the broader context of the construction of intellectual cooperation networks. For the history of the LoN, see the now classic Gerbet et al. (1996), Marbeau (2017) and Pedersen (2007, 2015).
- 4.
- 5.
In order to “establish scientific mutual aid between the different New schools, to centralize the documents that concern them and to highlight the psychological experiments carried out in these laboratories of the pedagogy of the future” (PEN 1923, 1, cover page).
- 6.
- 7.
UAI, La vie internationale, 1921, 26, pp. 165 et 180. Journal de Ferrière, September 1920. AdF/D/2/3/6-8, AIJJR.
- 8.
- 9.
- 10.
Co-founder of the Bund Neues Vaterland, which became the German League for Human Rights (Deutsche Liga für Menschenrechte), of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom in Germany, of the Bund entschiedener Schulreformer, an important association for progressive school reforms.
- 11.
See Berstein (2019) for an analysis of the political ideas of Léon Bourgeois; theorist of solidarism and modes of regulation between states, Bourgeois received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1920.
- 12.
Through the voice of one of the first people of colour to become a diplomat, Louis Dantès Bellegarde (1877–1966), professor and then, among his other political and diplomatic functions, minister of education, delegate of Haiti to the LoN, the Vatican and Geneva. From the outset, he defended, before the LoN, in 1921, the importance of an international scientific centre on childhood and education and, true to his convictions, contributed to the work of the IBE until the mid-1950s. Remember that, after tragic revolutionary struggles, the island of Santo Domingo—off the coast of Cuba—was the first free black republic in modern times to declare its independence (1804, from France), which did not spare it from bitter political struggles and then from a US occupation between 1915 and 1934.
- 13.
It should be noted that this is one of the first instances of privileging comparative studies in such an office, which are then held as world-class experimental approaches.
- 14.
But it preserved the demand for women to be included in the bodies of the League (Marbeau, 2007, 2017; see also Thébaud, 2019). Among these women was the Secretary of the American School Citizenship League, Fannie Fern Andrews, who in 1914 had already conceived of such an intergovernmental concertation, which could not materialise because of the war; this early initiative, she was considered by the IBE as its godmother (Bovet 1928, pp. 4–7; ICPE 1934, pp. 24–27, 173. Grandjean (2018, p. 157) points out that “the representatives of the Commonwealth have distinguished themselves since the preparatory work of the LoN in their zeal to contain the budget and the Society’s capacity to interfere with its members”.
- 15.
- 16.
- 17.
Let’s add some significant intellectuals who became the internationalists’ intermediaries between the Latin and Anglo-Saxon world, in particular Paul Monroe, William Rappard and Alfred Zimmern.
- 18.
Preliminary draft of the IBE, 1925. (181/95/44), AdF/A/1/1/36, AIJJR.
- 19.
The first ILO publication (Series J. Studies and Documents, Education No. 1, ILO preface) is signed by Claparède (1922) and deals with vocational guidance, a field in which the Institut Rousseau had specialised since 1917–1918, with the support of the Frenchman Julien Fontègne, then a war refugee. The whole brochure shows its importance for the fate of the working class, the fight against unemployment, the protection of workers against general or occupational diseases, the protection of young people and women.
- 20.
Its connections extend far beyond Europe, including intellectuals and networks in both the Americas and Asia (Hofstetter, 2010).
- 21.
Dugonjić-Rodwin (2022) demonstrates that the aim is to create this emerging community of international civil servants from scratch and to instil within this elite, through its descendants, the spirit of global solidarity that it is supposed to embody and disseminate, thwarting through its internationalism the nationalist frictions that undermined the LoN.
- 22.
Ferrière 1925, AdF/A/32/3/46, AIJJR. Indeed, as we know in retrospect, its concept would be transposed to New York (1946), at the time of setting up the UN Staff College, and it is still looked upon today as the reference for the thousands of international schools that are part of the “IB ecosystem” in most of the countries of the world (Dugonjić-Rodwin, 2022).
- 23.
All documentation relating to the founding of the IBE by the Institut Rousseau can be found at Archives Fondation Institut Jean-Jacques Rousseau (AIJJR): FG/BIE, 1 to 16; AdF, A/1 to 3.
- 24.
The total of the salaries of the IBE during the year 1930 was CHF 28,320. 67_A-4-2-291.I.
- 25.
This presentation draws on an exhaustive history of the Institute in Hofstetter (2010). “Temple Dedicated to Childhood” is quoted from a letter of É. Claparède to P. Bovet, 23.11.1911; Copies FG 25; AIJJR.
References
Berstein, S. (2019). Léon Bourgeois, une doctrine pour la gauche de gouvernement. In M. Winock (Ed.), Les figures de proue de la gauche depuis 1789 (pp. 271–282). Perrin.
Confortini, C. C. (2012). Intelligent compassion: Feminist critical nethodology in the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom. Oxford University Press.
Droux, J. (2018). All for the best? A case-study of child protection procedures and decision-making in the child’s best interest (Geneva, 1890–1940). In H. Amsing, N. Bakker, & S. Parlevliet (Eds.), Images of education. Cultuuroverdracht in historisch perspectief (pp. 223–234). Uitgeverij Passage.
Dugonjić-Rodwin, L. (2022). Le privilège d’une éducation transnationale. Sociologie historique du baccalauréat international. Presses universitaires de Rennes.
Fuchs, E. (2007). The creation of new international networks in education. Paedagogica Historica, 43(2), 199–209.
Gerbet, P., Mouton, M.-R., & Ghébali, V. Y. (1996). Le rêve d’un ordre mondial, de la SDN à l’ONU. Imprimerie nationale.
Ghébali, V. Y. (1972). Aux origines de l’ECOSOC: l’évolution des commissions et organisations techniques de la Société des Nations. Annuaire français de droit international, 18, 469–511.
Giuntella, M. C. (2003). Enseignement de l’histoire et révision des manuels scolaires dans l’entre-deux-guerres. In M.-C. Baquès, A. Bruter, & N. Tutiaux-Guillon (Eds.), Pistes didactiques et chemins d’historiens (pp. 161–189). L’Harmattan.
Grandjean, M. (2018). Les réseaux de la coopération intellectuelle. La Société des Nations comme actrice des échanges scientifiques et culturels dans l’entre-deux-guerres [Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Lausanne]. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327208653_Les_reseaux_de_la_cooperation_intellectuelle_La_Societe_des_Nations_comme_actrice_des_echanges_scientifiques_et_culturels_dans_l%27entre-deux-guerres
Grandjean, M. (Ed.). (2022). Centenary of the International Committee on Intellectual Cooperation of the League of Nations. United Nations Library and Archives Geneva. https://intellectualcooperation.org/files/IntellectualCooperation_2022.pdf
Guieu, J.-M. (2012). La SDN et ses organisations de soutien dans les années 1920. Entre promotion de l’esprit de Genève et volonté d’influence. Relations internationales, 151, 11–23.
Haenggeli-Jenni, B. (2017). L’Éducation nouvelle entre science et militance. Débats et combats à travers la revue Pour l’Ère nouvelle (1920–1940). Peter Lang.
Hameline, D. (1993). Adolphe Ferrière (1879–1960). Perspectives, XXIII(1–2), 379–406.
Hameline, D. (2002a). Le cosmopolitisme de l’Éducation nouvelle à l’épreuve des nationalismes dans l’entre-deux-guerres. In D. Hameline, L’éducation dans le miroir du temps (pp. 157–216). LEP.
Hameline, D. (2002b). L’éducation dans le miroir du temps. LEP.
Herren, M. (2000). Hintertüren zur Macht. Internationalismus und modernisierungsorientierte Aussenpolitik in Belgien, der Schweiz und den USA, 1865–1914. Oldenbourg.
Hidalgo-Weber, O., & Lescaze, B. (Eds.). (2020). 100 Years of Multilateralism in Geneve. From the LoN to the UN. Suzanne Hurter.
Hofstetter, R. (2010). Genève, creuset des sciences de l’éducation (fin du XIXe — première moitié du XXe siècle). Droz.
Hofstetter, R. (2015). Building an “international code for public education”: Behind the scenes at the International Bureau of Education (1925–1946). Prospects, Quarterly Review of Comparative Education, XLV(1), 31–48.
Hofstetter, R. (2022). ‘Ut per juvenes ascendat mundus’. Le pari périlleux de fédérer les mouvements sociaux (1925–1929). In R. Hofstetter & Érhise, Le Bureau international d’éducation, matrice de l’internationalisme éducatif (premier 20e siècle) (pp. 77–116). Peter Lang.
Hofstetter, R., & Riondet, X. (2018). International institutions, pacifism, and the attack on warmongering textbooks. In E. Roldán Vera & E. Fuchs (Eds.), Textbooks and war – Historical and multinational perspectives (pp. 201–232). Palgrave Macmillan.
Hofstetter, R., Droux, J., & Christian, M. (Eds.). (2020). Construire la paix par l’éducation: réseaux et mouvements internationaux au XXe siècle. Genève au cœur d’une utopie. Alphil.
Koslowski, S. (2013). Die New Era der New Education Fellowship: ihr Beitrag zur Internationalität der Reformpädagogik im 20. Jahrhundert. Julius Klinkhardt.
Laqua, D. (Ed.). (2011). Internationalism reconfigured: Transnational ideas and movements between the world wars. I.B. Tauris.
Laqua, D. (2013). The age of internationalism and Belgium, 1880–1930. Peace, progress and prestige. Manchester University Press.
Laqua, D., van Acker, W., & Verbruggen, C. (Eds.). (2019). International organizations and global civil society. Histories of the Union of International Associations. Bloomsbury Academic.
Lefebvre, D. (2019). Henri La Fontaine franc-maçon. Éditions de la Fondation Henri La Fontaine.
Levie, F. (2006). L’homme qui voulait classer le monde: Paul Otlet et le Mundaneum. Les impressions nouvelles.
Loubes, O. (2001). L’école et la patrie. Histoire d’un désenchantement (1914–1940). Belin.
Marbeau, M. (2007). Les femmes et la Société des Nations (1919–1945): Genève, la clé de l’égalité? In J.-M. Delaunay & Y. Denéchère (Eds.), Femmes et relations internationales au XXe siècle (pp. 163–175). Presses de la Sorbonne Nouvelle.
Marbeau, M. (2017). La Société des Nations: Vers un monde multilatéral, 1919–1946. Presses universitaires François-Rabelais.
Meyer, G. (2013). Genève et les organisations internationales: une histoire locale de l’international. Bulletin de la Société d’histoire et d’archéologie de Genève, 43, 86–94.
Mole, F. (Ed.). (2021). L’Institut Rousseau à Genève, épicentre d’une mutation pédagogique mondiale? Archives Institut Jean-Jacques Rousseau Genève.
Moody, Z. (2016). Les droits de l’enfant. Genèse, institutionnalisation et diffusion (1924–1989). Alphil.
Pedersen, S. (2007). Back to the League of Nations. The American Historical Review, 112, 1091–1117.
Pedersen, S. (2015). The guardians: The League of Nations and the crisis of empire. Oxford University Press.
Pemberton, J. A. (2012). The changing shape of intellectual cooperation: From the League of Nations to UNESCO. Australian Journal of Politics & History, 58(1), 34–50.
Renoliet, J.-J. (1999). L’UNESCO oubliée: la Société des nations et la coopération intellectuelle, 1919–1946. Publications de la Sorbonne.
Riondet, X. (2020a). L’action de l’Institut International de Coopération Intellectuelle (IICI) au sujet des manuels scolaires (1931–1936): une agence aux moyens modestes, au sein de la complexité de l’Organisation de Coopération Intellectuelle (OCI). Relations internationales, 183, 77–94.
Riondet, X. (2020b). La résolution Casarès, ou les premiers pas difficiles de la Coopération intellectuelle au sujet des manuels scolaires (1925–1939). In J. Droux & R. Hofstetter (Eds.), Internationalismes éducatifs entre débats et combats (fin du 19e — premier 20e siècle) (pp. 141–117). Peter Lang.
Roldán Vera, E., & Fuchs, E. (Eds.). (2018). Textbooks and war: Historical and multinational perspectives. Springer.
Schott, L. K. (1997). Reconstructing women’s thoughts: The Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom before World War II. Stanford University Press.
Siegel, M. L. (2004). The moral disarmament of France. Education, pacifism and patriotism, 1914–1940. University Press Cambridge.
Thébaud, F. (2019). Une traversée du siècle. Marguerite Thibert. Femme engagée et fonctionnaire internationale. Belin.
Verga, M. (2007). Manuels d’histoire pour la paix en Europe, 1923–1938. In M. Petricioli & D. Cherubini (Eds.), For peace in Europe. Institutions and civil society between the World Wars (pp. 503–524). Peter Lang.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.
Copyright information
© 2024 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hofstetter, R., Schneuwly, B. (2024). The Primacy of Education to Pacify the World? . In: The International Bureau of Education (1925-1968). Global Histories of Education. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41308-7_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41308-7_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-41307-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-41308-7
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)