Looking back on this trip to Northern Ireland, I can honestly say it changed the way I think about peace, conflict, and the role that communication plays in shaping society. Before coming on this trip, I mostly viewed peace as simply the absence of violence. After visiting Belfast, Derry, and the different organizations we met with, I realized that peace is much more complicated than that. A place can appear peaceful on the surface while still carrying the emotional, social, and political effects of conflict. Seeing this firsthand made many of the concepts we discussed in class feel real rather than just theoretical.

One of the biggest academic highlights for me was visiting the peace walls. I expected them to represent peace, but instead I found them confusing and even contradictory. The walls were originally built to reduce violence, yet they still physically separate communities decades after the Good Friday Agreement. Learning that many residents still want the walls to remain because they make them feel safer showed me how deeply fear can continue long after active conflict ends. That experience completely changed my understanding of peacebuilding. I realized that ending violence does not automatically eliminate mistrust or trauma.

Another experience that stood out to me was visiting integrated schools. I found myself thinking about the students more than anything else. Some students chose to attend these schools, while others were there because their parents wanted them to be. It made me wonder whether reconciliation is something people genuinely choose for themselves or something they gradually learn through their environment. Watching students from different backgrounds learn together gave me hope, but it also showed me that changing relationships between communities is a slow process that requires patience and consistent effort.

The visit to Corrymeela was another highlight because it demonstrated what intentional peacebuilding looks like. Unlike the peace walls, which separate communities, Corrymeela creates opportunities for dialogue and understanding. I appreciated that it was built as a neutral space where people from different backgrounds could come together with mutual respect. Before visiting, I assumed reconciliation happened mainly through political agreements, but Corrymeela showed me that lasting peace depends on everyday conversations, listening, and relationship-building between ordinary people.

The Free Derry Museum was probably the most emotional experience of the trip. Seeing photographs, videos, and personal stories made the history of the Troubles feel much more real than simply reading about it. It reminded me that historical events are not just dates in a textbook, they are experiences that continue to affect families and communities for generations. That visit helped me better understand the concept of intergenerational trauma and how memory continues to shape identity long after violence has ended.

As a Biology major, I initially questioned how a Peace Studies course would relate to my future career. By the end of the trip, I realized that medicine and healthcare are about much more than treating physical illness. Patients’ experiences are influenced by their families, communities, culture, and past trauma. Understanding those factors can make someone a more compassionate healthcare provider. Whether I eventually become a physician or pursue another healthcare profession, I know I will care for people whose lives have been shaped by experiences very different from my own. This course reminded me that listening carefully, respecting different perspectives, and understanding a person’s background are just as important as scientific knowledge.

One of my biggest personal challenges during the trip was processing everything we were learning while also reflecting on my own reactions. Many of the sites were emotionally heavy, especially hearing personal stories from people who had lived through the conflict. I found myself thinking about how easily division can become normalized within a society and how difficult rebuilding trust can be. At the same time, I was encouraged by the people and organizations dedicated to creating a more peaceful future. That balance between hope and sadness was something I did not expect before traveling.

Reading through my own daily reflections and those of my classmates, I noticed that many of us experienced similar moments of surprise, curiosity, and empathy, even though we often focused on different aspects of each visit. Seeing everyone interpret the same experiences differently reminded me that perspective plays a huge role in communication and conflict resolution. There is rarely only one way to understand a place or a story.

Overall, this trip challenged many of my assumptions and broadened both my academic and personal perspective. It reinforced that peace is not simply the absence of conflict but an ongoing process that requires communication, empathy, and intentional effort. It also reminded me that understanding people’s lived experiences is valuable regardless of the career path I pursue. This experience will stay with me long after this course because it changed how I think about conflict, healing, and the responsibility we all have to better understand one another.

One of the most interesting parts of the day was seeing how different organizations are working toward the same goal: helping Northern Ireland move from a divided past toward a shared future. Throughout the day, we met with representatives from the Irish Language Commissioner, the Ulster Scots/Ulster British Commissioner, the Electoral Commission, and the Commission for Victims and Survivors. Even though each organization focuses on different issues, I noticed that all of them were concerned with identity, representation, and creating relationships that allow people with different backgrounds to coexist peacefully.

A concept from our readings that connects to these experiences is reconciliation. According to Bloomfield, reconciliation is “a process through which a society moves from a divided past to a shared future” (Bloomfield, 2003, p. 12). Rather than ignoring differences, reconciliation involves finding ways for communities to live alongside one another while acknowledging the past. After listening to the speakers throughout the day, I realized that many of the organizations we visited are contributing to that process in different ways.

During our meeting with Terry and the Irish Language Commission, we learned about efforts to preserve and expand the use of the Irish language. I was surprised to learn how political support for the Irish has changed over time and how much work goes into translation, education, and media production. One story that stood out was hearing how just five families helped create an urban Irish-speaking community, showing how cultural change can begin at the local level. Terry also spoke about language as an important part of identity and culture. Hearing this made me realize that preserving a language is not only about communication but also about helping people maintain a connection to their history and community.

We also met with Lee, the first Ulster Scots and Ulster British Commissioner. His presentation added another perspective on identity in Northern Ireland. One point that stood out to me was when he said that the Good Friday Agreement did not fully resolve questions surrounding identity. He discussed the importance of culture, heritage, arts, and language, and used a pond analogy to explain how communities need ongoing care and investment in order to thrive. Lee also spoke about programs such as NICE (National Identity and Cultural Expression), which encourage conversations about cultural and national identity. His emphasis on connectedness and empathy reminded me of the game we played at Corrymeela, where understanding another person’s perspective was necessary for cooperation. Listening to both Terry and Lee helped me understand that reconciliation does not require people to abandon their identities. Instead, it creates space for different identities to exist alongside one another.

The Electoral Commission presentation focused on democracy and civic participation. Representatives discussed their efforts to increase voter turnout, educate young people about elections, and combat misinformation online. I found it especially interesting that 16- and 17-year-olds will be able to vote in future elections. The commission’s outreach through schools, social media, and programs like Welcome to Your Vote Week reflects the idea that democracy depends on participation. Our reading explains that democracy is a way of managing differences without violence and allows different viewpoints to coexist peacefully (Bloomfield, 2003, p. 10). Seeing how much effort goes into encouraging participation made me appreciate the role democratic institutions play in maintaining peace.

The presentation from the Commission for Victims and Survivors was probably the most impactful part of the day. Andrew discussed the lasting effects of the Troubles and the reality that many people continue to live with trauma decades after the conflict ended. One statement that stayed with me was when he said, “Peace isn’t the absence of violence; it’s the presence of justice.” The commission works to ensure that victims and survivors receive support, recognition, and dignity. Hearing about counseling services, survivor stories, and efforts to address generational trauma demonstrated that reconciliation is not about forgetting the past. Instead, it involves acknowledging painful experiences while creating opportunities for healing and coexistence.

Overall, today’s visits showed me that reconciliation happens in many different ways. It can involve preserving a language, celebrating cultural traditions, encouraging democratic participation, or supporting people who have experienced trauma. Although these organizations approach peacebuilding from different angles, all of them are helping Northern Ireland continue the difficult process of moving from a divided past toward a shared future.

Work Cited

Bloomfield, D. (2003). Reconciliation: An introduction. In D. Bloomfield, T. Barnes, & L. Huyse (Eds.), Reconciliation after violent conflict: A handbook (pp. 10–18). International IDEA.