Seven Practices

Contesting and Constructing International Perspectives in
Global Education
Contesting and Constructing International
Perspectives in Global Education
Edited by
R. Reynolds
University of Newcastle, Australia
D. Bradbery
J. Brown
K. Carroll
Australian Catholic University, Australia
D. Donnelly
K. Ferguson-Patrick
and
S. Macqueen
SENSE PUBLISHERS
ROTTERDAM / BOSTON / TAIPEI
A C.I.P. record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.
ISBN 978-94-6209-987-6 (paperback)

ISBN 978-94-6209-988-3 (hardback)
ISBN 978-94-6209-989-0 (e-book)
Published by: Sense Publishers,

P.O. Box 21858,
3001 AW Rotterdam,
The Netherlands
https://www.sensepublishers.com/
Printed on acid-free paper
All rights reserved © 2015 Sense Publishers
No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by
any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording or otherwise, without written
permission from the Publisher, with the exception of any material supplied specifically for the purpose
of being entered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements vii
Introduction: Interpreting Global Education 1

Ruth Reynolds, Deborah Bradbery, Joanna Brown, Kay Carroll,
Debra Donnelly, Kate Ferguson-Patrick & Suzanne Macqueen
Section 1: Temporal and Spatial Views of Global Education
1. Re-Imagining Global Education in the Neoliberal Age:

Challenges and Opportunities 11
Graham Pike
2. One Size Fits All? Global Education for Different Educational

Audiences 27
Ruth Reynolds
3. Global Perspectives on Global Citizenship 43

Hilary Landorf & Eric Feldman
Section 2: Telling National Stories of Global Education
4. The Significance of Schooling, Teaching and Education: A South

African Perspective 55
Patrick Themba Sibaya
5. Educating Diverse Teachers in a Diverse Country: An Issue

of Connectivity 63
Udan Kusmawan
6. The Neglect of Politics and Power Analysis in Development

Education 77
Mags Liddy
7. The Implications for Secondary Teacher Training of Large-scale

Polish Immigration into England 89
Trevor Davies
Section 3: Empowering Citizens for Global Education
8. Democratising Schools 107

Javier Calvo de Mora
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
9. Where’s the Action in Global Education? Employing Global

Education for Lasting Change through Teacher Education 115
Suzanne Macqueen & Kate Ferguson-Patrick
10. Teaching with a Values Stance for Global Citizenship: Integrating

Children’s Literature 125
Deborah Bradbery & Joanna Brown
Section 4: Deconstructing Global Education
11. Service Learning as Post-colonial Discourse: Active Global

Citizenship 135
Fran Martin & Fatima Pirbhai-Illich
12. Going Global 151

Kay Carroll
Section 5: Transforming Curricula for Global Education
13. Historical Culture and Peace Education: Some Issues for History
Teaching as a Means of Conflict Resolution 161
Henrik Åström Elmersjö
14. The Digital Studio as a Global Education Site: Imaging to Examine

Issues of Social Justice and Human Rights 173
Debra Donnelly & Kathryn Grushka
15. A Global Citizenship Perspective through a School Curriculum 187

Murray Print
16. It Takes a Global Village: Re-conceptualising Global Education

within Current Frameworks of School and Curricula 199
Kay Carroll
17. Educating for Global and Local Peace: Emerging Visions,

Hopeful Practices 209
Toh Swee-Hin (S.H. Toh)
Authors’ Biographies 223
Editorial Committee Biographies 229
vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The editors would like to acknowledge the wonderful support we have received
from some key people. First and foremost many thanks to our diligent and
hardworking Research Assistant, Monica Gendi. We would never have completed
this without her painstaking attention to detail. Secondly to Cecilia Chiu who is a
copy editor of exceptional expertise. She chased up every comma and full stop
with a vengeance that we now appreciate mightily.
We would like to acknowledge our Editorial Committee who provided much
needed commentary on articles and gave us direction when we needed it most.
Members of this committee are listed in the back of this text.
We would also like to thank our various authors who revised and revised,
engaging in much professional discussion around their ideas of a global education.
They have managed to do what we hoped they would – provide us with wide and
varied perspectives to lift our visage beyond what our limited contextual
experiences have thus far taught us about Global Education. We have learned a lot
by the process and we hope readers will also.
Also many thanks to Sense Publishers and Peter de Liefde, Publisher and
General Manager, who are so responsive to our queries and helpful at all times.
vii
RUTH REYNOLDS, DEBORAH BRADBERY, JOANNA BROWN,
KAY CARROLL, DEBRA DONNELLY, KATE FERGUSON-PATRICK
& SUZANNE MACQUEEN
INTRODUCTION: INTERPRETING
GLOBAL EDUCATION
This text addresses the need for an international perspective on global education
and to provide alternate voices to the theme of global education. It takes key
themes that require a global perspective and asks educators to indicate how their
own experience of global education addresses them. Global education is a broad
and contested concept imbued with varied values, understandings and practices.
The term ‘Global Education’ is ascribed with a multiplicity of definitions
depending on the context of the proponents. The aim of this book is to construct
concepts of global education using international perspectives from experts rather
than provide one definitive view, definition or approach. We followed the authors’
lead. Some chose to write on global citizenship, some on global education; some
gave it an historical lens, some a futures lens. To us this was what we wanted from
this book – to tap into a variety of views in order to reveal them to a wider
audience. We identified authors who could contribute broad perspectives on global
education and key questions were provided. We asked how they defined the area of
global education; the key focuses in their field as they related to their national
context; their personal contributions to the field; and the key tensions and
challenges for global education in the future. We attracted internationally
acknowledged authors from North America, Europe, Africa, Australia, and Asia
who provided perspectives on a wide variety of contexts including tertiary
education, teacher education, various pedagogies, including digital pedagogies, and
curriculum development at school, tertiary and community levels. The text
explores the tensions inherent in discussions of global education from a number of
facets including spatial, pedagogical, temporal, social and cultural; and provides
critical, descriptive and values-laden interpretations. We envisage this text as a
starting point for a stronger international conception of global education and a way
to build a conversation for the future of global education in a neo-liberal and less
internationally confident time.
Definitions
Global education is about ‘preparing students for the increasing interconnectedness
among people and nation’ (Zong, Wilson, & Quashiga, 2008, p. 199). Exponential
R. Reynolds et al. (Eds.), Contesting and Constructing International Perspectives in

Global Education, 1–7.
© 2015 Sense Publishers. All rights reserved.
RUTH REYNOLDS ET AL.
technological and societal change has made us increasingly interdependent and has
flattened and converged global boundaries creating a need for global education and
learning about all dimensions of humanity (Banks, 2004; Friedman, 2005; Tye,
2003). Global education comprises knowledge, consciousness, intercultural
awareness, transnational efficacy and informed advocacy (Lorenzini, 2013). Global
knowledge informs students about structural and social inequalities and dominant
discourses. This knowledge frames global awareness, citizenship and
consciousness (Davies, 2006; Dower, 2014; Dower & Williams, 2002; Carpenter,
Weber, & Schugurensky, 2012). Global consciousness is an informed view of
rights and responsibilities in the global community (UNESCO, 2012). This
consciousness comprises an understanding of the interrelationships between the
collective and individual responsibility. It recognises the importance of human
rights issues, environmental sustainability and intercultural understanding and
creates an impetus towards global citizenship. The notion of a multifaceted
multidimensional citizenship embodying personal, social, spatial and temporal
dimensions (Cogan & Grossman, 2009) is one way in which global consciousness
can be envisaged. It is characterised by engagement with the challenges and
opportunities afforded by the issues identified by globalisation. It is a
transformative and empowering concept to deconstruct the contemporary and
international discourses. The global consciousness enables students to respond to
contemporary issues of poverty, social injustice, persecution, exploitation or
environmental concerns with transnational efficacy to enact change and seek,
through global advocacy, alternative solutions to these issues and contexts. This
text connects these constructs of global education and considers how global
frameworks are played out in a range of international sites and experiences.
Key themes and ideas

Chapters have been grouped around emergent themes of global education and seek
to provide an explorative pathway for the reader. Beginning with the thematic
thread of Temporal and Spatial Views of Global Education, Pike compares views
on the concepts of global education and international education while Landorf and
Feldman examine evolving literature on the meaning and application of the term
global citizenship. Reynolds uses research literature on all of these themes to
clarify the different contexts in which they may be used. All three papers
acknowledge ongoing discussions around how global education could possibly be
conceived and implemented in different venues and some of the contemporary
issues associated with the notion. Pike (‘Re-imagining Global Education in the
Neoliberal Age: Challenges and Opportunities’) points to the rise of neoliberal
discourses which has moved education increasingly towards a resource rather than
a moral focus on building communities. Using Nussbaum’s two poles of education
for profit and education for freedom (Nussbaum, 2009) and his own continuum
from privilege to common good, Pike develops criteria for the resultant four
quadrants that will expose the predominant values and beliefs that inform the
practice of global and international education if that position is taken. This
2
INTRODUCTION: INTERPRETING GLOBAL EDUCATION
provides an incredibly useful platform for global educators at the local and global
level to position their actions in different ways and in different times. This theme
of pragmatic opportunity as a central feature of global education is taken up by
Reynolds (‘One Size Fits All? Global Education for Different Educational
Audiences’), when she argues that, despite the different terms used, the ideas
espoused and the strategies implemented are dependent on the educational context.
Thus much of the confusion around the use of terms associated with global
education is as a result of the way that practitioners at different levels of education
envision what is possible. Landorf and Fredman (‘Global Perspectives on Global
Citizenship’) provide another very important perspective for this discussion by
including voices from non-Western sources to the discussion of what global
citizenship means. As it is an avowed aim of this text to provide multiple voices on
a theme which is most often discussed in a small number of Western, privileged
groups, Landorf and Feldman’s perspectives are critical. By engaging global
educators from many different corners of the world they argue that the
development of human capability rather than corporate gain is a crucial element of
global citizenship and a guiding framework. Additionally both local and global
actions, skills, and interconnectedness are required to be truly global citizens and
so debates that argue for one or the other are not helpful in augmenting notions of
global citizenship.
It is obvious from our authors’ opinions that national perspectives continue to be
very important in influencing global viewpoints. Many authors see their own
nation’s actions as a way of understanding global education. We have grouped
these together to put the spotlight on this idea. Telling National Stories of Global
Education brings together diverse national narratives of the history and enactment
of global education. Stories from South Africa and Indonesia provide unique
experiences of global education but ones that can be linked to other places in the
world. Sibaya offers the view that experiences of education in South Africa offers
perspectives on the importance of overall global values that imbue education, a
view influenced by the years of South Africa being isolated from the rest of the
world and subject to racial divisions. Kusmawan from Indonesia perceives global
education as a matter of connectivity and has the view that information and
communication technology (ICT) can help build global connections and local
connections in the diverse nation that is Indonesia. The Indonesian challenge of
creating social and national cohesion through technology and the vast numbers,
diverse cultures, languages and educational settings this involves is confronting.
These studies provide real and positive examples of how global education and
global citizenship can be achieved within a national context. Additionally in this
section stories from Ireland and from England provide examples from nations who
are reaching out to the world with authors reflecting on the issues associated with
such global interaction. Liddy provides an Irish perspective (‘The Neglect of
Politics and Power Analysis in Development Education’), arguing that what is
called development education in Ireland has a strong history of charity and mission
work in its conception of global education and global citizenship. Liddy argues that
there needs to be a more critical approach: that neglect of the power and political
3
aspects of global citizenship in development education could be seen as

encouraging issues such as human rights and social justice as personal and
individualised concerns rather than structural issues at cultural, economic and/or
political levels. Davies (The Implications for Secondary Teacher Training of
Large-Scale Polish Immigration into England), who surveyed trainee teachers on
their attitudes to global education, found that respondents believed that people
from different cultures can be good neighbours but there was an alarmingly low
regard for England being socially just and some confusion as to their role as
individuals and the wider role of government generally. They recognised that they
should exercise individual responsibility and contribute to volunteering and
community activity; but few trainees believed that teachers should make their
values about other cultures explicit. Both of the latter national narratives portray
mixed views on global education, weighing up the constraints of individual rights
and responsibilities and the international rights and responsibilities involved. Many
teachers seemingly do not see themselves as active global citizens but instead as
good global neighbours.
The section Empowering Citizens for Global Education is a compilation of
articles envisaging new global futures and strategies to achieve future global
citizens with an emphasis on schools. Calvo de Mora argues that democratising
schools is an important way to model for students and the wider community how a
better society could evolve; Macqueen and Ferguson-Patrick argue that enabling
students to take action on important events is a crucial but seemingly rare event in
schools and bodes ill for future global citizenship; and Bradbery and Brown argue
that the values of global education are crucial for future global citizens. Calvo de
Mora (‘Democratising Schools’) points out that if we want a more equitable global
community we need to collaboratively bring together families, teachers,
administrators, and students in schools, because they possess complementary
information that can be used to solve educational problems. Often non-formal
knowledge such as social and emotional issues, neighborhood issues, and family
status builds democratic school communities and such participation is the process
by which public concerns, needs, and values are incorporated into governmental
and corporate decision-making processes. School community-building can provide
direction for the wider world. Macqueen and Ferguson-Patrick (‘Where’s the
Action in Global Education? Employing Global Education for Lasting Change
through Teacher Education’) critique a pre-service teacher global education
program from the point of view of teaching future teachers to take action to engage
students in important global issues. They argue that enacting global values is
essential for the better world and any action that helps to link the local experience
with the global one will assist with this. Despite some degree of reticence in
dealing with issues that could be seen as controversial, global ways of acting, being
and feeling need to be embraced by teachers. Another chapter by Bradbery and
Brown (‘Teaching with a Values Stance for Global Citizenship: Integrating
Children’s Literature’) identifies the empowering potential of children’s literature
as a vehicle for teaching the values and dispositions of global citizenship and
4
provides some examples of key global issues that can be addressed by such
techniques.
Furthering the theme of pursuing a stronger sense of agency for global education
in Deconstructing Global Education, Carroll (‘Going Global’) argues that critical
literacy, critical inquiry and critical understanding are needed for a global context
and engagement. She outlines the impact of contemporary digital and social media
practices on global citizenship and suggests a framework for a critical approach to
global literacy in schools. Martin and Pirbhai-Illich (‘Service Learning as Post-
Colonial Discourse: Active Global Citizenship’) reframe service learning in a post-
colonial context and deconstruct examples from Canada and India.
Transforming Curricula for Global Education concentrates on critically focused
strategies and pedagogies for the promotion of global education precepts. All five
chapters address initiatives in curriculum to provide a reflexive approach to global
education. Although, as Andreotti (2006) notes, soft approaches to global
education such as raising awareness of global issues and promoting campaigns are
appropriate in some contexts, critical approaches where there are safe spaces
established to consider multiple perspectives on inequality and injustice, are also
possible. Curriculum can provides some of those spaces. Elmersjo (‘Historical
Culture and Peace Education’) examines the links between historical culture and
peace education. He argues that history education acts in a dialectic relationship
with its society and when a cultural group moves towards building more peaceful
and equitable relationships history education often uncritically follows. A critical
approach to history education would be to expose the conflicts in the narratives of
past events and to embrace these as part of a well functioning democracy. Donnelly
and Grushka investigate social justice and human rights using images in the digital
studio. They found that the independent self-directed learning structure of the
digital studio environment provided learners with a sense of agency and autonomy
in their learning and a space to explore global themes. In the Australian context,
the new Civics and Citizenship syllabus is arguably a good model for global
citizenship education. Print (‘A Global Citizenship Perspective through a School
Curriculum’), who was instrumental in developing this curriculum document,
points out that there are many opportunities provided in the document to explore
notions of global citizenship. The issue is that any form of citizenship education,
whether it be global or national or local, is poorly regarded in education curriculum
internationally and requires both formal and informal approaches to build engaged
citizens. Carroll (‘It Takes a Global Village: Re-Conceptualising Global Education
Within Current Frameworks of School and Curricula’), also addressing the
Australian Curriculum, maps the cross curricular priorities of Asia and Australia’s
engagement with Asia; Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories and cultures;
and sustainability across the newly implemented Australian curriculum and
concludes that education is the means through which the global village can be
envisaged and enacted. Toh (‘Educating for Global and Local Peace: Emerging
Visions, Hopeful Practices’) provides a vision of hope for us with his deep passion
for encouraging peace and peaceful critical pedagogy. He argued that global
education must employ multiple pathways including Human Rights Education,
5
intercultural understanding and personal inner peaceful mindfulness. The

possibilities are there for us all as educators to provide multiple ways to address
global education despite the evident constraints.
The emergent themes and trends identified in this book represent the many
voices of global educators on several continents and the interplay of these. The
various frames and lenses through which global education is viewed allow us to
present a problematised approach enabling us to confidently engage with global
discourses and global citizens. This text provides some initial insights into how we,
as researchers and educators from diverse nations, see the world of global
education. The editorial team have collated unique/different/rich/compelling stories
and ideas, providing a comprehensive statement of what global education means
internationally and how this relates to the implementation of global perspectives in
educational settings. This is only the beginning. We can see some themes that
require further investigation and some ideas that are worthy of providing direction
in the field:
1. There is a need to further explore non-Western perspectives on global education.
To be truly global we must learn to engage with others who have a view with
which we may not be familiar.
2. Readers from the Western world need to apply our critical, post-colonial
scrutiny to discourses of globalisation, common good and international
imperatives. What would truly global, non-judgemental and mutually supportive
communications truly look like? Why would we have such conversations? How
would we have such conversations?
3. How have national citizenship narratives been interrupted by global citizenship
narratives? What examples of this have not yet been explored?
4. From a curriculum perspective how well have we positioned ourselves for a
globally connected world and what are the implications of this? What are the
emerging pedagogies of such a world?
We encourage the continuing debate.
REFERENCES
Andreotti, V. (2006). Soft versus critical global citizenship education. Policy and Practice: A
Development Education Review, 1(3), 40–51.
Banks, J. A. (Ed.). (2004). Diversity and citizenship education: Global perspective. San Franciso:
Jossey Bass.
Carpenter, S., Weber, N., & Schugurensky, D. (2012). Views from the blackboard: Neoliberal education
reforms and the practice of teaching in Ontario, Canada. Globalisation, Societies and Education,
10(2), 145–161.
Cogan. J. J., & Grossman, D. L. (2009). Characteristics of globally minded teachers: A twenty first
century view. In T. Kirkwood-Tucker (Ed.), Visions in global education (pp. 240–270). NT: Peter
Lang.
Davies, L. (2006). Global citizenship abstraction or framework for action? Educational Review, 58(1),
5–25.
Dower, N. (2014). Global ethics: Dimensions and prospects. Journal of Global Ethics, 10(1), 8–15.
Dower, N., & Williams, J. (Eds.). (2002). Global citizenship: A critical reader. Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press.
6
Friedman, T. (2005). The world is flat. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Lorenzini, M. (2013). From global knowledge to global civic engagement. Journal of Political Science
Education, 9(4), 417–435.
Nussbaum, M. (2009). Education for profit, education for freedom. Liberal Education, 95(3), 6–13.
Tye, K. A. (2003). Global education as a worldwide movement. Phi Delta Kappan, 85, 165.
United Nations Economic, Scientific and Cultural Organisation [UNESCO]. (2012). A roadmap on
global consciousness: Thinking and learning for the 21st century. Retrieved from
https://en.unesco.org/cultureofpeace/flagship-programmes/global-consciousness
Zong, G., Wilson, A. H., & Quashiga, A. Y. (2008). Global education. In L. S. Levstik & C. A. Tyson
(Eds.), Handbook of research in social studies education (pp. 197–216). New York and London:
Routledge.

7
SECTION 1
TEMPORAL AND SPATIAL VIEWS

OF GLOBAL EDUCATION
GRAHAM PIKE
1. RE-IMAGINING GLOBAL EDUCATION IN THE

NEOLIBERAL AGE
Challenges and Opportunities
INTRODUCTION
In this chapter, I want to explore the lasting impact of neoliberalism on the

development of global education, in both K-12 and higher education sectors, in the
United Kingdom and Canada. In so doing, I hope to illustrate the urgent need for a
reassessment of, and reinvestment in, global education’s visionary goals at a time
when economic interests, as determined by the global free market, trump the
broader concerns of planetary health and the common good. Conflict and
controversy, in political as well as educational domains, have always shaped the
global education narrative but the neoliberal values that dominate contemporary
discourse on public education pose a challenge of an entirely different magnitude.
These are personal reflections on an era that has witnessed monumental changes in
geopolitical and economic systems, all of which, inevitably, have influenced
educational thinking. The probable continuance of such rapid change, allied to the
uncertainty of its outcomes, is the context for proposing a re-imagining of global
education at a time when its central values are often proclaimed but rarely practised.
GLOBAL EDUCATION AND INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION:

RESPONSES TO GLOBALISATION
Global education (at the primary and secondary levels of education) and
international education (at the tertiary level) are both reform movements that have
attempted to broaden students’ understanding of the world in the wake of the
impacts of globalisation. Public education systems, inevitably, have emerged
from – and have been deliberately shaped to promote – the nation as the primary
geographical and political concept. For more than a century, nationalism has been
integral to the purpose and practice of education (Green, 1990, 1997). Educational
institutions have laboured to produce workers who will meet the nation’s need for
certain skills and talents, civilians who will perform the requisite duties as voters,
parents and tax-payers, and citizens who will defend their sovereignty – even being
prepared, when necessary, to sacrifice their own lives in the interests of the nation
(Smith, 1998).
In the latter half of the 20th century, building on some earlier attempts and
strategies (Heater, 1980, 1984), educators in the global North began to argue, from

GRAHAM PIKE
both pragmatic and moral perspectives, that education should better acknowledge
and reflect the nature of the contemporary world. The pragmatic viewpoint
emerges from the inexorable rise of globalisation: in an era when national
economies are increasingly interdependent and the passage of goods and services is
indifferent to political boundaries, an understanding of the world as a global village
is more attuned to the everyday realities that link people, cultures and places in a
vast interconnected web. Whether for good or ill, the argument goes, globalisation
has forever changed the way the world works and education shoulders a
responsibility to prepare students to adapt and contribute to this enlarged
community.
The moral argument draws credibility from the realities of globalisation but
goes further than the pragmatist view. Given that we now live in a global village,
we have duties and responsibilities that are similarly far reaching in their scope
(Dower, 2003). As we are intimately interconnected, and the impacts of our actions
and decisions will have consequences for people around the globe, we should
extend our ‘circle of compassion’ to include those who live beyond our nation’s
border and to ‘give the circle that defines our humanity special attention and
respect’ (Nussbaum, 1996, p. 9). The care and concern for neighbours, one of the
defining characteristics of a well-functioning community, becomes a global, rather
than just a local or national, ethic. It is an argument grounded more in moral
principles than in law, though many of the key pronouncements that it draws upon
(such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) carry considerable weight.
Education’s role then, in this regard, is to sensitise national citizens to the stark
inequalities and injustices of the global system and to equip them with the tools
necessary to help ameliorate the lives of the less fortunate, wherever they may
reside.
Global education, at the K-12 level, draws from both pragmatic and moral
arguments. Building on earlier attempts in peace education to shape public
education as a vehicle for developing more tolerant young people who can resolve
conflicts without resorting to violence (Heater, 1980), global education continues
to focus on the development of the skills and values of cooperation and conflict
resolution while also imparting knowledge about global systems, global issues and
the interconnectedness of humans and other species. Common to many
manifestations of global education is the concept of the global community,
incorporating the idea that citizens of one nation should not only understand the
global implications of their decisions and actions but also should feel respect and
concern for the citizens of other nations who may be impacted by those decisions
or may simply need their attention and care. In the intimate milieu of the primary
and secondary classroom, where the inculcation of values such as tolerance, respect,
fairness and compassion is relatively easy to justify as falling within the mandate
for public education, teachers can feel confident about dwelling on these aspects,
whether at local, national or global levels.
At the tertiary level of education, international education has become one of the
fastest-growing and most influential developments in colleges and universities in
recent years (Taylor, 2004). Drawing from earlier traditions in comparative
12
RE-IMAGINING GLOBAL EDUCATION IN THE NEOLIBERAL AGE
education suggesting that national systems of education could benefit from a cross-
fertilisation of relevant ideas and practice from other systems (Dolby & Rahman,
2008) international education has sought to facilitate the movement and exchange
of knowledge, students and professors between institutions in different nations and
to promote the benefits of an international study experience. One of the early
manifestations of international education, built on the altruistic visions integral to
the field of international development, saw many college and university students
engage in a volunteer experience through organisations such as the Peace Corps
and Voluntary Service Overseas. Today, the rationale for international education is
most usually steeped in pragmatism: studying abroad will enhance a student’s
prospects of employment at a time when the workforce demands skills such as
adaptability and cross-cultural sensitivity. Furthermore, creating a cosmopolitan
campus at one’s own institution facilitates the interchange of perspectives from
around the world and thus allows even domestic students to benefit from
something of an intercultural experience. In the contested environment of academic
freedom that pervades most higher education institutions, the value-laden ideals of
global education are less in evidence, though they may still motivate many students
and faculty to embark upon international study and research experiences. Such
ideals may also be implicit in institutional pronouncements about the value of
international education for the development of global citizens.
THE IMPACTS OF NEOLIBERALISM
Global education
Running parallel to the development of the global and international education
movements has been the increasingly pervasive influence of neoliberalism (Harvey,
2005) in education systems. During the 1980s, at about the same time as the global
education movement was beginning to identify its key tenets and attract interest
from primary and secondary teachers in the developed world, the market-driven
ideology of neoliberalism was finding a foothold in the governance of school
systems and in the struggle for control of curriculum. The major thrust of
neoliberal initiatives was a shift away from the ‘ethical liberalism’ (Manzer, 1994)
of the post-war years towards requiring school curricula to focus principally on
developing the knowledge and skills required for global competitiveness, based on
a perception that schools were failing to adequately prepare students for ensuring
their nation’s success in the rapidly expanding global economy (Mitchell, 2003).
The classic hallmarks of neoliberal thinking in education include: curricula
increasingly oriented to the imperatives of a free-market global economy and the
honing of skills necessary to perpetuate it; an insistence on ‘learning outcomes’
that are closely allied to the perceived needs of employers; the prioritisation of
STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) subjects over the
‘softer’ and more creative arts, humanities and social sciences; an attribution of
greater value to learning that can be immediately measured; and an increasing
13
GRAHAM PIKE
commercialisation of education that views learning as a product to be acquired,

rather than as a lifelong way of being.
The pragmatic goals of global education were not necessarily viewed as
incompatible with the neoliberal agenda; in fact, lists of essential skills for the late
20th century employment produced by corporate and industrialist think-tanks were
often remarkably similar to skill sets promoted by global educators and were used
by some in advocacy campaigns for global education (O’Sullivan, 1999). The
moral arguments found in the global education literature, however, were often
viewed as a threat to the efficient production of suitably qualified workers for the
increasingly competitive global economic system. As mathematics, science and
technology achieved higher status in the politics of curriculum development, the
softer ideals of global education embedded in the social sciences, especially ideas
related to the widening of the circle of compassion and to the pursuit of social
justice globally, were subjected to more frequent attack in many countries or were
squeezed out of an increasingly crowded and regulated curriculum (Pike, 2008;
Tye, 2009). The guiding principles of a neoliberal approach to education –
standardisation of curriculum, quantifiable outcomes, accountability through
performance measurement – presented considerable challenges to the fundamental
tenets of global education that view learning as a journey with an undetermined
destination and adopt the beliefs and values of the student as the starting point for
that journey. The predominant neoliberal focus on the acquisition of a fixed body
of knowledge, inevitably prioritised by educational goals that insist on measurable
outcomes, was largely at odds with the nascent global education movement that
was struggling to define its epistemological parameters and which, in any case,
wished to give more weight to skills development and the exploration of values.
In the UK, following a decade of significant growth in world studies (the
preferred term at the time), attacks by Roger Scruton (1985), a junior minister in
Margaret Thatcher’s government, and others of like mind (e.g., Marks, 1984; Cox
& Scruton, 1984) marked a serious and significant shift in the political discourse
surrounding the leading movements in social and political education. From having
enjoyed some, albeit limited, support from the Department of Education and
Science, world studies was now directly under attack by government ministers and
influential academics. Furthermore, and perhaps more importantly, the freedom
enjoyed by teachers to debate the place and scope of teaching contemporary global
issues in the K-12 curriculum was severely restricted by the multiple impacts of the
1988 Education Reform Act that heralded the arrival of the first National
Curriculum in England and Wales. Not only was the National Curriculum, for the
most part, unreceptive to the substance and style of teaching advocated by world
studies, but also the pervasive and relentless shift towards the standardisation of
curriculum and assessment left teachers with little time or energy to explore ways
to integrate topics that were deemed to be peripheral, despite some evidence of
initial resistance on the part of global educators (Vulliamy & Webb, 1993).
In Canada, the federal government, under the auspices of the Canadian
International Development Agency (CIDA), had committed significant funding to
global education projects in eight of the ten provinces beginning in 1987.
14
Innovative projects undertaken in collaboration with teachers’ unions, including

the development of ‘global schools’ in some provinces, nurtured a generation of
global educators that built on best practice ideas from many countries. School
boards actively promoted global education as a key strand in the social studies
curriculum and funded teachers’ workshops and summer institutes. However, by
the mid-1990s, the tide of widespread support for global education in Canada was
rapidly turning. CIDA, without warning, cut its funding for the provincial global
education projects in 1995, leaving many projects and organisations struggling for
alternative funds and destroying the provincial and national dialogues and support
networks that were so important to teachers. Recently established Global Schools
discovered that their visions were no longer in line with school board mandates and
withered on the vine. Inexorably, the hallmarks of neoliberal ideology began to
take hold in education thinking and systems in Canada as elsewhere throughout the
developed world.
Global education was patently unprepared for the neoliberal onslaught. Not only
were some of its key principles a poor fit with neoliberal thinking, but also the
movement itself had paid insufficient attention to the fundamentals of gaining
credibility within either academic or political establishments. Indeed, being
essentially a grassroots movement, global educators had eschewed the idea of
aligning themselves with establishment thinking, arguing that such thinking was at
the roots of many contemporary global crises and, therefore, needed to be
challenged. Additionally, global education proponents had made many assertions
about the efficacy of their favoured teaching and learning strategies, but had
devoted little time to providing supporting, research-based evidence (Lister, 1987;
Merryfield, 1998). When faced with the sweeping reforms of curricula and
assessment practices that neoliberal thinking instigated, global educators were ill-
equipped to demonstrate the validity of their beliefs and practice or to adapt to the
changing circumstances in education thinking. Challenges to global education’s
credibility have been further exacerbated by the pervasive impacts of subsequent
global events, notably 9/11 and the economic collapse of 2008. The irony, of
course, is that global educators believe that their vision for education is key to
developing safer and more sustainable societies, but they are struggling to be heard
amidst the strident neoliberal voices.
International education1
In contrast to global education, international education has thrived under the
influences of neoliberalism. As public higher education institutions across many
parts of the developed world have endured consistent, and sometimes drastic, cuts
to their funding from governments, those institutions have actively pursued other
revenue sources to make up the deficit. At the same time, the attractions of a cross-
border educational experience have been recognised in many fast-developing
economies, particularly China, India and the oil-rich nations of the Middle East, by
increasing numbers of college and university students who view the status of
‘international student’ as a passport to higher paid employment in their home
15
GRAHAM PIKE
country or, in many cases, as a bridge to obtaining permanent residence in a more

developed country. This has created a burgeoning pool of eager international
students who are willing to pay premium tuition fees, often many times the cost of
tuition in their home country, to pursue a dream. This is neoliberalism in education
writ large: educational institutions with a desperate need for funds and, in many
cases, a dwindling local population, selling the credentials demanded by a growing
elite of wealthy students from beyond their national borders. As the market for
educational credentials is largely unregulated and global in scope, it offers those
students who can afford the fees a wide choice of education providers and thus sets
up intense competition between educational institutions worldwide wishing to mine
this rich seam of additional revenue.
Of course, higher education institutions that are key players in this market offer
cogent and passionate arguments, often supported by government policy
(Government of Canada, 2014), senior politicians (Gillard, 2009), and university
presidents (Toope, 2011) in defence of their international student recruitment
strategy. Such arguments generally focus on the social advantages of diverse,
multicultural and multilingual classrooms, the benefits of international exchange
partnerships that provide opportunities for domestic students to study in other
countries, the potential for faculty exchange and cross-border research
collaborations, and the impetus that international students provide in many ways to
the development of global citizenship on national campuses. These loftier, more
palatably altruistic goals are undeniably beneficial: the vibrancy of the
cosmopolitan campus is infinitely preferable to the limited vision of the college or
university that caters principally to the needs of its local middle-class
neighbourhoods; in a global economy and an increasingly interdependent global
system, it makes eminently good sense for future employees to gain experience of
other cultures, languages and ways of knowing at the same time as earning their
required credential. The desirability of what the forces of neoliberalism have
helped to create in higher education institutions, I would submit, is not in question;
however, the predominance of economic need as a key – and often unquestioned –
driver of the current trends in international education raises many questions that sit
uncomfortably with the rhetoric emanating from these same institutions. As the
authors of the 4th Global Survey on the Internationalization of Higher Education
note, the finding that ‘increased/diversified revenue generation’ is not regarded as
important by institutions is ‘surprising’, given the evidence to the contrary; they
suggest that ‘it is quite likely … that respondents offered a more “politically
correct” answer to this question’ (Egron-Polak & Hudson, 2014, pp. 51–52).
The rhetoric emanating from government policy statements and institutional
strategic plans may talk of the benefits of international collaboration for knowledge
exchange and student preparedness while the reality, notwithstanding the actual
benefits that may accrue from student and faculty mobility, is mired more in
economic self-interest and institutional competitiveness. The moral dilemma
inherent in this reality is summarised succinctly in an internal report from a
Canadian university:
16
The future for Ontario (and indeed all western) universities will be a difficult,
even perilous, journey. The ability of society to fund expensive education for
a large percentage of a diminishing local population is in question. One
possible aspect of this future is for the publicly funded universities to market
education to other jurisdictions at a profit to finance their public (provincial)
obligation. This is a significant development and should be debated in the
context of the mission of the publicly supported post-secondary education
system of Ontario. (Carleton University, 2011, p. 15)
Recent trends suggest that this reality is not likely to change in the foreseeable
future. While revenue from international education activity has largely benefited,
to this point, countries in the North, nations that used to be net exporters of
students, such as China, are now successfully marketing their own educational
products to students from other nations. Furthermore, the emergence of ‘education
hubs’, backed by significant private investment, in locations such as the United
Arab Emirates, Singapore and Malaysia indicates that the more prosperous nations
in the global South are determined to become serious players in the international
education marketplace (Knight, 2011). As governments in the North become
increasingly reliant on international tuition revenue to offset reductions in higher
education funding, competition for international students looks set to intensify.
This is the paradox of international education: a movement born out of the
ideals of internationalism and enrichment through cultural exchange, and still able
to deliver on those ideals at the micro level, seems inextricably caught up at the
macro level in the web of commercialisation that the very different ideals and
practices of neoliberalism have forced upon higher education (Knight, 2008; de
Wit & Brandenburg, 2011). In critiquing this trend I do not wish to downplay the
significance of the enormous benefits that institutions, individual students and
faculty have gained through international education; nor would I wish to doubt the
motives of those involved in the international education movement who strive daily
to create more global understanding, knowledge exchange and intercultural
sensitivity through their actions. Whatever the primary motivation, the
internationalisation of higher education would seem to offer the only sensible path
for institutions to take in the pursuit of greater human development and
international security. However, as the vice chancellor of a British university points
out, international education as a movement seems profoundly uneasy with the idea
of engaging in debate with ‘alternative forms of globalisation’, even though
internationally mobile students often ‘play a key role in developing these new
global social movements and forms of political action’ (Scott, 2010, p. 3). Such
debate is no more, and no less, than should be expected at institutions of higher
learning that value the notion of academic freedom and the rights of the academic
community to comment on the decisions of their governments and employers.2
17
GRAHAM PIKE
RE-IMAGINING GLOBAL EDUCATION: THE NEED FOR

PRAGMATIC ALTRUISM
At a time when public education has been made more accessible to people in more
and more communities, through both economic and technological advances,
the potential for influencing the development of communities and societies through
education has never been greater. However, the same economic and technological
advances have stimulated expectations for education that are increasingly focused
on the satisfaction of a relatively narrow set of goals, largely oriented towards the
pursuit of economic prosperity and Western-style material comforts. While the
very human desire for personal and social improvement is entirely understandable,
I would suggest that a key role for public education at this critical stage in
human development is to instill a much more sophisticated vision of personal
and planetary well-being. Such vision has to be global in scope, rather than
designed to fuel national or regional competitiveness; it needs to be long term and
non-partisan, rather than tied to transient political mandates; fundamentally, it
needs to recognise the inherent incompatibility between two key ideals that are
often perceived as both desirable and attainable, namely ‘development’ and ‘equity’
(Sachs, 2013). Over the past 30 years the negative impacts of the fruits of
development enjoyed by the wealthy top 15% of humanity, resulting largely from
the exploitation of fossil fuels, have become increasingly clear. At the same time
there has been a growing acceptance of the idea that such benefits constitute human
rights in that, if they are available to some, they should be available to all,
regardless of geographic location, wealth, ethnicity, class or gender. Unfortunately,
equal access to all the comforts enjoyed by the wealthy elite is, in all likelihood,
not possible on a planet with finite and diminishing resources (including water),
limited useable space for increased food production and waste disposal, and a
steadily growing population. This incompatibility creates a moral dilemma for
humankind of immense proportions: do we continue to pursue the current path of
development, fuelled by neoliberal visions and values, and accept that access to its
desired goals will remain unequal? Or do we strive for equity on a global scale and
recognise that our prevailing concept of development will need to undergo quite
drastic revisions that will undoubtedly challenge and change the lifestyles of the
privileged?
Central to informed discussion of such dilemmas is global education, in many
forms and fora: from the necessity of basic schooling for the one billion trapped in
poverty, especially girls, to the need for broader public information in the
developed world about the global realities we face and for a concerted focus on the
development of creative solutions. Indeed, it could be argued that the current
global crises represent, in some measure, a failure of public education, particularly
in the developed world. Eliminating abject poverty and reducing climate change
have been within our grasp for several decades; the opportunities have been missed
due to the choices we have made. To be fair, these choices have been made
unwittingly in most cases: the majority of people have simply not received
sufficient information through formal or informal education to understand the
18
interconnectedness of all peoples and environments and to appreciate the full

global impacts of their decisions as consumers, voters, workers and home-makers.
School curricula have remained largely nation state-oriented and obsessed with
discipline-specific and disconnected knowledge, thereby inhibiting students from
seeing the ‘big picture’ and creating alternative visions of the future. Critical
information about key global systems, notably the economic system and its
inextricable connectedness to environmental and social systems, has been withheld
as the province of ‘experts’, resulting in widespread public ignorance about the
harmful and discriminatory effects of everyday actions. It has to be the role and
responsibility of public education to nurture citizens who are able and prepared to
make informed and ethically sound decisions with regard to the major global issues
of the day. There is no other social institution that has the reach and capacity to
furnish future decision makers with the knowledge, skills and determination
necessary to come to grips with moral questions of this magnitude. This is why
global education is so urgent and so crucial. It is why, in the current era of
neoliberalism, global education must find a way to be heard among the global
cacophony that is steering humankind in the direction of unsustainable
development with scant regard for the long-term consequences (Monbiot, 2014;
United Nations, 2012).
What is most needed, I would suggest, is a kind of pragmatic altruism – a blend
of international education’s responsiveness to the opportunities presented by
the forces of globalisation, but with a critical lens that reflects the longer-term
vision and social justice ethic of global education. Globalisation, for good or ill,
is here to stay but neoliberalism is just one of many possible doctrines that can
infuse and direct education’s response to it. In buying into the neoliberal agenda,
education systems in many countries have allowed the mandates of the free
market to determine the content and goals of education, to align it with a restrictive
and singular economic vision and, in fact, to distort the very concept of value in the
21st century. As Stefan Collini (2011) notes in his review of higher education in
Britain:
British society has been subject to a deliberate campaign, initiated in free-
market think tanks in the 1960s and 1970s and pushed strongly by business
leaders and right-wing commentators ever since, to elevate the status of
business and commerce and to make ‘contributing to economic growth’ the
overriding goal of a whole swathe of social, cultural and intellectual activities
which had previously been understood and valued in other terms. (p. 9)
While the ‘knowledge economy’ is often touted as the key driver of prosperity
in the 21st century, the knowledge that is deemed valuable tends to be that which
supports dominant models of economic growth, rather than sustainable and
equitable visions of human development. The desire to ‘manage’ knowledge,
so that intelligence, innovation and creativity can be better packaged to benefit
business and industry, leads to the standardisation, measurement and
accountability reforms of the neoliberal era (Bottery, 2006). Key to a broader, more
visionary interpretation of a knowledge economy is the concept of a ‘learning
19
GRAHAM PIKE
society’ (Stiglitz & Greenwald, 2014), a society that promotes continuous learning
for all, not for the limited goal of economic advancement but for the more
holistic purpose of individual and societal improvement. This is not to advocate a
return to the naïve optimism that promulgated the birth of the global education
movement. Pragmatic altruism demands a firm and unyielding grip on the
visionary goals of global education while being nimbly responsive to prevailing
economic, political and social trends. It demands hawkish monitoring of current
educational trends and a determination to vocally critique those that are invested
solely in short-term economic and material gains. It demands, too, a realisation that
the desire for self-improvement, including economic advancement, remains the
primary driver of the pursuit of knowledge; the necessary intellectual leap is the
understanding of how the needs of self and society, of person and planet, are
inextricably intertwined.
MAPPING THE MOTIVATIONS FOR GLOBAL AND INTERNATIONAL

EDUCATION: AN ANALYTICAL MATRIX
A central problem of dominant paradigms is that their larger goals are rarely
contested; the paradigm’s orthodoxy becomes the prevailing legend through
which most people make sense of their daily lives. The pursuit of economic
growth, regardless of whether such growth is equitable, just or sustainable, has
become such a legend and its influence on education at all levels is pervasive.
In an era in which ‘education for employment’ has become synonymous
with ‘education’, it is not hard to see how school systems have bought into
the neoliberal agenda or why the liberal arts and humanities are feeling under
threat in higher education (Edmundson, 2013). As noted earlier in this
chapter, global and international education are similarly under pressure – if
they are to be deemed to have value – to become aligned with neoliberal
values. Indeed, the importance of a global perspective has already been
appropriated by those advocating for the skills required for the world of
international business, as seen in this Canadian provincial economic strategy
report:
We will need more entrepreneurs, financiers and managers. We need people
who are comfortable doing business globally, with multiple languages and
cross-cultural skills. To seize the opportunities offered by an economy that
functions as an interconnected grid, people need to be attuned to the world
and prepared to participate in global networks. The education system at all
levels has an important role to play in fostering this mindset. (Premier’s
Council for Economic Strategy, 2011, p. 64)
In the spirit of fostering debate in our respective institutions and achieving more
focused and informed policies and practice in global and international education,
the following matrix (Figure 1) is offered as a tool with which to plot and analyse
the primary motivations that stimulate a range of activities. Such motivations, I
20
RE-IMAGIN
NING GLOBAL EDUCATION IN
N THE NEOLIBE
ERAL AGE
would suggest, proovide an indiccation of the underlying vvalues and belliefs that
steer tthe course off activity at aany institutionn. The horizoontal axis reprresents a
continuuum betweenn Martha Nuussbaum’s twoo poles of ‘Education foor Profit’
and ‘EEducation forr Freedom’ (N Nussbaum, 20009), throughh which she contrasts
the viiew of educcation’s primaary role as preparing sttudents for eeconomic
enrichment with the belief that t educatioon is princippally a vehhicle for
humann developmentt and emancippation. The veertical axis ressponds to the question
of whhose interestss are primarily served through globbal and inteernational
educattion: those whho are alreaddy privileged (economicallyy, politically, socially)
or thee larger masss of people iin a society or social grooup (recognissing that
any acctivity is nott likely to benefit everyoone, but it m may at least hhave the
potential to do so). The
T four quaddrants thus creeated can be ussed to plot acttivities in
any innstitution, or classroom, aand the resuulting map w will likely exppose the
predomminant values and beliefs thhat inform thee practice of gglobal and inteernational
educattion.
Figure 1.
Placcement of anyy activity in a certain quadrrant might varry from one innstitution
or classsroom to anoother accordingg to the motivvation behind it, how it is cconstrued
and im
mplemented, annd its resulting impact. Succh variations nnotwithstandinng, I offer
the folllowing chart to indicate wwhere sample activities, in both K-12 annd higher
educattion sectors, might
m be placedd.
21
GRAHAM PIKE
Quadrant 2: Shared Prosperity Quadrant 4: Global Community
– Strengthening – International research collaboration

international/intercultural content of and capacity building, among equal
curriculum partners
– Fundraising for worthy global causes – Developing holistic and
– Scholarships for deserving transformative global education
international students curriculum
– International development projects – Sustainability initiatives that
(designed and led by developed permanently reduce consumption
country teams) and waste
– Exploring creative and equitable
solutions to global problems
Quadrant 1: Sustained Elitism Quadrant 3: Targeted Internationalism
– Recruiting fee-paying international – Study abroad opportunities for

students students
– Provision of – Connecting classrooms via
programmes/establishment of branch technology
campuses abroad – Exchange opportunities for
– Field trips/study tours to other faculty/staff
countries – Foreign language teaching as part
– Developing skills for international of the curriculum
business
The point of such a mapping exercise is not to pass judgment on activities that
are located within one quadrant compared with another. Each activity may have
merit, to some degree, depending on how much thought has been given to its
potential contribution to a just and sustainable global community. Furthermore, as
the matrix is intended to map activities from the perspective of their primary
motivation, not from the point of view of how the individual experiences each
activity, it is quite possible that the recruitment of an international student (a ‘for
profit’ motive) could result in an emancipatory experience for the student (a ‘for
freedom’ result). At the macro level however, such mapping can assist teachers and
institutions in determining the desirability of the path they are pursuing in their
global and international education initiatives and the degree to which stated goals
are being met.
An additional reason for offering this matrix is to stimulate debate about the
purpose and direction of global and international education at the macro level. It
would appear that prevailing trends in international education, closely allied to
general drifts towards the commercialisation of higher education, are moving
22
incrementally but inexorably towards a higher concentration of activity in

Quadrant 1, stimulated and supported by governments that equate international
education with economic stimulus and job creation. Global education too, in
seeking credibility, is subject to similar pressures. For example, the Premier of
British Columbia has targeted K-12 and post-secondary international student
recruitment, which already contributes nearly $1.8 billion to the provincial
economy (Kunin, 2011), as a key plank in the future job creation strategy for that
Canadian province (Government of British Columbia, 2011). This view of global
and international education’s purpose, steeped in the philosophy of neoliberalism,
is a far cry from the spirit of internationalism that is at the heart of what motivates
and sustains most teachers and professionals working in the field. That spirit
flourishes in many of the activities in Quadrants 3 and 4, where the rationale is
couched more in the belief that respectful and mutually beneficial connections
among diverse peoples and cultures, and the development of holistic visions for the
global community, are fundamental to sustainable and equitable development,
including but not limited to economic enhancement, for all global citizens. With
the current trend favouring those activities that are directly tied to economic
benefits for individual institutions and nations, the more altruistic and
communitarian goals of global and international education are under threat.
NOTES
1
For a fuller discussion of the impacts of neoliberalism in higher education, see Pike (2012).
2
For a thoughtful and principled statement on internationalisation in education, see the Accord on the
Internationalization of Education, published by the Association of Canadian Deans of Education,
2013: http://www.csse-scee.ca/docs/acde/Accord_Internationalization_EN.pdf
REFERENCES
Bottery, M. (2006). Education and globalization: Redefining the role of the educational professional.
Educational review, 58 (1), 95–113.
Carleton University. (2011). Report on international recruitment. Ottawa: Author.
Collini, S. (2011). From Robbins to McKinsey. London Review of Books, 33(16), 9–14.
Cox, C., & Scruton, R. (1984). Peace studies. A critical survey. London: Institute for European Defence
and Strategic Studies.
de Wit, H., & Brandenburg, U. (2011). The end of internationalization, International Higher Education,
62, 15–17.
Dolby, N., & Rahman, A. (2008). Research in international education. Review of Educational Research,
78(3), 676–726.
Dower, N. (2003). An introduction to global citizenship. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Edmundson, M. (2013). Why teach? In defense of a real education. New York: Bloomsbury.
Egron-Polak, E., & Hudson, R. (2014). Internationalization of higher education: Growing expectations,
fundamental values. IAU 4th Global Survey. Paris: International Association of Universities.
Gillard, J. (2009). Australia: International education’s contribution. University World News, 78.
Retrieved from http://universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20090528173114651
Government of British Columbia. (2011). The BC jobs plan. Canada starts here. Victoria, Canada:
Government of British Columbia.
23
GRAHAM PIKE
Government of Canada. (2014). Canada’s international education strategy. Retrieved from

http://international.gc.ca/global-markets-marches-mondiaux/education/index.aspx?lang=eng
Green, A. (1990). Education and state formation: The rise of educational systems in England, France
and the USA. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Green, A. (1997) Education, globalization and the nation state. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Harvey, D. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Heater, D. (1980). World studies: Education for international understanding in Britain. London: Harrap.
Heater, D. (1984). Peace through education: the contribution of the Council for Education in World
Citizenship. Lewes: The Falmer Press.
Knight, J. (2008). Higher education in turmoil: The changing world of internationalization. Rotterdam:
Sense Publishers.
Knight, J. (2011). Education hubs: A fad, a brand or an innovation? EAIE Forum, Spring, 34–37.
Kunin, R. (2011). The economic impact of international education in British Columbia. Vancouver:
British Columbia Council for International Education.
Lister, I. (1987). Global and international approaches in political education. In C. Harber (Ed.), Political
education in Britain (pp. 47–62). London: Falmer.
Manzer, R. (1994). Public schools and political ideas: Canadian educational policy in historical
perspective. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Marks, J. (1984). Peace studies. Propaganda for defencelessness. London: Women and Families for
Defence.
Merryfield, M. M. (1998). Pedagogy for global perspectives in education: Studies of teachers’ thinking
and practice. Theory and Research in Social Education, 26(3), 342–379.
Mitchell, K. (2003). Educating the national citizen in neoliberal times: From the multicultural self to the
strategic cosmopolitan. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 28(4), 387–403.
Monbiot, G. (2014, May 28). The impossibility of growth. The Guardian. Retrieved from
http://www.monbiot.com/2014/05/27/the-impossibility-of-growth/
Nussbaum, M. (1996). Patriotism and cosmopolitanism. In J. Cohen (Ed.), For love of country:
Debating the limits of patriotism (pp. 3-17). Boston: Beacon Books.
Nussbaum, M. (2009). Education for profit, education for freedom. Liberal Education, 95(3), 6–13.
O’Sullivan, B. (1999). Global change and educational reform in Ontario and Canada. Canadian Journal
of Education, 24(3), 311–325.
Pike, G. (2008). Global education. In J. Arthur, I. Davies, & C. Hahn (Eds.), The Sage handbook of
education for citizenship and democracy (pp. 468–480). Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Pike, G. (2012). From internationalism to internationalization: The illusion of a global community in
higher education. Journal of Social Science Education, 11(3), 135–152.
Premier’s Council for Economic Strategy. (2011). Shaping Alberta’s future: Report of the Premier’s
Council for Economic Strategy. Edmonton: Government of Alberta.
Sachs, W. (2013). Liberating the world from development. New internationalist, 460, 22–27.
Scott, P. (2010). International education: Alternatives to the market, International Higher Education, 61,
2–3.
Scruton, R. (1985). World studies: Education or indoctrination? London: Institute for European
Defence and Strategic Studies.
Smith, A. D. (1998). Nationalism and modernism. London: Routledge.
Stiglitz, J. E. & Greenwald, B. C. (2014). Creating a learning society: A new approach to growth,
development, and social progress. New York: Columbia University Press.
Taylor, J. (2004). Towards a strategy for internationalisation: Lessons and practice from four
universities. Journal of Studies in International Education, 8, 149–171.
Toope, S. (2011, January 26). Stephen Toope: How international students change Canadian schools. The
Globe and Mail. Retrieved from http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/leading-
thinkers/stephen-toope-how-international-students-change-canadian-schools/article1883278/
24
Tye, K. A. (2009). A history of the global education movement in the United States. In Kirkwood-
Tucker (Ed.), Visions in global education: The globalization of curriculum and pedagogy in teacher
education and schools (pp. 3-24). New York: Peter Lang Publishing.
United Nations. (2012). Resilient people, resilient planet: A future worth choosing. Report of the United
Nations Secretary General’s high-level panel on global sustainability. New York: United Nations.
Vulliamy, G., & Webb, R. (1993). Progressive education and the National Curriculum: Findings from a
global education research project. Educational Review, 45(1), 21–41.
Graham Pike
Faculty of International Education
Vancouver Island University
25
RUTH REYNOLDS
2. ONE SIZE FITS ALL? GLOBAL EDUCATION FOR

DIFFERENT EDUCATIONAL AUDIENCES
INTRODUCTION
The term global education means different things to different people and there has
been longstanding discussion about how to define it, and how best to teach it
(Subedi, 2010). Terms such as development education, peace education, global
citizenship education, international education and multicultural education are often
used interchangeably in connection with global education; without critique. From
the United States, Hanvey’s model of An Attainable Global Perspective (1976)
provided the basis for the later work of Pike and Selby (1988) in the United
Kingdom with its emphasis on social and action skills at local and global levels
(Heater, 2004). Kirkwood (2001) also built on Hanvey’s dimensions in her
essential elements of global education encompassing multiple perspectives,
comprehension and appreciation of cultures, knowledge of global issues and the
world as interrelated systems (Zong, Wilson, & Quashiga, 2008).
The term global education is used with values attached. Most definitions include
ideas of human rights, equity, conflict resolution and social justice. For instance
Osler and Vincent (2002) suggested that global education:
is based on the principles of co-operation, non-violence, respect for human
rights and cultural diversity, democracy and tolerance [and] is characterised
by pedagogical approaches based on human rights and a concern for social
justice which encourage critical thinking and responsible participation. (p. 2)
The terms global education and global citizenship education are often used
interchangeably. Oxfam (1997) for instance defined a global citizen as someone
who ‘knows how the world works, is outraged by injustice and who is both willing
and enabled to take action to meet this global challenge’ (p. 1). According to
Ibrahim (2005):
effective mainstreaming of global citizenship depends on the balance
between citizenship as specific curriculum area and cross-curricular themes
to allow in-depth coverage of issues and coordinated learning. It is important
for students to develop skills of communication, critical reflection and active
participation in the context of understanding global structures and processes
and human rights and responsibilities. This is more likely to facilitate

RUTH REYNOLDS
understanding of the complexity of global issues, promote dialogue and

discussion between and within different groups and allow opportunities for
reflection on values. (p. 191)
Davies, Reid and Evans (2005) argued that global citizenship education is not
about adding international content into citizenship programmes but that some of
the ethos of global education should be applied to citizenship education
programmes.
A further refinement to the concept of global education comes with many
researchers referring to a critical global education. A critical global education is a
curriculum that fosters critical dialogue and action on global issues (Subedi, 2010).
Such a curriculum would investigate historical factors that help students
understand unequal global relationships. It would deal with issues beyond the
nation state, examining power and privilege; it would have a reflective ethical
perspective; and it would value marginalised knowledge such as third world
traditions and perspectives (Merryfield, 2009).
METHODOLOGY
The author identified key texts which provided an overview of the field and
searched for key authors in global education and global citizenship in education
and key words like values education, peace education, global education, global
citizenship, globalisation, sustainability, environmental education, human rights,
internationalisation, and international education to clarify the sector of education
they addressed. An issue for global education is that related fields – peace
education, environmental education, intercultural education and development
education – all have their own separate identities but can also be linked to global
education and citizenship education. Thus the study did not use a systemised
randomised literature research process and the researcher was obviously influenced
by her social and cultural context, including access to research papers through her
university data base references, and her use of terms approximating to her views of
what global education could entail. Of the 1,110 articles collated, primarily written
after 2000, most were related to higher education including teacher education
(508), then came secondary education (365), then primary/elementary education
(185), then early childhood education (35) and community education (42). Most
were studies undertaken in the USA (20%), Australia (20%) and UK (11%),
reflecting the researcher’s Anglophile world and the terminologies used.
Nevertheless the results provided direction for future research and for this paper
divisions were made among preschool education, teachers and classroom
education, teacher education, tertiary education, and community education.
EARLY CHILDHOOD
Early childhood studies emphasise the importance of seeing the young child as a
fully functioning individual human being who interacts, constructs and adapts her
28
ONE SIZE FITS ALL?
world as she experiences multiple encounters. In the Australian context, The Early
Years Learning Framework for Australia (Australian Government Department of
Education, Employment and Workplace Relations, 2009) argues that children must
feel that they belong, must interact and engage with their present life situations,
and also must be open to change in their lives. These could be called global
dispositions and examining the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the
Child (UNICEF, 1989) there is an implicit expectation that children have access to
opportunities to address cultural differences and can participate in activities that
consider others’ rights. Articles 29, 30 and 31 state:
Children’s education should respect each child’s personality, talents, and
abilities to the fullest. It should encourage children to respect others’ human
rights and their own and other cultures. It should also help them to learn to
live peacefully, protect the environment and respect other people. …
Minority or indigenous children have the right to learn about and practise
their own culture, language and religion. … Children have the right to relax
and play, and to join in a wide range of cultural, artistic and other recreational
activities. (UNICEF, 1989)
Key themes identified in the research literature in this sector included: learning for
civic participation; moral and character education; social skill development;
broadly focused sustainability themes; intercultural understanding; and technology
when it is used to develop possible global themes. A few sample studies are
provided.
Martin and Evaldsson (2012) argued for the importance of rule making in their
Reggio Emilia school. For them it was considered important that children be seen
as active agents ‘that creatively utilise and transform cultural experiences from the
adult world through participation in communicative practices with other children’
(Martin & Evaldsson, p. 54). Related is the development of moral and character
education as a key theme in early childhood. For example more than half the
teachers in the study by Boulton-Lewis, Brownlee, Walker, Cobb-Moore, and
Johansson (2011) believed that social issues alone constituted good moral
behaviour and so emphasis was placed on teaching how to behave rather than
exploring judgements and considering issues associated with human rights and
justice. McNamee and Mercurio (2007) argued for the value of using picture books
to encourage children’s ability to care, Singer (2010) pointed to the value of Dr
Seuss in the development of character, while Stove (2010) advocated for the
importance of teaching for self restraint. Alternatively Mills-Bayne (2008)
recommended that children in early childhood settings be taught philosophical
inquiry and critical thinking skills to foster effective moral reasoning.
Another key theme in global education is sustainability and Davis (2009),
Davis, Cooke, Blashki, and Best, (2010) and Ferreria and Davis (2010) point out
that a systems approach, ensuring students learn about the interdependence of all
aspects of the global ecological system, when teaching for sustainability, works
very well in a preschool setting and is transformative. Both Miller (2012) and
Gadotti (2010) made the point that holistic approaches to sustainability promotes
29
RUTH REYNOLDS
opportunities for rich and deep explorations on a range of topics relevant to

children’s lives and allows them some control of their lives and Lloyd (2010)
argued for the use of information and communication technology (ICT) in
elementary and Early Childhood settings to help develop sustainable approaches.
Intercultural understanding is also advocated in pre-school and early childhood
education. Souto-Manning (2009) targeted cultural responsive pedagogy using
multicultural literacy and democratic literacy while Shaw (2010) argued that
student voice in global citizenship and intercultural understanding was crucial.
Technology was seen as an asset in this area with Struppert, Guo, and
Waniganayake, (2010) focusing on the importance of using technology to develop
intercultural competence play-based computer-based technologies.
SCHOOL BASED APPROACHES TO GLOBAL EDUCATION: SCHOOL TEACHERS
In many cases classroom teachers assume a role that is less globally minded than
might be expected due to their perception that the wider community see education
as simply an industry, subject to the same commercial negotiations as any other
industry, and they see no advocacy role in their job description (Codd, 2005). They
are demoralised by public opinion and perceive themselves as restricted by the
curriculum. Schweisfurth (2006) noted there were some unusual teachers who did
not see the tightening of curricular expectations as reducing opportunities for
incorporating global education priorities. Carano (2013) provided some evidence
for this by pointing out that globally minded teachers, who did attempt to
implement wide ranging global programmes, were influenced by a number of
factors, apart from their formal teacher education programmes and their curriculum
interpretations, these being: (a) family, (b) exposure to diversity, (c) minority
status, (d) global education courses, (e) international travel, (f) having a mentor,
and (g) professional service.
Cogan and Grossman (2009) pointed out that teachers needed to be globally
minded if students are to learn to be globally minded and it is simply the case that
many school teachers do not have international knowledge, skills and perspectives;
that global education can be seen as inherently controversial; and the lack of global
perspectives in curriculum national standards makes it hard to teach. Thus it is not
surprising that when asked to rank themes important to globally minded citizens,
teachers in Cogan and Grossman’s study agreed that cooperation with others, and
problem solving skills were the most important citizen characteristics with
understandings, accepting and tolerating cultural differences, and willingness to
change one’s lifestyle and consumption habits to protect the environment also
highly rated. They thus emphasised generic good citizenship skills. Cogan and
Grossman (2009) argued that many of these skills can be developed out of school,
thus pointing to the value of increased community/school linkages.
Although intercultural awareness and understanding did not seem to be of
interest to teachers, there has been much interest from researchers in how to
encourage this in the classroom. Work by Martin and Griffiths (2012), Merryfield
(2009) and Young (2010) emphasised the need for teachers to develop their own
30
ONE SIZE FITS ALL?
intercultural awareness and to implement culturally relevant pedagogy in the

classroom particularly focusing on the fact that intercultural understanding is
situational and the context from which participants of such knowledge learned their
global skills is crucial. In the Australian context the white paper on Australia in the
Asian Century (Australian Government, 2012) focussed on the need to teach and
learn Asian languages and engage in Asian studies as national objectives integral to
national productivity, but as Merryfield (2009) pointed out there is a need for
teachers to experience marginalised world views and cultural views, not simply see
other cultures as a source of economic gain.
SCHOOL BASED APPROACHES TO GLOBAL EDUCATION: THE CLASSROOM
Tye (2009) argued that all school students must learn how the systems of the world
work – the descriptive side of global education; and also the normative side of
global education, analysing values and planning action for global problems such as
human rights, social justice and intercultural relations. However while most
researchers emphasise the importance of values-based, and systems-based, issues-
focused approaches to global education in schools this may not actually occur in
many classrooms. Pike (2000) found that school programmes studying countries
and culture seemed to dominate US classrooms while approaches involving moral
values and personal growth were more evident in classrooms in Canada and the
UK. Zong et al. (2008), using reports of a number of school-based research studies
into Global Education, noted that activities such as travel programmes, building
classroom connections through technology, and strategies to develop cross cultural
awareness were the main focuses in schools and these varied in success. For
example although Germain (1998), Wilson (1993) and Bates (2012) found that
international experiences for K-12 students made a big impact in countering
stereotyping and developing empathy with immigrant groups, few US teachers had
international experience, skills and perspectives (Cogan & Grossman, 2009) and
upon reaching tertiary institutions most students were focused on global and
intercultural awareness rather than any deeper understandings (Carano 2013).
Technology was increasingly seen as having possibilities to build connections
between classrooms, especially trying to build cross cultural awareness (Tye, 2009,
Merryfield, 2003) but positive results are at best preliminary.
Merryfield (1998) argued that exemplary teachers taught interconnectedness,
global issues and global connections across disciplines using a variety of strategies
and resources including higher order thinking. However critical approaches to
teaching and learning about global societies were rare in classrooms and study of
others as exotic reinforced neo colonial divisions (Subedi, 2010). Tye (2003)
argued that schools were still very much about national issues and focuses rather
than international issues. There are, however, some promising glimpses of what
schools do offer as their approach to Global Education with action participatory
approaches to issues that cross national boundaries (Tsevrini, 2011), a focus on
classroom ethos or climate (Davies, Reid & Evans (2005), issues-based discussions
(Hicks, 2006; Hicks & Holden, 2007), and classroom strategies such as culturally
31
RUTH REYNOLDS
relevant or culturally responsive pedagogy (Morrison, Robbins, & Rose, 2008;

Gay, 2000).
TEACHER EDUCATION AND GLOBAL EDUCATION
Teacher educators play a crucial and often underestimated part in preparing future
teachers who are globally minded (Reynolds, Ferguson-Patrick, & McCormack,
2013; Williams, 2014; Zong et al., 2008). Many teacher educators interested in
global education have experienced some degree of ‘border crossing’ whether it be
having experienced some element of racial discrimination or by having been in an
alternate culture for some time. Merryfield (2000) argues that they have
experienced a loss of power due to not knowing the cultural norms associated with
a new context. Some subject disciplines tend to provide more opportunities for
global education content than others with geography being seen as the foremost
opportunity to provide global citizenship content. Best results in teacher education
appear to emerge when there is a coordinated approach across the teacher
education programme, rather than individual lecturers incorporating their own
particular emphasis (Ferguson-Patrick, Macqueen, & Reynolds, 2014; Robbins,
Francis, & Elliott, 2003).
Teacher education students themselves were primarily focused on the teaching
strategies associated with global education, a finding supported by the second
Citizenship Education Policy Study (CEPS 2) study which found student teachers
were much more interested in applied skills and abilities such as problem solving
and on personal development than either in-service teachers or education policy
makers (Cogan & Grossman, 2009). The strategies described in the research
literature seem to be linked to a number of key areas; cross cultural competence,
study abroad programmes, using technology to develop global skills, resources and
knowledge building, mediation strategies/problem solving techniques, and civics
and citizenship skills.
Pre-service teachers are expected to emerge from their teacher education
programmes with some degree of cross cultural competence, not only to address
the diversity of students in their classes but also to be able to view the world with
diverse cultural lenses to combat racism, prejudice and discrimination and to be
able to work within their community on issues associated with these (McAllister &
Irvine, 2000). Culturally relevant pedagogy is advocated as one way to achieve
intercultural competency defined by Ladson-Billings (1994) as a ‘pedagogy that
[empowers] students intellectually, socially, emotionally, and politically by using
cultural referents to impart knowledge, skills, and attitudes’ (pp. 17–18). She saw it
as comprising the rigorous application of academic success for all students,
developing cultural competence for each student’s own culture as well as the
culture in which they lived, and socio-political consciousness where inequality was
revealed for all to see. Young (2010) argued however that this process was
inconsistently understood and applied in teacher education and in teaching and that
‘the void in scholarly research is not in the knowledge of theories but in the
knowledge of how to implement them, particularly in a way that has a wide-
32
ONE SIZE FITS ALL?
reaching and sustainable impact on teacher education’ (p. 259). Cushner (2009),
advocating for study abroad programmes of any variety, supported this when he
argued that:
Schooling in general, and teacher education in particular, continues to
address culture learning primarily from a cognitive orientation. That is,
students read, watch films, listen to speakers, observe in classrooms and hold
discussions around issues of cultural difference. This continues in spite of the
growing body of research that demonstrates the critical role that experience
plays in enhancing intercultural development … must address the
interpersonal and intercultural dimensions of communication, interaction and
learning. (pp. 27–28)
Rapaport (2013) argued that such experiences can rectify misconceptions, reverse
stereotypes and significantly contribute to the internationalisation of social studies
curricula. However Poole and Russell (2013) found few substantial changes in
programmes to globalise teacher education in the US context, and younger teachers
were not more globally aware than older or more experienced teachers.
Disappointedly they found that many study abroad programmes incorporated little
interaction with others not of their culture and so the achievements were minor.
Technology is also used as a tool in teacher education primarily, it appears, to
enhance cross cultural competency (Maguth, 2014; Merryfield, 2003) but also to
enable more in depth conversations and to help provide some anonymity when
engaging in discussions of a controversial nature (Merryfield, 2000; Zong, 2002).
The Internet also provides a means for instant access to updated worldwide
information from various sources.
As Carano (2013) found, being able to access and knowing where resources
could be found was the most cited asset by pre-service teachers as helping develop
global education including resources to enable travel. GERT (2013) and Ferguson-
Patrick et al. (2014) also found that this was a common theme in their studies of the
views of pre-service teachers. Carano (2013) found strategies and resources
associated with service learning, global literacy and social justice were most
commonly neglected in teacher education programmes with studies of globality
(state of the planet awareness; knowledge of global dynamics; awareness of human
choices and spatial-temporal awareness) and intercultural understanding
dominating global education initiatives as they did in students’ schooling years.
However, further knowledge building of fundamental aspects of the world was
required in teacher education. For example Osunde, Tlou and Brown (1996) found
many misconceptions of Africa among preservice teachers while Kirkwood-Tucker
(2002) found it was still necessary to point out that there was a difference between
international education, learning about other cultures, and global education with
some international education necessary before global education could be seen to be
appropriate.
With pre-service teacher education obviously making linkages between
strategies for civics and citizenship education and global education there was also
evidence in the research literature of mediation and problem solving strategies
33
RUTH REYNOLDS
appropriate for a more global world view by use of such techniques as a mock
United Nations debate (Kirkwood-Tucker, 2004). Kubow (1999) argued of a need
for democratic deliberative dialogue, with Hahn (2001) advocating more decision
making, and civic action. Hahn also encouraged teacher educators to promote
dialogue with colleagues cross-nationally arguing that social studies educators
should better prepare students ‘for their roles as knowledgeable, caring, and
effective civic actors in pluralistic democracies in a globally interdependent world’
(p. 21).
GENERAL TERTIARY EDUCATION
Che, Spearman and Manizade (2009) pointed out that a current focus on
internationalisation and globalising higher education was seen in two ways. There
was the notion of internationalisation focusing on encouragement of international
students and staff to join the global competition for resources, research and
prestige. There was also another vision of internationalisation with an ideological
dimension focusing on global ethics and global citizenship, developing domestic
and international students and staff to operate effectively in globalised
environments (Grimshaw, 2011). The first vision leads to the ranking of tertiary
institutions globally and is largely linked to research grants that dominate above all
else and; while universities in the USA have the most weight in shaping global
trends, they are the least subject to externally-driven transformation. In contrast
universities in emerging nations are colonised by the ‘brain drain’ of key personnel
and ideas, by foreign research conversations and agendas, and by the ‘in-your-face’
visibility and robustness of the leading foreign institutions (Marginson, 2006, p. 2).
Heilman (2009), pointed out that ‘students are encouraged to know the Other in a
potentially exploitive way that situates the Other as a technology or tool that can
serve as a means to personal ends, … building capital wealth’ (p. 39).
The second vision argues that internationalising of teaching, research and
services provides an intercultural or global dimension in all functions of the
university and attempts are made to make the curriculum (both formal and
informal) more relevant and engaging for international students and by considering
internationalisation at home to prepare all students for life and work in a global
economy (Robson, 2011). This vision offers opportunities for education focused on
social inclusion embracing three notions of access, participation and success
representing degrees of social inclusion as signifiers of quality (Gidley, Hampson,
Wheeler, & Bereded-Samuel, 2010) and is linked to more collaborative and
normative ideologies such as those grounded in social justice and human potential.
Technicist interpretations of social inclusion and quality are problematised as being
too narrow and the participation of a more diverse group of students than currently
appears to be the case are encouraged (Bourke, Bamber, & Lyons, 2012; Jones &
Killick, 2013; Landorf, 2013).
Study abroad programmes in higher education settings appear to be largely
about increased understandings about themselves, the world or their particular area
of study and Root and Ngampornchai (2013) warned that that while experiences
34
ONE SIZE FITS ALL?
abroad have an obvious impact on students’ cognitive, affective, and behavioural

skills, they do not necessarily help to develop deeper levels of intercultural
competence. Overall Marginson and Sawir (2011) suggested that international
education was failing to meet its potential for intercultural development and that
‘the ethnocentrism traditional to English-speaking nations has hardly been dinted’
(p. 6).
COMMUNITY
It is not only in the formal schooling sites of our society that global education is
required and supported. In the Australian context the Australian Government
issued a white paper, called Australia in the Asian Century with the view being that
many sectors of Australian society must become engaged in our global world; ‘Our
goal is to secure Australia as a more prosperous and resilient nation that is fully
part of our region and open to the world’ (Australian Government, 2012, p. 1).
Areas requiring development for Australia to prosper in a global community
were seen to be economic skills, Asian literacy, creative thinking, global
collaborative relationships with a need to strengthen people-to-people economic,
social and cultural interactions. As Rivzi (2012) pointed out much of this paper
provides an instrumentalist view of integration into Asia:
invokes conceptions of the Asian others whose cultures must be understood,
whose languages must be learnt, and with whom close relationships must be
developed – in order for us to realise our economic and strategic purposes. A
crude social distance is thus assumed between Australian us and Asian them.
(p. 74)
By way of contrast the Global Education Network Europe (GENE) has a
community rights based, universalist approach to global education focusing on
traditional fields associated with development education and building values
associated with justice, equity, and human rights. This view of global education
uses the Maastricht Declaration on Global Education in Europe from 2003 which
states:
Global Education is education that opens people’s eyes and minds to the
realities of the world, and awakens them to bring about a world of greater
justice, equity and human rights for all. GE is understood to encompass
Development Education, Human Rights Education, Education for
Sustainability, Education for Peace and Conflict Prevention and Intercultural
Education; being the global dimensions of Education for Citizenship. (GENE,
2008, n.p.)
Some of these characteristics will have resonance with some of the key charity
organisations working in global education. Oxfam UK for instance has a very
strong education programme associated with their global citizenship programmes
and argues that ‘education for global citizenship helps enable young people to
develop the core competencies which allow them to actively engage with the
35
RUTH REYNOLDS
world, and help to make it a more just and sustainable place’ (Oxfam GB, n.d.,
para. 1).
Oxfam Australia does not focus on the term ‘global citizenship’ to the same
extent, advocating for The Power of People Against Poverty and the focus of their
material includes, but is not limited to, poverty, social justice, climate change,
gender, Indigenous rights, ethical fashion, food equity and sustainability. They
argue that students in schools need to be supported to help shape solutions to
global problems at a local, national or global level.
Another high profile Australian charity in this area is World Vision with its
organisational focus of Christian resources to deepen understanding of Jesus’
passion for the poor; policy focus covering issues including aid and trade, climate
change, human trafficking and gender equality; events to provide opportunities to
learn about and contribute to the aid and development sector; and school resources.
The school resources focus on social justice issues and global poverty.
As noted previously by Rizvi (2012), some would argue that many of these
charity groups promote post-colonial perspectives. Rizvi’s perspective aligns with
that of Andreotti (2006) who pointed out that some volunteer programmes
associated with global education are more focused on helping the volunteer gain an
international experience, rather than the recipient.
Oxley and Morris (2013) pointed out that the most prevalent conceptions of
global citizenship were of cultural and social global citizenship, while the political,
critical, environmental and spiritual were far less dominant within curricular
intentions. Thus different faith-based conceptions of global education are rarely
acknowledged or researched (Pike, 2013).
CONCLUSION
As the focus of this paper was to establish patterns in different sectors of education,
the measure of its success is by evaluating its ability to identify such patterns. I
searched for gaps between what I had identified and what intuition told me about
how global education was conceptualised and taught, but the patterns that emerged
were primarily driven by authors in their key words and the need for further work
in this area is very apparent. Political education and environmental education did
not appear as many times as expected, but there was a definite focus on
intercultural education across all sectors. Moreover although I see lots of
environmental education work happening in schools there does not seem to be
much research on its effectiveness, and particularly on how this links to the notion
of a global citizen, so it did not appear as strongly as I expected in the research
literature.
So can we discern a pattern? Early childhood education concentrates on the
child in her social context and so global education starts with the local. Civic
participation is addressed in rule making, group interactions and through learning
other related social skills; and in some cases deliberating on moral issues.
Intercultural understanding is of concern and it too is addressed through social
interaction at the local level, sometimes enabled by ICT. At the tertiary level global
36
ONE SIZE FITS ALL?
education increasingly appears to be about assisting students to be global players in

a globalised economic world. This appears to be more about economic gains than
social justice and human rights focuses and so these two sectors are addressing
global education from very different stances. School teachers, school classrooms,
pre-service teachers and teacher educators have similar emphases with teacher
educators more likely to be strong advocates for a critical focus to intercultural
understanding than classroom teachers, but all are concerned about civic skills,
moral and character development, global knowledge and awareness, broadly
focused environmental themes, using technology as a tool rather than seeing it as a
global issue or theme in itself, and intercultural understanding.
It was difficult to select community representations. Many community groups
use education as a platform for pursuing global focuses and these focuses extend
along a continuum from charity, human rights initiatives to economic global
education initiatives for national gain. Additionally when a charity is involved it
can pose as helping the other in a post colonialist type gesture or in a faith based
proselytising approach or social justice initiative. Global education for national
gain can be seen as assisting the home nation, but can also be seen as a gesture to
encourage cross national linkage to build better global understanding.
There was a common theme that emerged. Global education emphasises
communication. Most articles focused on the importance of building
communication across people, groups and nations. The identification of who
benefits by this communication, and how it is exhibited varies by sector but
identifying this as a key focus for global education is a useful action outcome for
global education. A key research project could investigate the number and styles of
communication evident in global education literature. How much of the pedagogy
advocated for teaching global education involves communication approaches and
what styles of communication. The data indicates that the focus is on
communicating for a number of different and varied purposes but focusing on
communication as an overall goal of global education provides a guide to the
pedagogy and the values of global education for all educational sectors. This is a
strong message for global educators, one they can implement in any sector.
REFERENCES
Andreotti, V. (2006). Stephanie Wilde, Editor, Political and citizenship education: International
perspectives, Symposium Press, Wallingford (2005). International Journal of Educational
Development, 26(5), 563–564.
Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations [DEEWR].
(2009). Early Years Learning Framework for Australia. Canberra: DEEWR.
Australian Government. (2012). Australia in the Asian century. White paper. Canberra: Department of
Prime Minister and Cabinet.
Bates, R. (2012). Is global citizenship possible, and can international schools provide it? Journal of
Research in International Education, 11(3), 262– 274.
Boulton-Lewis, G., Brownlee, J., Walker, S., Cobb-Moore, C., & Johansson, E. (2011). Moral and
social development: Teachers’ knowledge of children’s learning and teaching strategies in the early
years. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 36(4), 6–14.
37
RUTH REYNOLDS
Bourke, L., Bamber, P., & Lyons, M. (2012). Global citizens: Who are they? Education, Citizenship
and Social Justice, 7(2), 161–174.
Carano, K. (2013). Global educators’ personal attribution of a global perspective. Journal of
International Social Studies. 3(1), 4–18.
Che, S. M., Spearman, M., & Manizade, A. (2009). Constructive disequilibrium. In L. Ross (Ed.),
Handbook of practice and research study abroad (pp. 99–116). Hoboken: Taylor & Francis.
Codd, J. (2005) Teachers as ‘managed professionals’ in the global education industry: The New Zealand
experience. Educational Review, 57(2), 193–206.
Cogan. J. J., & Grossman, D. L. (2009). Characteristics of globally minded teachers: A twenty first
century view. In T. Kirkwood-Tucker (Ed.), Visions in global education (pp. 240–270). NT: Peter
Lang.
Cushner, K. (2009). The role of study abroad in preparing globally responsible teachers. In L. Ross
(Ed.), Handbook of practice and research study abroad (pp. 151–169). Hoboken: Taylor & Francis.
Davis, J. (2009). Revealing the research ‘hole’ of early childhood education for sustainability: A
preliminary survey of the literature. Environmental Education Research, 15(2), 227–241.
Davis, J. M., Cooke, S. M., Blashki, G., & Best, A. (2010). Healthy children, healthy planet: The case
for transformative education in schools and early childhood from an Australian perspective.
International Public Health Journal, 2(4), 561–570.
Davies, I., & Pike, G. (2009). Global citizenship education. In R. Lewin (Ed.), Handbook of practice
and research in study abroad (pp. 61–77). Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.
Davies, I., Reid, M., & Evans, A. (2005). Globalising citizenship education? A critique of ‘global
education’ and ‘citizenship education’. British Journal of Educational Studies, 53(1), 66–89.
Ferguson-Patrick, K., Macqueen, S., & Reynolds, R. (2014). Pre-service teacher perspectives on the
importance of global education: World and classroom views. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and
Practice, 20(2), 470–482.
Ferreira, J. A., & Davis, J. M. (2010). Creating deep and broad change through research and systems
approaches in early childhood education for sustainability. In J. Davis (Ed.), Young children and the
environment: early education for sustainability (pp. 273–293). Port Melbourne: Cambridge
University Press.
Gadotti, M. (2010). Reorienting education practices towards sustainability. Journal of Education for
Sustainable Development. 4(2), 203–211.
Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Germain, M. (1998). Worldly teachers: Cultural learning and pedagogy. Westport, CT: Greenwood
Press.
Gidley, J., Hampson, G., Wheeler, L., & Bereded-Samuel, E. (2010). From access to success: An
integrated approach to quality higher education informed by social inclusion theory and practice.
Higher Education Policy, 23(1), 123–147.
Global Education Network Europe [GENE]. (2008). Quality in global education. An overview of
evaluation policy and practice. Retrieved from: http://www.gene.eu
Global Education Research and Teaching [GERT], (2013). Teaching global education: Lessons learned
for classroom teachers. Ethos, 21(1), 18–22.
Grimshaw, T. (2011). Concluding editorial: ‘The needs of international students rethought –
Implications for the policy and practice of higher education’. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and
practice, 17(6), 703–712.
Hahn, C. L. (2001). Democratic understanding: Cross-national perspectives. Theory into Practice, 40(1),
14–22.
Hanvey, R. G. (1976). An attainable global perspective. New York: Centre for Global Perspectives in
Education.
Heater, D. (2004). Citizenship: The civic ideal in world history, politics and education (3rd ed.).
Manchester: Manchester University Press.
38
ONE SIZE FITS ALL?
Heilman, E. (2009). Terrains of global and multicultural education: What is distinctive, contested and
shared? In T. F. Kirkwood-Tucker (Ed.), Visions in global education (pp. 25–46). New York: Peter
Lang.
Hicks, D. (2006). Lessons for the future: The missing dimension in education. Victoria, BC: Trafford
Publishing.
Hicks, D., & Holden, C. (2007). Teaching the global dimension. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Ibrahim, T. C. A. (2005). Global citizenship education: Mainstreaming the curriculum? Cambridge
Journal of Education, 35(2), 177–194.
Jones, E., & Killick, D. (2013). Graduate attributes and the internationalized curriculum: Embedding a
global outlook in disciplinary learning outcomes. Journal of Studies in International Education,
17(2), 165–182.
Kirkwood, T. F. (2001). Our global age requires global education: Clarifying definitional ambiguities.
The Social Studies, 92, 10–15.
Kirkwood-Tucker, T. F. (2002). Teaching about Japan: Global perspectives in teacher decision-making,
context and practice. Theory and Research in Social Education, 30(1), 88–115.
Kirkwood-Tucker, T. F. (2004). Empowering teachers to create a more peaceful world through global
education: Simulating the United Nations. Theory and Research in Social Education, 32(1), 56–74.
Kubow, P. (1999). Preparing future secondary teachers for citizenship educators’ roles: A possible
direction for preservice education in the new century. Asia Pacific Journal of Teacher Education
and Development, 2(2), 53–64.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant pedagogy.
Theory into Practice, 34(3), 159–165.
Landorf, H. (2013). Using the dialectic of social justice to enliven the dialogue between global
education and multicultural education. Journal of International Social Studies, 3(2), 99–105.
Lloyd, M. (2010). The world is flat: ICT and education for sustainability in the early years. In J. Davis
(Ed.), Young children and the environment: Early education for sustainability (pp. 212–241).
Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.
McAllister, G., & Irvine, J. (2000). Cross cultural competency and multicultural teacher education.
Review of Educational Research, 70(I), 3–24.
McNamee, A., & Mercurio, M. L. (2007). Who cares? How teachers can scaffold children’s ability to
care: A case for picture books. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 9(1). Retrieved from
http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v9n1/mcnamee.html
Maguth, B. (2014). Digital bridges for global awareness: Pre-service social studies teachers’
experiences using technology to learn from and teach students in Thailand. Journal of International
Social Studies, 4(1), 42–59.
Marginson, S. (2006). Dynamics of national and global competition in higher education. Higher
Education, 52, 1–39.
Marginson, S., & Sawir, E. (2011). Student security in the global education market. In C. Holden, M.
Kilkey, & G. Ramia (Eds.), Social Policy Review 23 (pp. 283–305). Bristol: Policy Press.
Martin, C., & Evaldsson, A. (2012). Affordances for participation: Children’s appropriation of rules in a
Reggio Emilia school. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 19(1), 51–74.
Martin, F., & Griffiths, H. (2012). Power and representation: A postcolonial reading of global
partnerships and teacher development through North–South study visits. British Educational
Research Journal, 38(6), 907–927.
Merryfield, M. (1998). Pedagogy for global perspectives in education: Studies of teachers’ thinking and
practice. Theory and Research in Social Education, 26(3), 342–379.
Merryfield, M. (2000). Using electronic technologies to promote equity and cultural diversity in social
studies and global education. Theory and Research in Social Education, 28(4), 502–526.
Merryfield, M. (2003). Like a veil: Cross-cultural experiential learning online. Contemporary Issues in
Technology and Teacher Education, 3(2), 146–171.
39
RUTH REYNOLDS
Merryfield, M. (2009). A meeting on the Congo: Race, voice and representation. In E. Heilman (Ed.),
Methods for social studies methods: What we do and why we do it (pp. 369–376). New York:
Teachers College Press.
Mills-Bayne, M. (2008). ‘Because it’s being nice’: An exploratory study of moral reasoning, tolerance
and values in early childhood. Critical and Creative Thinking, 16(1), 101–125.
Miller, K. (2012). Creating an engaging and relevant ‘classroom’ that ignites a love of learning:
Inspiring, practical social education through service learning. Ethos, 20(1), 14–17.
Morrison, K. A., Robbins, H. H., & Rose, D. G. (2008). Operationalizing culturally relevant pedagogy:
A synthesis of classroom-based research. Equity & Excellence in Education, 4(14), 433–452.
Osler, A., & Vincent, K. (2002). Citizenship and the challenge of global education. Stoke-on-Trent:
Trentham Books Ltd.
Osunde, E., Tlou, J., & Brown, N. (1996). Persisting and common stereotypes in US students’
knowledge of Africa: A study of preservice social studies teachers. The Social Studies, 87(3), 119–
124.
Oxfam. (1997). A curriculum for global citizenship. Oxford, UK: OXFAM.
Oxfam GB. (n.d.). Global citizenship. Retrieved from: http://www.oxfam.org.uk/education/global-
citizenship
Oxley, L., & Morris, P. (2013). Global citizenship: A typology for distinguishing its multiple
conceptions. British Journal of Educational Studies, 61(3), 301–325.
Pike, G. (2000). Global education and national identity: In pursuit of meaning. Theory into Practice,
39(2), 64–73. doi: 10.1207/s15430421tip3902_2
Pike, G. (2013). Global education in times of discomfort. Journal of International Social Studies, 3(2),
4–17.
Pike, G., & Selby, D. (1988). Global teacher, global learner. London: Hodder & Stoughton.
Poole, C., & Russell, W. (2013). Global perspectives of American elementary school teachers: A
research study. Journal of International Social Studies, 3(2), 18–31.
Rapaport, A. (2013). Teacher exchange as a means of social studies curriculum internationalization.
Journal of International Social Studies, 3(1), 69–76.
Reynolds, R., Ferguson-Patrick, K., & McCormack, A. (2013). Dancing in the ditches: Reflecting on
the capacity of a university/school partnership to clarify the role of a teacher educator. European
Journal of Teacher Education, 36(3), 307–319.
Rizvi, F. (2012). Engaging the Asian century. ACCESS Critical Perspectives on Communication,
Cultural & Policy Studies, 31(1), 73–79.
Robbins, M., Francis, L., & Elliott, E. (2003). Attitudes toward education for global citizenship among
trainee teachers. Research in Education, 69, 93–98.
Robson, S. (2011) Internationalization: A transformative agenda for higher education? Teachers And
Teaching: Theory And Practice, 17(6), 619–630.
Root, E., & Ngampornchai, A. (2013). “I came back as a new human being”: Student descriptions of
experiences of intercultural competence acquired through education abroad. Journal of Studies in
International Education. 17(5), 513–532.
Schweisfurth, M. (2006). Education for global citizenship: Teacher agency and curricular structure in
Ontario schools. Educational Review, 58(1), 41–50.
Shaw, G. (2010). Citizenship education: Student voice and global citizenship. Ethos, 18(4), 19–23.
Singer, M. J. (2010). Character education, Dr Seuss and Te Whariki: A likely combination. Australasian
Journal of Early Childhood, 35(2), 43–53.
Souto-Manning, M. (2009). Negotiating culturally responsive pedagogy through multicultural children’s
literature: Towards critical democratic literacy practices in a first grade classroom. Journal of Early
Childhood Literacy, 9(1), 50–74.
Stove, J. (2010). Self-control, the neglected key to learning. Quadrant, 54(10), 70–75.
Struppert, A., Guo, Q., & Waniganayake, M. (2010). Promoting intercultural competence through
technology-based play. In M. Ebbeck & M. Waniganayake (Eds.), Play in early childhood education:
Learning in diverse contexts (pp. 270–287). South Melbourne Vic: Oxford University Press.
40
ONE SIZE FITS ALL?
Subedi, B. (2010). Critical global perspectives. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

Tye, K. (2003). Globalizing global education. Phi Delta Kappan, 85(2), 165–168.
Tye, K. (2009). A history of the global education in the United States. In T. Fuss Kirkwood-Tucker
(Ed.), Visions in global education (pp. 3–24). New York: Peter Lang.
UNICEF. (1989). United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Retrieved from:
http://www.unicef.org/crc/files/Rights_overview.pdf
Williams, J. (2014). Teacher educator professional learning in the third space: Implications for identity
and practice. Journal of Teacher Education, 65(4), 315–326.
Wilson, A. (1993). Conversation partners: Gaining a global perspective through cross cultural
experiences. Theory into Practice, 32, 21–26.
Young, E. (2010). Challenges to conceptualizing and actualizing culturally relevant pedagogy: How
viable is the theory in classroom practice? Journal of Teacher Education, 61(3), 248–260.
Zong, G. (2002). Can computer mediated communication help to prepare global teachers? An analysis
of preservice social studies teachers’ experience. Theory & Research in Social Education, 30(4),
589–616.
Zong, G., Wilson, A. H., & Quashiga, A. Y. (2008). Global education . In L. S. Levstik & C. A. Tyson
(Eds.), Handbook of research in social studies education (pp. 197–216). New York and London:
Routledge.
Ruth Reynolds
School of Education
University of Newcastle
41
HILARY LANDORF & ERIC FELDMAN
3. GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES ON
GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP
INTRODUCTION
At a conference on global citizenship held in 2014, participants discussed topics

ranging from effective models for basic education, to ending violence against
women, to models of reconciliation and forgiveness in the aftermath of ethnic
cleansing (Melton Foundation, 2014). The variety of meanings ascribed to global
citizenship that appeared in the Melton Foundation 2014 Springboard Sessions is
representative of that found in the research, usage, and practice of global
citizenship throughout the world.
Our original intent for this chapter, to thematically catalogue the discourse of
global citizenship throughout space and time, proved naïve and unreasonable very
soon after we began our research. In short order, we identified the term global
citizenship in education and social science literature, in the context of non-
governmental organisations, corporations, educational policy and advocacy groups,
private student exchange services, and K-20 formal and non-formal educational
settings.
Researchers have examined the term global citizenship from many angles, from
the mention and meaning of the term in major world newspapers (Dill, 2013), to
the creation of the term in academic discourse (Parmenter, 2010), to creating
typologies of the multiple conceptualisations of the term (Oxley & Morris, 2013).
In opening our eyes to the volumes of research on the meaning and usage of this
complex concept, we noticed that, despite its multitude, the great majority of those
doing the inspection have been associated with Western institutions. To understand
the fullness of this concept as it is defined and used in the 21st century, global
perspectives are needed. It is our aim in this chapter to add previously unheard
voices to the dialogue and discussion of global citizenship. First, we provide a
summary of current reviews of literature on the meaning and application of the
term. Then we discuss common themes and tensions that exist within the reviewed
literature, and uncover our research problem, namely, the relative lack of non-
Western perspectives on global citizenship. We go on to present the results of a
content analysis we undertook pertaining to an online discussion on global
citizenship carried out by a Global Citizenship Education Working Group in which
17 of the 42 participants who contributed are from non-Western institutions
(Learning Metrics Task Force, 2014b).

METHODS
To address our inquiry into different perspectives of the meaning of the term global
citizenship, we began by entering the terms global citizenship and global
citizenship education together with the word definition into prominent research
database search engines such as Academic OneFile and OmniFile Full Text. We
also searched for books in the Florida International University library collection
that contained the terms global citizenship and global citizenship education, and
searched university, government organisation, and non-profit organisation websites.
Our initial search resulted in over 400 articles, books and websites with global
citizenship included in the title, abstract, or keywords. As we continued to engage
with the research the following additional terms emerged in connection with the
term global citizenship and we expanded our search to include these terms:
cosmopolitanism, world citizenship, transnational citizenship and universal
citizenship. As we engaged in an iterative process of reviewing the research and
refining our search, we noticed that, with the exception of very few examples, all
the literature on global citizenship was from a Western perspective, specifically
from researchers affiliated with institutions from the United States, Canada, the
United Kingdom and Australia.
Once we had discovered that so much has been written about global citizenship,
from many disciplinary angles but few cultural perspectives, we decided to explore
online discussions about global citizenship that were held in summer 2014 by the
Learning Metrics Task Force 2.0 Global Citizenship Education Working Group
(GCEWG). This is a group of researchers, educators, policy-makers and
practitioners that included members from institutions around the globe, selected on
the basis of an online application and letter of interest. One of the authors of this
chapter was a member of this working group, and secured permission to access and
use comments from the discussions for this chapter. Online responses to two
questions about the goals and aspirations for the group were reviewed and analysed
for emerging themes. In order to protect the privacy of the working group
participants, we only included information about their general role, institution, and
country. Other identifying information has been removed.
SUMMARY OF CURRENT REVIEWS OF LITERATURE
Before summarising current reviews of literature on the meaning and usage of

global citizenship, it is important to map the definitions of each of the component
words and how these words may connect with one another. Global, according to
Byers (2005), could mean ‘planetary, the entire world’ (para. 8), or, something
more local, even personal. Byers explains that global could also mean well-
rounded, so that describing someone as global would imply that she is widely-read,
holistic in her appreciation of the world, and understanding of the perspectives of
others. Global could even mean adaptable, like a travel plug for a hairdryer or an
electric razor. In this sense, a person who is global could readily fit into various
positions, locations, even countries and cultures.
44
GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES ON GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP
Global is certainly different from the concept of citizenship, which is composed

of three main elements (Cohen, 1999; Kymlicka & Norman, 2000; Carens, 2000).
The first is that of legal status, defined by political, social, and civil rights and
responsibilities. The second element is the citizen as one who has political agency,
able to actively participate in her nation’s political institutions. The third element is
membership in a political community that has a distinct collective identity (Carens,
2000). Given the definitional contradiction between global and citizen some
researchers, such as Davies (2006), question whether the concept of global
citizenship, regardless of its meaning, is even realistically possible: ‘It could be
argued that the notion of “global citizenship” is simply a metaphor, a linguistic
fancy which deliberately transposes a national political reality to a wider world
order’ (p. 5). One could very well use the same analogy for global citizenship that
Robin Richardson (as cited in Ballin & Griffin, 1999) uses for global education,
that of six blindfolded people looking at the concept, coming to their own
conclusion, and being in part right.
As noted in the introduction to this chapter, the range of definitions and usages
of the term global citizenship is vast and varied. On one end of the spectrum, as
Reysen and Katzarska-Miller (2013) put it, ‘all humans are global citizens;
however, some individuals lack the awareness to recognise their connection with
humanity as a whole’ (p. 866). On the other end, global citizenship may be a
fiction or an oxymoron, as Davies (2006) argues above. In an extreme example of
the conflict between the meaning of citizen and global, Gary Davis, founder and
champion of the One World movement, renounced his U.S. citizenship in 1948,
claiming that he was now a citizen of the world. He also had his own flag and
passport, and established the World Government of World Citizens to self-issue
passports, identity cards, birth/marriage certificates, even postage stamps and
currency. He believed that ‘if there were no nation-states, there would be no wars’
(Fox, 2013, para. 3). He ran for the U.S. presidency in 1988, and ‘periodically ran
for president of the world, always unopposed’ (Fox, 2013, para. 9). However the
term global citizenship is defined, and in whatever ways it is used, its importance
as a political, social, and civil concept is undeniable.
Researchers have written about global citizenship since the early 1970s, but it
has become a focus of study in a diverse range of academic fields in the last two
decades. Parmenter (2011) conducted an analysis of 199 articles in the WorldCat
database concerning when and where discussion of global citizenship occurred.
Two-thirds of the articles from her sample were published after the year 2000.
Although the search was limited only to English language publications, a full 74
percent of the articles she found pertaining to global citizenship were attributed to
authors in the United States (U.S.) (56%) and the United Kingdom (U.K.) (18%),
followed by Australia (6%), Canada (5 %), Japan, Hong Kong, and Belgium (2%
each), and Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Ireland, Cyprus, South Africa, India, the
Netherlands and France (1% each). In other words, according to Parmenter’s
findings, the United States clearly dominates the research literature on global
citizenship, and the U.S., U.K., Australia and Canada combined account for 85% of
the institutional affiliations of its authors.
45
HIGHLIGHTED TENSIONS IN THE LITERATURE
From our review of the current wave of research on global citizenship, several
tensions emerged. We will explain two of these tensions, one focused on the
definition of global citizenship, and the other on its goals. The first tension in
global citizenship is one that comes from its inherent definitional contradiction.
When one defines the concept literally, as global, a set of rights and/or
responsibilities not bound by specific borders or institutions, plus citizenship, a
legal construct derived from a governing body, the result seems to express an
impossible notion. Parekh (2003) presents a compelling case against global
citizenship if it is indeed seen as a model of government: global citizenship, he
says, ‘is neither practical nor desirable’, as such a society is ‘bound to be remote,
bureaucratic, oppressive, and culturally bland’ (p. 12). However, many suggest that
the rise of global citizenship does not signal the death of national citizenship.
Gibson, Remmington and Landwehr-Brown (2008) see global citizenship as one of
multiple, co-existing layers of citizenship, along with national citizenship. Appiah
(2008) argues that the rights and responsibilities of global citizenship can be
derived from membership in the broader class of humanity. For Appiah, global
citizenship is comparable to concepts like universal human rights and
cosmopolitanism, which by definition transcend geographical and political
boundaries.
The second tension pertains to the possible educational outcomes of global
citizenship. James Banks (1997, 2003, 2004) has frequently advocated for social
justice as one of the essential goals of global citizenship education. Banks (2004)
explains, ‘when we teach students how to critique the injustice in the world, we
should help them to formulate possibilities for action to change the world to make
it more democratic and just’ (p. 291). He advocates for a reform to citizenship
education that incorporates social justice and emphasises the need for skills such as
multicultural literacy. On the opposite side, Skrbis and Woodward (2013) describe
global citizenship as associated with cosmopolitan ‘marketable skills’ such as
being able to successfully navigate an intercultural business dinner with ‘the need
for global economic capital’ (p. 18). They contrast this goal with that of non-
business professions such as aid workers who utilise the same skills ‘out of a sense
of humanitarian altruism’ (p. 20).
ESSENTIAL PROBLEM IN THE EXISITING LITERATURE
The problem here is not that any of the aforementioned conceptualisations of

global citizenship is wrong, but that the term is being used to mean different kinds
and types of global citizenship. Scholarly debate and discussion regarding the
ideals and implementation of the concept are often based on different ideas of its
meaning. Add that most of the existing conversations about the meaning and
practice of global citizenship have omitted the non-Western world, and we are left
with a wide but inconsistent body of literature on global citizenship, one in which
global perspectives are surprisingly absent.
46
INCLUDING GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES IN THE LITERATURE OF

GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP
As explained in the methods sections of this chapter, from May 2014 through
January 2015, one of us was part of the Learning Metrics Task Force 2.0 Global
Citizenship Education Working Group. The GCEWG is a group of researchers,
educators, policy-makers and practitioners convened by the United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), The Youth
Advocacy Group, and the Center for Universal Education at the Brookings
Institution to inform the global dialogue on global citizenship and global
citizenship education. It was created in response, in part, to United Nations
Secretary General Ban Ki-moon sparking a renewed commitment among
international education and development experts to explore the role of public
education in developing global citizens.
One of the tasks of the group was to discuss its goals and aspired impact by
responding to two questions posed by the group’s conveners: ‘What do you hope to
get out of participating in this group?’ and ‘How can we make sure that our
recommendations have an impact?’ (Learning Metrics Task Force, 2014a). We
analysed participants’ responses to these questions by coding for emergent themes.
The selected quotations from the participants’ responses are from the online
discussion that took place from 16 June, 2014, to 21 August, 2014 (Learning
Metrics Task Force, 2014b).
In our content analysis of the working group discussions, two themes emerged
that we think address the aforementioned tensions. The first concerns the outcomes
of global citizenship, a theme similar to that found in previous research. Within this
theme, three prevailing outcomes emerged: (1) action based on societal rights; (2)
skills; and, (3) interconnectedness. A second theme also emerged that we have not
previously seen in the literature: connecting the global and the local. Many of the
participants discussed the idea of connecting the global and the local as crucial to
the enactment of global citizenship. After explaining the make-up of the group, we
will discuss our findings.
The GCEWG included representation from all seven continents. There were 83
members in the GCEWG, which was divided into three subgroups: Subject Matter
and Pedagogy; Measurement, Monitoring, and Evaluation; and Policy, Advocacy,
and Communications. Forty-two participants, representing institutions from 23
different countries, contributed to the general discussion on global citizenship. Of
the contributing 42 participants, 16 were based in the United States, 3 in the United
Kingdom, 2 in Canada, 1 each in Australia, Belgium, Italy and Germany, and the
rest in 16 non-Western countries, including the following: 2 from Kenya, and 1
each from Tanzania, Nigeria, Jordan, Nepal, Liberia, Fiji Islands, Mexico,
Zimbabwe, Haiti, Jamaica, Pakistan, Argentina, Malawi and Hong Kong.
The first emergent theme from the GCEWG discussions was the outcomes of
global citizenship, which included three distinct outcomes: (1) action based on
societal rights; (2) skills; and, (3) interconnectedness. This theme was unsurprising
to the researchers given that global citizenship is often framed in terms of
47
outcomes, particularly in discussions of the internationalisation of education

(Olson, Green, & Hill, 2006; Green, 2012; de Wit, 2010). The first type of outcome
present in the working group discussion was societal-rights-based action. By
societal rights we mean rights based on the idea of a society that gives fair
treatment and a just share of its benefits to all individuals and groups (Landorf &
Nevin, 2007). These rights may include equal access to education, health care,
clean water, and adequate shelter. Societal-rights-based action for global
citizenship encompasses the idea that responsibilities of global citizenship connect
to specific actions, such as community-based projects to build schools, work with
local health care providers, or support for the promotion of water treatment. There
were 10 contributors who discussed global citizenship in the context of societal-
rights-based action, 5 in non-Western countries and the same number in Western
countries. Examples of the way this outcome manifested in the working group
discussion include comments from a research associate at the Medical College of
Wisconsin, who linked global citizenship to ‘seeking solutions to global issues
such as our environment, poverty alleviation and access to basic health care’
(working group discussion, June 20, 2014). Another comment by an education
consultant at the Organization of American States (OAS) was particularly salient
regarding this theme, as it raised the issue of how global citizenship ‘can be
implemented according to different realities and contribute, among other
elements/variables, to the preparation of our children and youth to participate, be
protagonists, in the transformation of their communities, countries and the world’
(working group discussion, June 17, 2014). In both these comments, as in others,
the idea that global citizenship is observable through individuals taking action that
improves the lives of all in their society.
The second outcome found in the working group discussion was skills related to
global citizenship. In the case of this outcome, eight participants used language that
referred to competencies, skills, and related terms. All participants whose
comments related to this theme were from Western institutions. Several comments
specified the need for identifying specific skills and competencies and how to
assess them. For example, an advisor for Save the Children’s Global Education
Initiative in Washington commented about the need for identifying global
citizenship competencies and associated assessment approaches that would be
applicable across countries. Others, such as a programme manager at Camfed
International discussed their hope that the working group would help ‘design core
competencies necessary for a global citizen’ (working group discussion, June 17,
2014).
The third outcome present in the online discussion was that of
interconnectedness. This theme covered the recognition of interdependence, shared
humanity, shared responsibility and shared destiny. Similar to our finding of the
skills outcome, the majority of contributors to the interconnectedness outcome
were from Western institutions. Five individuals contributed comments related to
this outcome, one from a non-Western institution and the rest from Western
institutions. One example is a comment from a researcher at Human Rights
Education Associates: ‘I am interested to see how the frame of global citizenship
48
education can facilitate in learners across state borders their interconnectedness,

shared humanity and mutual responsibility for addressing global phenomenon’
(working group discussion, June 18, 2014). Another example of the articulation of
this outcome comes from a doctoral student at Roma Tre University in Italy,
expressing the hope that the group will be able to ‘outline the characteristics of the
global citizen, stressing in particular the aspect of global citizenship education
related to citizenship, that concerns the belonging to a world society’ (working
group discussion, June 18, 2014).
In addition to the three outcomes outlined above, we uncovered a new
contribution to global citizenship research, which is the theme of connecting the
local and the global. This theme concerns the necessity of addressing local
implications of global issues, and at the same time how local concerns may have a
global effect, or, as Hanvey (1982) puts it, how ‘things ramify’ (p. 164). This
perspective can be seen in widely distributed curriculum guides, such as Global
Citizenship: The Handbook for Primary Teaching, published by Oxfam (2002), a
UK-based anti-poverty and pro-justice non-governmental organisation. This guide
presents an ethos of justice, is rich in content concerning the dynamics of global
situations, and encourages local-global action. The interplay between the local and
the global can also be seen in global citizenship curriculum theory, such as that
espoused by Gaudelli (2009), who claims that ‘one cannot theorise curriculum as if
offering a prescription for a blank slate, but must consider the uniqueness and
particularity of this place that constitutes this person/people’ (p. 81).
The theme of the connection between the local and the global became apparent
from comments that specified that global citizenship should be connected to
community, regional, or national issues or practices. Many members of the group
explicitly called for a connection between the global and the local as essential for
global citizenship to have impact. Eleven members of the working group
commented specifically about the importance of connecting the local and the
global in the context of global citizenship. Of these commenters, five were from
non-Western institutions and six were from Western institutions.
Some comments clearly explained the need for connecting the global and the
local, while others alluded to it. The following are comments that best illustrate this
finding. A member who is part of Pakistan’s Children’s Global Network said that
he hopes that the working group ‘takes the discussion a step ahead to content and
relevance of learning to a community, a region and global’, adding that he is ‘keen
to focus more on the child, and the relevance of it being anchored to its community
and nations’ (working group discussion, June 18, 2014). A research officer at the
Kenya National Commission for UNESCO tied the idea of connecting the global
and the local to how recommendations for global citizenship education must be
practical and relevant. He explained, ‘local examples and application of global
concepts is one avenue of ensuring that this is done’ (working group discussion,
June 18, 2014). Other contributors from countries outside of the West conveyed
similar ideas about the importance of this connection between the local and the
global.
49
The working group members from institutions in the West also emphasised the
idea of connecting the global and the local. A United Kingdom based officer of the
International Baccalaureate explained, ‘the idea of the global can be very distant
for most young people and so it will be important to explore how these can be
connected to local understandings’ (working group discussion, June 22, 2014). In
exploring how identity is a part of the connection between the global and the local
in global citizenship, a professor at the Center for International Education of the
University of Massachusetts explained that ‘an important concept related to impact
for global citizenship education is an increased awareness of one’s identity as a
global citizen, which can contribute to a deeper appreciation of one’s local and
national identities’ (working group discussion, July 23, 2014). A lead teacher for a
countywide community development and global citizenship initiative at a high
school in Maryland, USA, advocated for the connection between the local and the
global by using the term glocal: ‘I work in partnership with students, teachers,
parents, and community leaders to design a framework that supports young people
as they strive to be “glocal” citizens: rooted in the local, branching into the global’
(working group discussion, June 17, 2014). This contributor’s reference to glocal is
as a term that has been used to reject assumptions that local and global are
oppositional (Robertson, 1995, 1997; Patel & Lynch, 2013; Harth, 2010). All of
these participants in the GCEWG discussion called for research that considers a
new aspect of global citizenship, one that links the global and local together, rather
than treating them as separate conceptions of citizenship.
A RESOLUTION TO THE TENSIONS OF GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP

AND A WAY FORWARD
The two themes that emerged from the multiplicity of voices that contributed to
online discussions of the Learning Metrics Task Force 2.0 Global Citizenship
Education Working Group provide a window into how stakeholders are talking
about global citizenship; they also point to a resolution of the tensions apparent in
the literature on this complex and important concept. The outcomes of global
citizenship highlighted by the working group reflect the desire for the development
of human capability rather than corporate gain. These outcomes comprise actions,
skills, and interconnectedness that contribute to the quest for a more just world.
The theme of connecting the local and the global reflects a belief on the part of
many members from both Western and non-Western institutions that, rather than
denoting a definitional contradiction, the term global citizenship involves both the
global and the local and the interplay between the two. It is significant that the
addition of non-Western voices points to a resolution of the conflict between global
and local citizenship that is seen in the literature. Bringing global perspectives into
the discussion of the what and the how of global citizenship is not only essential,
but it moves the dialogue from questioning of the existence of the concept to
exploration of the ways in which it can be operationalised while respecting local
needs as well as global issues and concerns.
50
The global operationalisation of global citizenship is a challenging endeavour. It

will require consensus building around vision, international discourse on policy
implications, and dedicated technical expertise, as well as substantial financial
resources, and an enormous amount of commitment and action from policy makers,
administrators, educators, and students. As is evident in our findings, however,
forums like the one convened by the Youth Advocacy Group, the Center for
Universal Education at the Brookings Institution, and UNESCO, in which voices
from around the world are heard, are essential in turning the theory of global
citizenship into action. In a world in which so many people live under the double
threat of poverty and conflict, having access to education that provides them with
the tools to develop their understanding of the interconnectedness of the world and
the ability to individually and collectively solve problems is both key to their
survival and an opportunity to assume their role as responsible global citizens.
Addressing pressing global and local issues will require consensus building around
vision, international discourse on policy implications, and dedicated technical
expertise, as well as substantial financial resources, and an enormous amount of
commitment and action from policy makers, administrators, educators, and
students.
REFERENCES
Appiah, K. A. (2008). Education for global citizenship. Yearbook of the National Society for the Study
of Education, 107, 83–99.
Ballin, B., & Griffin, H. (Eds.). (1999). Building blocks for global learning. Derby: Global Education
Derby.
Banks, J. A. (1997). Educating citizens in a multicultural society. New York: Teachers College Press.
Banks, J. A. (Ed.). (2003). Diversity and citizenship education: Global perspectives. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Banks, J. A. (2004). Teaching for social justice, diversity and citizenship in a global world. The
Educational Forum, 68, 296–305.
Byers, M. (2005, October 5). Are you a ‘global citizen’? The Tyee. Retrieved from
http://thetyee.ca/Views/2005/10/05/globalcitizen/
Carens, J. H. (2000). Culture, citizenship, and community: A contextual exploration of justice as
evenhandedness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cohen, J. (1999). Changing paradigms of citizenship and the exclusiveness of the demos. International
Sociology, 14(3), 245–268.
Davies, L. (2006). Global citizenship: Abstraction or framework for action? Educational Review, 58, 5–
25.
De Wit, H. (2010). Internationalisation of higher education in Europe and its assessment, trends and
issues. Den Haag, Nederland: NVAO Nederlands-Vlaamse Accredietatieorganisatie.
Dill, J. S. (2013). The longings and limits of global citizenship education: Moral pedagogy of schooling
in a cosmopolitan age. New York: Routledge.
Fox, M. (2013, July 28). Garry Davis, man of no nation who saw one world of no war, dies at 91. The
New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/29/us/garry-davis-man-of-no-
nation-dies-at-91.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Gibson, K., Remmington, G., & Landwehr-Brown, M. (2008). Developing global awareness and
responsible world citizenship with global learning. Roeper Review, 30, 11–23.
Green, M. (2012). Global citizenship: What are we talking about and why does it matter?
Trends & Insights for International Education. Retrieved from http://www.nafsa.org/
51
Explore_International_Education/Trends/TI/Global_Citizenship_-_What_Are_We_Talking_About_
and_Why_Does_It_Matter_/
Hanvey, R. G. (1982). An attainable global perspective. Theory into Practice, 21, 162–167.
Harth, C. (2010). The global schoolhouse: Going glocal adaptive education for local and global
citizenship. Independent School, 70(1), 68–74.
Kymlicka, W., & Norman, W. (2000). Citizenship in culturally diverse societies: Issues, contexts,
concepts. In W. Kymlicka & W. Norman (Eds.), Citizenship in diverse societies (pp. 1–41). Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Landorf, H., & Nevins, A. (2007). Social justice as a disposition for teacher education programs: Why is
it such a problem? In S. Nielsen & M. Plakhotnik (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth Annual College of
Education Research Conference: Urban and International Education Section (pp. 49–53). Miami:
Florida International University.
Learning Metrics Task Force. (2014a). Global citizenship education working group draft terms of
reference. Unpublished document, Center for Universal Education, Brookings Institution,
Washington, D.C.
Melton Foundation. (2014). Springboard sessions: Stories that inspire action. Retrieved from
http://meltonfoundation.org/global-citizenship-conference-2014/program-gcc-2014/100-acts/
springboard-sessions
Olson, C. L., Green, M. F., & Hill, B. A. (2006). A handbook for advancing comprehensive
internationalization: What institutions can do and what students should learn. Washington, DC:
American Council on Education.
Gaudelli, W. (2009). Heuristics of global citizenship discourses towards curriculum enhancement.
Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 25(1), 68–85.
Oxfam. Global citizenship: The handbook for primary teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxfam Publishers.
Oxley, L., & Morris, P. (2013). Global citizenship: A typology for distinguishing its multiple
conceptions. British Journal of Educational Studies, 61(3), 301–325.
Parmenter, L. (2011). Power and place in the discourse of global citizenship education. Globalisation,
Societies and Education, 9(3–4), 367–380.
Parekh, B. (2003). Cosmopolitanism and global citizenship. Review of International Studies, 29, 3–17.
Patel, F., & Lynch, H. (2013). Glocalization as an alternative to internationalization in higher education:
Embedding positive glocal learning perspectives. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in
Higher Education, 25(2), 223–230.
Robertson, R. (1995). Glocalization: Time-space and homogeneity-heterogeneity. In M. Featherstone, S.
Lash, & R. Robertson (Eds.), Global modernities (pp. 25–44). London: Sage Publications.
Robertson, R. (1997). Comments on the ‘global triad’ and ‘glocalization’. In N. Inoue (Ed.),
Globalization and indigenous culture (pp. 217–225). Tokyo: Institute for Japanese Culture and
Classics, Kokugakuin University.
Reysen, S., & Katzarska-Miller, I. (2013). A model of global citizenship: Antecedents and outcomes.
International Journal of Psychology, 48, 858–870.
Skrbis, Z., & Woodward, I. (2013). Cosmopolitanism: Uses of the idea. London: Sage.
Hilary Landorf
Office of Global Learning,
Florida International University
Eric Feldman
Office of Global Learning,
Florida International University
52
SECTION 2
TELLING NATIONAL STORIES

OF GLOBAL EDUCATION
PATRICK THEMBA SIBAYA
4. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF SCHOOLING,

TEACHING AND EDUCATION
A South African Perspective
INTRODUCTION
This chapter considers some of the fundamentals of education from the perspective
of experiences in South Africa where schooling has not been, and continues to
remain, not necessarily accessible or at least sufficient. The terms schooling,
teaching and education are interrogated and their contribution to a global education
in an increasingly globalised world are considered. South Africa is addressing a
number of key issues in education, some of which can be assisted by globalisation
and access to resources provided by the wider world, and some which are local
themes and require local perspectives and skills. South African education must
aspire to build worthy world citizens who portray values of respect and justice.
These are surely global aims.
In 1994 President Nelson Mandela initiated measures to ensure equality in every
aspect of life and freedom among the races of South Africa. Many of us who have
Christian faith-based perspectives on events in our lives and communities see this
as evidence of a Messiah coming to help our people. Since 1994, South Africa
(SA) has not been isolated from other countries in the world and the complex
realities of South African higher education development, or transformation, are
related to the worldwide phenomenon of globalisation. The rapid and dramatic
changes taking place in South African higher education are the evidence of global
trends, values and ideas. The features of the educational landscape, and the values
associated with it, are not uniquely South African but are linked to global higher
education values and trends. The process of globalisation has led to cross-
pollination of educational values, ideals and trends. Ideals for good citizenship are
shared by the world at large. The ultimate education is to produce citizens who are
good, responsible, respectful, prone to value human life, and respect human beings
regardless of their origin, creed, gender or behaviour.
The political transformation and educational values in South Africa attracted
international scholars from various countries through the process of globalisation.
This process encompassed the international market, global finance, signing of
memoranda of understanding, and worldwide social and economic growth. This
process has also increased a pay-off for high level skills. Globalisation has made

higher education more business-like in South Africa. First it was the introduction
of terms to qualify value education. These terms, which are now shared values,
include equity, competitiveness, responsiveness, quality, accountability, efficiency
and international student recruitment. Countries such as the United States of
America (USA), the United Kingdom (UK), the Netherlands and Germany
sponsored students from SA to study for senior degrees at their advanced
universities. Daniels (2010) elaborates on the nature of international collaborations
that occurred since 1994. She outlines a system of a sandwich programming,
whereby a student completes a number of years abroad and an equal number of
years locally to finish a programme. In some instances, a student completes the
entire degree abroad but the degree is conferred by a partner university locally
(Daniels, 2010). There are many such permutations indicative of the linked
education values and interest that international institutions vested in South Africa
following the transformation of higher education and a new democratic South
Africa. The number of foreign students studying at South African universities is
increasing at a rate which sometimes seems alarming.
Following this transformation of higher education we observe student and
lecturer exchange programmes between South Africa and other countries.
Globalisation clarifies world educational values and how the world operates and
structures institutional operations. Globalisation can produce convergent and
divergent views (Vaira, 2004). The convergent aspect of globalisation puts
emphasis on a progressive directional trend toward homogenisation of a cultural,
political and economic values and way of life. The opposite is true with regard to
the divergent view, which is nonlinear and non-directional (Vaira, 2004). Both are
evident in South Africa.
Higher education institutions, in South Africa and abroad, formed consortia or
partnerships or collaborative programmes (Daniels, 2010; Engelbrecht, 2012). The
international communities have shown interest in and valued these partnerships. Le
Grange (2002) has argued for a place for indigenous knowledge systems (IKS) in
such research partnerships. Globalisation, massification and worldwide distribution
of knowledge and educational values must also accommodate a socially distributed
knowledge system. It is imperative to seek research partnerships with people and
countries that recognise the importance of IKS (Le Grange, 2002). This will
harmonise the effect of globalisation and internationalisation. Whatever form
globalisation takes an acknowledgement of the indigenous groups must be part of it
– after all, the values of South African education have emerged from its past
struggles.
SOUTH AFRICAN EDUCATION SYSTEM MAKES UP FOR LOST TIME
Education in South Africa has a tainted history of racial segregation. There were
separate departments of education for Whites, Coloureds, Indians and Blacks. It is
beyond the scope of this chapter to dig the graves and discuss psychological,
physical, social and spiritual scars left indelibly printed in the minds of the Black
South Africans but some brief examples will help make the point.
56
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF SCHOOLING
The service delivery and per capita expenditure per child in school were
different in the past and disadvantaged the Africans. Past reference to the
Black/Bantu child was often made in the literature on education in South Africa
with the idea that this child is to be educated to fit into a particular/specific cultural
society within a specific socio-cultural milieu (Dreyer, 1969; Nel, 1981). For
example:
The Bantu Teacher must be integrated as an active agent in the process of
Development of the Bantu Community. He must learn not to feel above his
community, with a consequent desire to become integrated into the life of the
European community. (Verwoerd, 1954, p. 15)
The whole mental furniture of A Kaffir’s mind differs from that of a

European…He is a complete stranger to Western concepts of clear thinking
and is as ignorant of logic as he is of the moons of Jupiter. (Otaala, 1995,
p. 16)
These references indicate that for several decades in South Africa, there has been a
period of unbroken indoctrination and ideology of separateness in education. In
significant ways, the racism which existed at the time disfigured the subject of
education and also the education system as a whole. No attempts were made in the
literature, to convey the image of education as a developmental tool for a third
world country. Instead all attempts were made to designate White in a superior
position to Blacks.
The practice which ran for about 400 years was stopped in 1994. Schooling,
teaching and education needed to be reconfigured. While teaching is limited to
instruction, training or impartation of knowledge and skills, education, is a broader
concept. It embraces a person and his/her relationship with other beings. The aim
of liberal education is personality moulding. This can be achieved through
intentional or accidental behaviours. In a globally connected world relationships
are crucial and so an education in a broad sense would seem to be of most value,
even if schooling has of necessity been limited.
Teaching
Teaching means communication of knowledge and skills to the learner. Teaching is
an art and therefore only qualified teachers can claim this title. A teacher possesses
knowledge and the method of teaching. Teachers are trained professionally and do
not get this art intuitively. To be effective, teaching must bring about learning, that
is, a change in behaviour. This means that teaching should be judged as successful
by lasting results and application of acquired knowledge in the life situations. The
results of teaching should not vanish but persist throughout the lifespan of the
learner. The South African system of education promotes quality education for all
and aspires to get or harvest excellent standards and a good teaching-learning
environment (Gurney, 2007). Teachers are regarded as ‘in loco parentis’. While
teaching is limited to the school environment and is practised by professional
57
experts education may be formal or informal. The biological parents may not be
qualified teachers but are responsible for education of their children while teachers
teach and educate (Jansen, 2011).
Schooling
One of the most striking features of South African schools is the manner in which
parents attend meetings and participate in the affairs and well-being of the school.
By any standards, parental involvement, concerns and support for the school are
great. The enactment of a teachers’ role is governed by ethics and Professional
Codes of Conduct (Employment of educators Act 1998; South African Council for
Educators Act 2000; South African Council for Educators, 2011). As such,
teachers are prohibited by Law from engaging in propaganda, counterpropaganda,
indoctrination and brainwashing in any other form of ideological persuasive or
coercive communication whose main objective is the suppression of scrutiny
questions from children, learners and students. Teachers must spread the gospel of
EDUCATION which is a two-way communication, open phenomenon and in
which questions are entertained, encouraged, permitted, elicited and expressed
spontaneously and openly (Richmond, 1971; Serpell, 1993).
No. 84 of the South African Schools Act 1996 reinforces the connection
between the home and the school. Consequently, the school belongs to parents in
general and the immediate community in particular. It is necessary therefore to
develop networks between the school, home and community. The single best way
to improve education is to strengthen parents’ involvement, through establishing a
rapport with them. There is much evidence to support this statement. The research
data (Hornby, 2011) suggest that parents’ involvement in their children’s schooling
or education improves their children’s academic performance. Success at school
depends upon a triangle of interaction of three human elements namely, the
teacher, the parent and the child. There are positive benefits derived from parental
involvement. Such a teacher/community engagement in teaching and schooling
leads to education (Hornby, 2011).
Education
It would seem to be obvious in a moral community that every child in need of
education automatically becomes ‘my’ child. Education means upbringing, in its
broad sense – a moral obligation. The person whom education should realise in us
is not a biological being but a humane being. Education exists in a refinement of
innate attributes. It is the community or society and/or nation as whole which
draws the portrait of the kind of person we should be (Bantock, 1965). Parents are
educators and they provide role models for the growing children. A human child
cannot be left to random environmental moulding factors. Parents and teachers
intervene to give guidance and direction to adulthood. They lead the child to
adulthood. In other words they synergise to help the child get to his or her own
adulthood (Miller, 2010; Burns & Aspeslagh, 2014).
58
However, in a country previously beset with violence, death and massacre, it

was a dubious proposition that parents could fulfil their role of upbringing with a
measure of confidence and socio-political upheavals. This country dehumanised
parents. In this country for education, parents and teachers have equal
responsibilities. Two key ingredients appear to be essential for education –
knowledge and conscience, in other words access to knowledge and the formation
of conscience (Du Plooy & Kilian, 1993; Miller, 2010).
Human and natural sciences as well as scientific learning have an increasing
place in our knowledge. These disciplines are indispensable for a harmonious
interpersonal organisation of life in common in the midst of its complexity.
Teaching and education activities culminate in the formation of conscience.
Certainly education has in the first place a pedagogical role of moulding of its
students, in order that they will be capable of reaching the level of knowledge
required and of exercising their profession effectively, efficiently, expeditiously
and courteously. Above this level, knowledge acquired has the function of
transmitting values, virtues, culture and permitting and facilitating the integration
of knowledge and life contexts (Entwistle, 2013; Miller, 2010; Burns & Aspeslagh,
2014).
The current practice in the education system of South Africa, in principle,
represents an attempt to redress past imbalances. However to advocate for quality
education for all is not plain sailing. It is a journey beset with cul-de-sacs and road-
works. The school buildings are not the same between groups. The urban-rural
dichotomy in school types cannot be obliterated. Township schools do not have
offices for both teachers and support staff. No government in the world can bridge
the gaps between institutions built on fundamental different ideologies. Yes, the
concept of redress of imbalances is observable and operational to achieve ideal
similarity but is not always fulfilled.
Students, who follow the general stream, that is, liberal education, find that job
opportunities are dwindling. We have many students who have completed their
degrees but cannot be gainfully employed. This is a major problem facing
graduates today and many are asked to change or study for other careers in
Mathematics, Science, Commerce, Technology and Medicine. Women are now
encouraged to pursue occupations or careers in the same way as most men. At
present time just about half of all high-school graduates are female students, while
in 1900 they represented a small percentage of all high-school graduates. The
percentage of all bachelor’s degrees going to women has been steadily increasing
in percentages from 1900 to 1970 and will be expected to reach about 80% in 2070
(Council on Higher Education, 2009, 2013). In many ways we have made great
gains in both education and schooling.
CONCLUSION
Teachers play a pivotal role in teaching and education of learners. This role
demands an impeccable character. This disposition is crucial in serving as a model
for learners’ personality. There is a reciprocal benefit in value sharing in a global
59
worldview. Our interaction with other people or members of the public and the
world must guarantee that the end-product will manifest the following virtues:
– Respect for human rights and dignity;
– Fundamental freedom, freedom charter;
– Peace and rejection of violence as a means to an end;
– A spirit of solidarity;
– The principle of rational thought;
– The ethics of evidence, proof and not intuition;
– Avoidance of hatred, jealousy, sabotage and a spirit to conquer, rather than to
defeat.
If our interaction with the public does not produce these virtues, they will
qualify as non-events. The joy of life is the difference that you make in other
people’s lives. When your time is up in this world, it will truly not matter whether
you have attained great wealth or prestigious titles or fame. What will finally
matter is whether you have led a life that has left this world to be an even slightly
better place. Educators in SA are indeed attempting to accomplish this task.
REFERENCES
Bantock, G. H. (1965). Education and values. London: Faber and Faber.

Burns, R. J., & Aspeslagh, R. (2014). Three decades of peace education around the world: An
anthology. London: Routledge.
Council on Higher Education. (2009). Higher education monitor: Postgraduate studies in South
Africa – a statistical profile. Pretoria: Author.
Council on Higher Education. (2013). Higher education participation in 2011. Pretoria: Author.
Daniels, F. M. (2010). Response to national policy imperatives for nursing education: A Western Cape
case study. Curationis, 33(1), 43–48.
Dreyer, H. J. (1969). Inttelektuele ontwikkeling en die implikasies daarvan vir Bantu-onderwys.
(Intellectual development and its implications for Bantu Education). [Inaugural address]
KwaDlangezwa: University of Zululand.
Du Plooy, J.L. & Kilian, C.J.G. (1993). Introduction to fundamental pedagogics. Pretoria: Van Schaik.
Employment of Educators Act 1998 No. 76 (SA).
Engelbrecht, P. (2012). Research in a South African faculty of education: A transformative approach.
Perspectives in Education, 30, 39–49.
Entwistle, N. J. (2013). Styles of learning and teaching: An integrated outline of educational psychology
for students, teachers and lecturers. London: Routledge.
Gurney, P. (2007). Five factors for effective teaching. New Zealand Journal of Teachers’ Work, 4(2),
89–98.
Hornby, G. (2011). Parental involvement in childhood education: Building effective school-family
relationships. New York: Springer.
Jansen, J. (2011). Great South African teachers. South Africa: Pan Macmillan.
Le Grange, L. (2002). Challenges for higher education transformation in South Africa: Integrating the
local and the global. South African Journal of Higher Education, 16, 67–73.
Miller, J. P. (2010). Whole child education. Canada: University of Toronto Press.
Nel, A. (1981). The place of psycho pedagogics in the training of teachers for a changing society
Inaugural address. KwaDlangezwa: University of Zululand.
Otaala, B. (1995). The contribution of educational psychology in Africa: The Namibia case. [Inaugural
address] Windhoek: University of Namibia.
Richmond, W. K. (1971). The school curriculum. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd.
60
Serpell, R. (1993). The significance of schooling. Cambridge: University of Press.

South African Council for Educators. (2011). Code of professional ethics. Pretoria: Government
Printers.
South African Council for Educators Act 2000 No. 31 (SA).
South African Schools Act 1996 No. 84 (SA).
Vaira, M. (2004). Globalisation and higher education organisational change: A framework for analysis.
Higher Education, 48, 483–510.
Verwoerd, H. F. (1954). Bantu education: Policy for the immediate future. Pretoria: Information Service
of the Department of Native Affairs.
Patrick Themba Sibaya

Faculty of Education
University of Zululand
61
UDAN KUSMAWAN
5. EDUCATING DIVERSE TEACHERS

IN A DIVERSE COUNTRY
An Issue of Connectivity
INTRODUCTION
This chapter explores the constraints and opportunities for Indonesian educational
institutions in the quest to educate its diverse population. Global education implies
globalisation and increasing interaction with other parts of the world (Pike, 2013),
but in the Indonesian context educating a diverse and geographically dispersed
population is a substantial challenge. Indonesia is a country built on various
ethnicities and traditions and these must be respected as well as create effective
participation in the shared national and global education agendas (Raley & Preyer,
2010; Banks, 2003). Many Indonesians see themselves as globally connected by a
range of traditions that extend beyond national boundaries but still require support
from national educational authorities. Connecting Indonesian societies is therefore
an imperative to empower all the people and maintain cohesive societal and
cultural structures. Education is a crucial aspect of building these connections as
teachers lead their students to engage with the rich resources of knowledge and
expertise available beyond their time and place constraints. However, by 2013,
approximately 48% of the 2.92 million teachers in Indonesia had met basic
professional teaching qualifications as required by National Standards for
Education (Badan Standar Nasional Pendidikan, 2005; Maria, 2014). One of the
key reasons for this is the geographical isolation of many Indonesian citizens, and
added to this only 16.72% of Indonesian people have access to the internet. This
challenges UT, as a state university of Indonesia, to increase online education
systems as its instructional learning system as a means of broadening its services in
addition to using traditional educational learning media such as radio and television
broadcasts, and ‘modules’ (printed learner materials) as the main learning
resources. This chapter argues that due to geographical constraints, connectivity
among people and the regions remains a central issue for quality development of
teaching and education in Indonesia. It argues that education that serves diverse
people, in various modes of delivery, needs to be made widely available to support
regional and global connectedness, and in particular to meeting the era of ASEAN
Economic Community 2015.

UDAN KUSMAWAN
INDONESIA AS A DIVERSE COUNTRY
Indonesia is a diverse country of ethnicities and rich traditions which has recently
demonstrated strong dedication and comprehensive efforts to build a democratic
society. Within Indonesian society and across its mountainous tropical archipelago,
interconnectedness among people remains a critical challenge. Indonesian diversity,
in part, originates from at least 300 ethnic groups of about 1,340 tribes, living on
6000 islands, and speaking about 746 local languages. According to Indonesia
Statistics Bureau, of the total population of 248 million people that are registered in
512 districts, 57.4 million domicile in 183 geographically isolated districts (Risadi,
2013).
In addition to living in these remote and isolated districts, many Indonesians are
living in border areas: those bordering the seas directly across from the
neighbouring countries of Malaysia and Singapore via the Malacca Strait; with
Malaysia across the Natuna Sea to the west; with Vietnam across the South China
Sea to the north; with The Philippines via the Celebes Sea; with Australia across
the Timor Sea; and with India across the Andaman Sea (Jaelani, 2006).
Furthermore, Jaelani indicated that border regions include land borders with
Malaysia, Papua New Guinea (PNG) and Timor Leste, and are spread across 15
districts in 4 provinces, each facing different border characteristics.
Education for all in such diverse geographic situations of Indonesia must
consider and support peoples’ attachments to their wider cultural communities
(international connections) in order to participate effectively in both shared
national and global education (Raley & Preyer, 2010; Banks, 2003). Thus
Indonesian communities have a mixture of global and local connections that enable
unique approaches to education. In addition to the geographical and any related
legal administrative conditions, diversity affects educational services delivered in
urban or rural districts and settings and demographic groups. Except in some cities,
learners and their teachers suffer from a lack of access to the advances of
information communication technology (ICT) or because of their traditional
learning habits. Only 18.95% of the regions in Indonesia are administratively
categorised as urban districts, the rest being rural and lacking technology services
(97 urban and 415 rural districts). This creates a specific challenge to provide the
widest variety of distance and online educational technologies – global education
in a diverse local context.
Complex issues arising in border regions have been due to a delicate
connectivity between developing national and global growth. Mostly, such
problems are related to basic issues of low public welfare, low quality of human
resources, and lack of transport and communication infrastructure. The
underdevelopment of both the land and sea border areas vis-à-vis the social and
economic situations in neighbouring countries could possibly develop into political
vulnerability in the longer term. Countering this very real potential for border
disputation and aspirations of locals to develop an affinity to a neighbouring
country has influenced the quality of education and education delivery from
Indonesian centres.
64
DIVERSE TEACHERS IN A DIVERSE COUNTRY
The capital city of Indonesia, Jakarta, with its population of 12.7 million (during
the day) and 9.6 million people (at night), has long been positioned as the main
source of expertise and standards for national development and prosperity. This
and other large cities in Indonesia have been built by having the best human
resources migrate from the outlying districts. Indeed, with insufficient
infrastructure, human resources and other resources, outer and remote district
governments have been struggling to meet quality requirements set up by the
central government. Teachers in these non-urban areas suffer from modernity as
they cannot be expected to have, or even be exposed to, these same educational
resources and opportunities, with resulting standards and outcomes, than those
attained in central city locations.
Given this situation, the government needs to bring about appropriate policies to
address quality education implementation. This chapter highlights and considers
the problems associated with two domains of policy development to meet the need
for quality education: 1) increasing local/regional connectivity as a means of
creating pathways of understanding between these diverse regions and 2) reducing
access disparities to quality education between regions, as a vehicle to permit
effective and efficient connectivity. Connectivity in this chapter stresses a direct
people-to-people connection as the main approach to develop and implement
innovative and future-orientated policies. A critical educational focus of debate in
Indonesia at the moment concerns on distance and online modes of education and
the extent to which these education delivery modes can promote and support policy
realisation to alleviate inequality between urban and rural districts.
PEOPLES’ CONNECTIVITY IN INDONESIA
Over the past decade of structural regional autonomy legislation, governance

patterns have changed from centralised to decentralised systems in a multitude of
sectors in Indonesia. Regional and local autonomy for the first time came into
effect in Indonesia through Law No. 22/1999 (Mungkasa, 2003). Local
governments have gained wide latitude in carrying out development on the basis of
creativity and locally developed initiatives and have thus become active
participants in development. This decentralising strategy was sought to accelerate
development especially in remote, outer, and disadvantaged areas.
As is often the case in developed countries, local and regional cooperation is an
important pre-condition in addressing internal issues and problems such as border
issues, environmental management, security, water management, product quality
excellence, core-product marketing, and educational quality and qualification
platforms. To generate cooperation, effective instruments and communication
systems to convey information are necessary. Indonesia, however, has to navigate
the issue of diverse language groups, as well as local customs and approaches, in
its mission to become a globally connected country. In order to connect border
areas to a unified approach to pursue a focused global connection strategy, the
national government needs to draw together all the local approaches within the
remote, outer, and disadvantaged areas (called 3T Areas, in Indonesian terms).
65
UDAN KUSMAWAN
In connecting local areas, the national government has implemented a

cooperative concept that has been tested and practised in developed countries
known as Regional Management (Zaini, 2011). It has been legislated by Law
No.32/2004 on Regional/Local Government which was further highlighted by Law
No.50/2007 on Regional/Local Government collaboration that every regional
government is to cooperate with other regions to share resources for mutual benefit
concerning the economy, human resources, and education standard achievements.
Zaini (2011) explained that central and regional levels of management institution
should function as facilitation interfaces between the local areas, so optimising the
use of agreed shared resources and initiating regional development blueprints to
alleviate disparities among disadvantaged locals and hence between disadvantaged
and developed regions of Indonesia.
In 2013, it was reported that only about 48% of the 2.92 million teachers in
Indonesia have upgraded their professional qualifications to meet requirements of
the National Standard for Education (Maria, 2014). These statistics are indicative
of the poor quality of education in the border, outer, and disadvantaged areas,
where most teachers lack quality access to information and communication
technologies and infrastructure. Improving this statistics can be difficult without
sustained enforcement efforts and facilitation from the national government. Due to
Indonesia’s geographical challenges especially as a massive archipelago, Maria
(2014) has argued that advancement of ICT and its usage as applied to strengthen
connectivity, education and education delivery is imperative. Two issues are
critical as regard to the link between improvement of quality education and
connectivity, i.e., the existence of ICT as a tool to enhance connectivity; and
knowledge and understanding of all parties as to the central issues of the border
areas.
ICT as a tool to enhance connectivity
Employing ICT in education and utilising it to engage students with others across
different cultures can be problematic. It is not simply a matter of connecting people
technologically. It is what people will do when they do connect and how they will
best join with others. The Rule of Minister of Education and Culture (MOEC)
No.72/2013 on Implementation of Special Education Services (SES) indicates that
education in remote or underdeveloped, indigenous communities, and/or with the
occurrence of natural disasters, social upheavals, and for economically
disadvantaged regions, has to be realised through the strong role of ICT. For this,
the government has underlined that education may apply traditional distance
services (audio, video, and TV) and be IT-based. This obviously gives space for
SES organisers to employ ICT for implementing quality education. This is
intended to connect and share the advancement of learning strategies and resources
to all disadvantaged regions.
Despite these imperatives and the governmental policy directions, internet
access remains low in Indonesia. As of July 2014, an estimation of Indonesia
internet users is 42,258,824 users with its internet penetration rate of only 16.72%,
66
out of the total population of 252,812,245 (Internet Live Stats, 2014). With this
comparatively low total number of people who have access to the internet in
Indonesia, and comparing it with the 12.7 million people who live in Jakarta, it can
be presumed that mostly those who are living in metropolitan cities have internet
access and can be concluded that the rural areas have little or no service. This
disparity curtails the opportunity for equality in quality educational standards and
outcomes.
Merryfield (2000) has indicated that, ‘one of the most critical failures of social
studies teacher educators in the late twentieth century has been our inability to
prepare teachers who teach for educational equity, cultural diversity, and global
interconnectedness’ (p. 502). Aligned with this proposition, one of the actions of
the government in responding to the stated challenges is reviewing national school
curriculum for elementary and secondary levels of education. The government of
Indonesia has implemented Curriculum 2013 as a solution to these challenges.
With the Curriculum 2013, the government has directed all the schools,
communities and local governments to action on educating and nurturing early and
young Indonesians with new ways of teaching and learning strategies to lead them
to be capable of arriving at a productive, creative, innovative, and affective
generation in a Golden Year of 2045. The new strategies are calling for schools and
communities to enhance their student learning with advanced communication and
information technologies appropriate for education.
Border areas – Issues for connectivity
In terms of various issues and problems facing the border regions, both land and
sea borders, there are six aspects that are related to the quality of inter-
connectedness among local areas, namely: policies, economic and socio-cultural
aspects, defence and security, natural resources management, institutional and
management authority, and cooperation between countries neighbouring. To date
there is not a comprehensive national policy that includes directions, approaches,
and strategies for the development of border areas, as well as integrates the
functions and roles of all stakeholders within border regions.
Border area policies have been directed towards securing the borders from
potential threats from outside and positioned the border regions as a safety/security
belt of the country. This has resulted in a lack of border region management that
emphases education and welfare approaches to optimise the potential of human and
natural resources, especially those of interest by investors. This narrow outlook has
had an effect on the quality of life of border communities, especially in regard to
poor levels of infrastructure and accessibility. This situation frequently compares
unfavourably with the situation within these districts’ neighbouring countries,
which have better socio-economic conditions. The social and economic life of
societies at border areas in Kalimantan and North Sulawesi, for example, are
oriented to the territory of neighbouring countries, instead of inwardly to their own
country. This orientation is also often influenced by similarity of their cultures,
customs and ancestry (i.e., of the same tribe) in some areas such as the border in
67
UDAN KUSMAWAN
Borneo (Dayak and Malay) and Papua. This connection, in turn, can encourage
traditional activities by illegal border crossers. Over the long term, gaps of quality
development with neighbouring countries may invite national political insecurity.
In practice, however, many local governments are not exercising their full
authority. This may be caused by several factors, but mostly has been due to the
insufficient capacities of the local governments to handle the cross-border
administration. This may also be related to the quality of access to education and
information resources in response to issues and problems arising in the regions.
The sheer volume of border situations and incidents finds the national government
struggling to deal with the issues in the most effective and efficient manner.
Quality education for all people through building connectivity between the people,
and develop the intensity and quality of communication strategies, will
undoubtedly assist to build capacity shortfalls.
Increasing connectivity is becoming more important as ASEAN is aiming to
create the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) in 2015, to realise regional
economic integration (ASEAN, 2014). In the era of AEC, a formal partnership is to
be facilitated by a single market and production base in Southeast Asia, and by
highly competitive globally integrated economic regions on a basis of regional
equitable economic development. Leadership and management capability will be
very important in the AEC era. One of the key areas of cooperation in the region is
human resources development and capacity building. Enabling cooperation
implicitly requires education skills for adequate infrastructure and communications
connectivity, and in particular for electronic transactions through e-ASEAN.
Quality education must be enhanced to reach the ultimate goal of the AEC, namely
to transform ASEAN into a region with free movement of services, investment,
skilled labour, and capital. Indonesia requires ICT infrastructure and education to
participate in this new global inter-regional partnership.
DISTANCE EDUCATION AS AN INSTRUMENT TO CONNECT THE DIVERSE

POPULATION TO QUALITY EDUCATION
Thomas Friedman (as cited in Zhao, 2009) said that ‘the world is flat, in which
more people on the planet are now participating and experiencing economic,
cultural, and political activities on a global scale’ (p. 101), and President Obama
has also said in his major education speech: ‘In a 21st century world … jobs can be
shipped wherever there’s an Internet connection, … a child born in Dallas is now
competing with a child in New Delhi’ (The White House, Office of the Press
Secretary, 2009, para. 7). This endorses the necessity for education to apply online
technologies in their instructional delivery systems and media of communication to
meet the ultimate goal of education for human resource development and its
sustainability. Online technologies for communication have boosted global
education conceptions and practices, in particular to diversity in culture and socio-
economic conditions that constitute two critical aspects in succeeding to educate
people for quality.
68
Zong (2002) cited Robert Hanvey’s proposition suggesting that developing

global teacher education programmes should consist of five interrelated dimensions,
namely (a) perspective consciousness: an awareness of and appreciation for other
images of the world, (b) state-of-the-planet awareness: an in-depth understanding
of prevailing global issues, events, and conditions, (c) cross-cultural awareness: a
general understanding of the characteristics of world cultures with an emphasis on
understanding differences and similarities, (d) knowledge of global dynamics: a
familiarity with the nature of systems and an introduction to the complex
international system in which state and non-state actors are linked in patterns of
interdependence and dependence in a variety of issue areas, consciousness of
global change, and (e) awareness of human choices: a review of strategies for
action on issues in local, national, and international settings. Kniep (1989)
proposed using global concepts such as interdependence, change, culture, scarcity,
and conflict as themes to organise social studies curriculum. Merryfield (as cited in
Zong, 2002), underlined three pedagogical processes for teaching about the world,
namely examining how imperialist ways of thinking have restricted learning in
social studies and affected the way young people understand the world;
incorporating the experiences, ideas, and knowledge of people who are usually
omitted, marginalised, or misrepresented in mainstream academic knowledge; and
engaging cross-cultural experiential learning. These views appear to support
increased technological approaches.
Global education and pedagogy are facilitated by Internet technology, using
both constructivist perspectives and diverse viewpoints on issues and events. The
education system has been instructed by legislation to promote global knowledge
and understanding as a means of broadening learning and research experiences in
Indonesia. The government has invited higher institutions and universities to
facilitate experiences for people to gain knowledge, sciences, and skills through
open and distance education systems. This aligns with statements from Zong (2002)
that the students and other people will understand and realise that technologies are
already available to reach people worldwide and to gain and share knowledge and
strategies globally. Technological and spatial limitations should no longer hinder
the connection of people from various ethnicities and cultures all around Indonesia
and the world.
Universitas Terbuka, one of state universities in Indonesia, applies distance and
open learning system. The term distance means that main learning strategy is not
performed through face-to-face, but makes use of media, whether printed media (in
UT terminology, it’s named as modules) or non-printed (audio/video,
computer/internet, radio and television broadcasts). The term open means there is
no limitation as to age, year of graduation, period of study, registration time, and
frequency of examinations. UT has four faculties and one graduate programme. For
the Faculty of Economics, Faculty of Natural Sciences, and Faculty of Law and
Social Sciences, the only limitation applied is that the students must have
graduated from High School (or equivalent). Meanwhile, the degree programme of
the Faculty of Education (FOE) is only accessible to students who have already
worked as a teacher. This aligns with the mission of the UT-FOE, namely applying
69
UDAN KUSMAWAN
in-service teacher training programme only. With such open and distance system,
teachers domiciled throughout Indonesia can have access to higher degrees to
improve their professional qualification as amended by the National Standard for
Education. UT is the only distance university that can serve widely dispersed
teachers, who due to their locality in remote, outer, and disadvantaged areas are
unable to have access to conventional face-to-face university study options and
even to universities available in their own regions due to their economic situation
and mostly due to time constraints.
UT students are expected to learn independently. This self-learning method
means that a student learns on his/her own initiatives. UT provides learning
materials specifically designed for independent learning. Aside from using
materials provided by UT, students can also take the initiative to make use
of the library, take tutorials, whether face-to-face or online, use radio or
television broadcasts, or uses computer-assisted learning materials and audio/
video programmes. To remain informed with up-to-date information on open and
distance education, UT has partnered with open and distance education (ODE)
universities in Asian and the Pacific countries. UT is one of the founders of
the Asian Association of Open Universities (AAOU), founded in 1987, to
work together on research and open education development and seminars. AAOU
is a non-profit organisation of higher learning institutions that are primarily
concerned with education at a distance. AAOU has 66 members. In addition
to enjoying regular programmes, such as staff exchanges, annual conference,
and journal publications, AAOU has facilitated all the members with access to
some useful linkages, including to the official blogs concerning international task
force on teachers provided by Education for All (EFA). EFA is an international
alliance of stakeholders, including national governments, inter-governmental
organisations, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), Civil Society
Organizations (CSOs), international development agencies and private sector
organisations working together to address the teacher gap to meet EFA goals. This
blog permits members, especially teachers, to brainstorm and broaden their
knowledge and awareness on teacher education development outside UT and
educational platforms in Asia and the World through charting discussion at
http://www.teachersforefa.unesco.org/fora/index.php.
The use of distance learning systems is not new in Indonesia. Since the 1980s,
learning through distance has required learners to work on their lessons via
correspondence courses using printed materials. The early days of television
witnessed the introduction of televised courses. Today, lessons can be through
videoconferences with several classrooms full of learners. Early online courses
using email were rapidly followed by web-based instruction. Some institutions,
such as Pustekkom (Centre for Information and Communication Technology
Education, MOEC) and Universitas Terbuka (the open and distance learning
university in Indonesia) are two state institutions offering distance education in
which the boundary between different types of distance learning is blurred as
multiple modes of instructional delivery system are employed for a single course.
For example, a library could be accessed via hard references or virtually; class
70
discussions could take place using email or online tutorial; some course content
could be delivered using printed materials, television, radio, and multimedia
learning resources; and a final activity is a place-bound proctored examination or a
practical report of programme assignment. This constitutes strengths of open
universities compared with other conventional universities in essence that diverse
learners’ learning skills and habits are able to be accommodated beyond their time
and place constraints.
Increasing online access to more people is a driving force for UT, with
providing more distance learning instructional modes and formats to students and
widening access to student teachers throughout Indonesia. Broadening access is
mostly addressed to students with geographical and time constraints. As mentioned
above, many teachers are domiciled in remote, outer, and disadvantaged areas and
providing access to learning through internet-based media means connecting
especially these people to reach quality and up-to-date educational resources. The
Ministry of Communication and Informatics has issued and implemented a policy
of providing internet services for all sub-districts In Indonesia, named as PLIK and
m-PLIK (internet programme for sub-districts; and mobile-internet programme for
sub-districts). These programmes aim to widen the opportunity of Indonesian
people to have more internet access so as to relieve the disparity of human resource
capacities among the regions in Indonesia.
In 2014 the Indonesian higher education participation rate is only 33%,
according to the Directorate General of Higher Education of MOEC (2014),
meaning that a large proportion of young Indonesians aged between 19-24 years
old do not attend university. There are 32 of the total 104 Indonesia higher state
institutions/universities providing teacher training and education programmes.
Universitas Terbuka is one of the state universities providing education
programmes. UT is a mega university serving a total of 433,763 students
(Universitas Terbuka, 2014), of which 73.62% (319,342) are basic and secondary
teachers. By 2014, over a million teachers have graduated from Faculty of
Education (FOE) UT. With this data, it appears that UT has contributed to over
45% of the national programme of teacher education in Indonesia.
In line with the national efforts, Universitas Terbuka has built 38 regional
offices throughout Indonesia and a Regional Centre for Overseas Students serving
Indonesian people who are domiciled abroad. As shown in Table 1, some UT
regional offices serve more than 73,191 teacher students (consisting of 72,544
students of Basic Education Programme, and 647 students of Non-Basic Education
Programme, including early childhood and second education programme), and
90% of whom are in regions categorised as remote and disadvantages areas. Multi
modes of service delivery are provided to ensure that students gain access to the
educational resources developed by UT. Figure 1 shows UT student service centres
located in all provinces of Indonesia. In addition to UT, more than 46 state
Institutes for Teacher Education and Training under MOEC of Indonesia are
serving teacher students who live near their campus (within a radius of 60 km from
campus), due to their characteristics as a conventional (face-to-face) institutes or
universities.
71
UDAN KUSMAWAN
In addition to delivering education to people with geographic or ICT restrictions,

distance education is also open to meet the needs of people with disabilities. Thus,
design of distance learning courses has to reduce the barriers for the full
participation of people with some types of disabilities. Currently, UT is just
starting to develop delivery mode and media to ensure people with several physical
disabilities to enable them to participate in distance learning courses. Thousands of
specialised hardware and software products that are already available today and
can be freely downloaded in the internet allow individuals with a wide range of
abilities and disabilities to productively use computing and networking
technologies.
One of the online services for teachers provided by FOE-UT is Guru Pintar
Online (GPO). Through this portal, FOE-UT shared knowledge and information
concerning various segments of education. The GPO can be reached at
http://gurupintar.ut.ac.id/. This is accessible free of charge for anyone who is
interested in obtaining information regarding educational pedagogical theories and
practices, as well as updating their knowledge on current educational rules and
regulations. Through this site, FOE-UT intends also to present wider opportunities
for all teachers who are teaching in Indonesia and abroad, to join and exchange
their ideas related to the development of educational knowledge and practices
applied in their classrooms.
GPO featured four areas of education, namely educational news and events;
general information including those related to rules and regulations issued by UT
and the government; communication forums, and linkages to other websites that
are related to educational matters. The communication forum facilitates readers
with media for discussion and brainstorming concerning teaching practices, mainly
taking place in the classroom. Video streaming is the main media mode for
delivering content regarding classroom teaching strategies and approaches.
Teachers may submit comments or suggestions regarding the video through the
forum. Others may also submit responses or comments through the forum.
Discussion is under moderation by UT lecturers in an effort to maintain ethical and
scientific quality.
In general, learning support services can be any kind of services given to the
learners to strengthen their learning. Belawati (2000) suggests that learning support
services are those facilitated by open and distance education (ODE) institutions to
their learners while completing their course materials or when the learning process
actually takes place. UT calls this tutorial. UT divides tutorials into face-to-face
tutorials, programmed tutorials consisting of radio and television tutorials, online
tutorials, and academic and/or pedagogic activities consisting of laboratory
activities, online library services, and practical work. In 2004, UT developed
correspondence tutorials. Through this tutorial, written materials are mailed to the
learners and tutors at UT expect to receive responses from the intended learners. In
2005, UT decided to terminate this tutorial due to the various concerns arisen,
especially those who have questioned about the originality of the responses that
have been submitted by the learners. Since then, UT has developed a wide range of
72
online learning services and multimedia, including a fully-online service designed

for students to reach their learning resources.
Among the four approaches to learning, online tutorials and its advanced
innovations constitute the most recent approach provided by UT. Some experts
argue that the use of internet technology in ODE is necessary when the following
conditions are achieved, namely ICT infrastructure is accessible for intended
learners; the learners can meet the financial demand for accessing the available
technology; and finally learners’ learning habits correspond with the language of
the intended virtual technology (Suparman, 2009). In pursuing future challenges,
UT continuously develops the use of internet networks to facilitate the
advancement of learner support services. Current progresses have been related with
online facilities enabling the students to be reached through synchronous
communication platform, mostly applied to online tutorials. UT has also offered a
fully-online degree programme in graduate level of studies. Additionally, we have
also enriched UT-OER with the implementation of Massive open online courses
(MOOCs). UT offers five classes, namely Public Speaking, Marketing Strategy and
Management, Open and Distance Education, English for Children, and Assorted
Food Processing. All classes are free of charge, except when they are willing to
receive certificate of their class participations. This means that UT has participated
in strengthening knowledge and skills of Indonesian people throughout the country
with no exception for those who experiencing geographical, economy and time
constraints.
CONCLUSION
Indonesia is a country of diverse ethnic groups of 248 million people, with 57.4
million residing in 183 geographically isolated districts. This chapter argues that
Indonesia is a globally connected country in a unique way as their diverse
population and geography draws together people from widely diverse cultural and
sociological positions.
Educating people of diverse ethnicities is critical to maintaining their attachment
to their cultural communities and their ability to participate effectively in shared
global education. Distance education is a crucial tool to offer multiple alternatives
to strengthening the unity of Indonesia including affirming diversity. It promotes
an important means to support Indonesian openness and readiness towards global
society and friendship. To meet the partnerships with the countries in Asia within
the ASEAN Association of open universities and the ASEAN Economic
Community platforms, it is imperative that MOEC improves quality standards for
education and connects them to the advanced innovations in all aspects of
educational system and development strategies within the framework of developing
human resource competencies. In relation to this, Universitas Terbuka has played a
part in broadening access for all people, in particular to teachers, through either
improving their educational qualification or facilitating their continuous
improvement and exchanges in classroom teaching and learning knowledge and
practices. UT connects diverse teachers in the diverse country of Indonesia.
73
UDAN KUSMAWAN
REFERENCES
Association of Southeast Asian Nations. (2014). ASEAN Economic Community. Retrieved June 15,
2014, from http://www.asean.org/communities/asean-economic-community
Badan Standar Nasional Pendidikan. (2005). Standar Nasional Pendidikan [National Standard for
Education] Government Rule No.19/2005.
Banks, J. A. (2003). School of Education at Johns Hopkins University-Educating global citizens in a
diverse world. Retrieved April 10, 2014, from
http://education.jhu.edu/PD/newhorizons/strategies/topics/multicultural-
education/educatingglobalcitizensinadiverseworld/
Belawati, T. (2000). Prinsip-prinsip Pengelolaan Pendidikan Terbuka dan Jarak-Jauh [Principles of
Management on Open and Distance Education]. Jakarta: PAU-PPAI Universitas Terbuka.
Directorate General of Higher Education, MOEC. (2014). Angka Partisipasi kasar Perguruan Tinggi
[Higher education gross enrolment rate]. Retrieved August 14, 2014, from
http://www.kemdikbud.go.id/kemdikbud/berita/2083
Internet Live Stats. (2014). Indonesia internet users. Retrieved July 25, 2014 from
http://www.internetlivestats.com/internet-users/indonesia/
Jaelani, L. M. (2006). Pulau-PulauTerluar dan Batas NKRI [Outer islands and border homeland
(NKRI)]. Retrieved July 02, 2014, from http://www.geomatika.its.ac.id/lang/en/archives/774
Kniep, W. M. (1989). Social studies within global education. Social Education, 53, 399–403.
Maria, D. (2014, April). Profil Pendidikdan Tenaga kepedidikan in Masa Depan [Profiles of
educational human resources of education in the future]. Paper presented at Workshop for FKIP-UT,
Universitas Terbuka, Bentan, Indonesia.
Merryfield, M. M. (2000). Using electronic technologies to promote equity and cultural diversity in
social studies and global education. Theory and Research in Social Education, 28(4), 502–526.
Mungkasa, O. (2003). Desentralisasi dan Otonomi Daerah di Indonesia: Konsep, Pencapaiandan
Agenda Kedepan [Decentralisation and local autonomy in Indonesia: Concept, achievement and
future agenda). Majalah perumahan, permukiman dan pembangunan perkotaan [Magazine on home,
society and city development] . Edisi 3 [Third edition] - March 2013
Pike G. (2013). Global Education in Times of Discomfort. Journal of International Social Studies, Vol.
3, No. 2, 2013, 4-17
Raley, Y., & Preyer, G. (2010). Philosophy of education in the era of globalization. New York:
Routledge
Risadi, A. A. (2013). Ketenaga-kerjaandan Daerah Tertinggal [Employment and underdeveloped
regions]. Retrieved July 10, 2014, from http://www.kemenegpdt.go.id/artikel/85/ketenagakerjaan-
dan-daerah-tertinggal
Suparman, A. (2009). Memorandum Akhir Jabatan Rektor Universitas Terbuka (Periode 2005-2009)
[Memorandum end position of the Rector of Universitas Terbuka (Periods of 2005-2009)].
Universitas Terbuka: Limited publication document.
The White House, Office of the Press Secretary. (2009, March 10). Remarks by the president to the
Hispanic Chamber Of Commerce on a complete and competitive American education. Retrieved
from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-of-the-President-to-the-United-States-
Hispanic-Chamber-of-Commerce
Universitas Terbuka. (2014). UT dalam angka [UT in Numbers]. Retrieved June 2, 2014, from
http://www.ut.ac.id/tentang-ut/ut-dalam-angka.html
Zhao, Y. (2009). Catching Up or Leading the Way: American Education in the Age of Globalization.
United Stated of America: Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data.
Zaini H. F. (2011). Kerjasama Daerah dan Pemberdayaan Daerah Tertinggal [Regional cooperation and
empowerment of disadvantaged regions]. Retrieved June 24, 2014, from
http://www.kemenegpdt.go.id/artikel/83/kerjasama-daerah-dan-pemberdayaan-daerah-tertinggal
74
Zong, G. (2002). Can computer mediated communication help to prepare global teachers?: An analysis
of pre-service social studies teachers’ experience. Theory & Research in Social Education, 30(4),
589–616.
Udan Kusmawan
Faculty of Teacher Training and Education
Universitas Terbuka
75
MAGS LIDDY
6. THE NEGLECT OF POLITICS AND POWER

ANALYSIS IN DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION
INTRODUCTION
The inclusion of global development topics into formal education is termed

development education in Ireland. Essentially it is when education addresses global
issues, recognises global responsibility and the lack of global justice in political
and economic condition and policies (Bourn, 2003). In the Irish context
development education is defined by Irish Aid1 as
an educational process aimed at increasing awareness and understanding of
the rapidly changing, interdependent and unequal world in which we live. …
It seeks to engage people in analysis, reflection and action for local and
global citizenship and participation. … It is about supporting people in
understanding and acting to transform the social, cultural, political and
economic structures which affect their lives at personal, community, national
and international levels. (Irish Aid, 2003, p. 9)
This definition centres on principles of human rights and solidarity with global
others. Ideally it is an educational process creating informed, motivated and able
learners, aware and empowered to campaign for change. The above definition
names central tenets to development education; global solidarity, participatory
learning, and action for social justice. All three elements are clear themes in the
historical trajectory of development education in Ireland. However this paper
suggests that the analysis of power and global politics is neglected in favour of
more socially orientated development education and soft forms of development
education (Andreotti, 2006) dominate. While these forms can engender values of
empathy and cultural awareness, the neglect of power could work to reinforce
stereotypical and negative views of the developing world.
I argue that critical forms of development education (Andreotti, 2006) or
politically informed development education is a marginal discourse in Irish
education, for two reasons: firstly the soft aspects to the global development story
are emphasised such as the human and social aspects, which leads to their inclusion
in softer curriculum subjects. While this approach can be valuable as it can
engender greater solidarity, the lack of power analysis undermines the potential of
development education in creating greater understanding of ‘the social, cultural,
political and economic structures which affect their lives at personal, community,
national and international levels’ (Irish Aid, 2003, p. 9). The neglect of power,
political and economic structural issues leads to deradicalised development

MAGS LIDDY
education (Bryan, 2011). This line of argument in turn leads to my second reason
which argues that the action and activism arising from socially orientated and
deradicalised development education remains focused mainly on the charitable or
lifestyle changes, reinforced by the lack of political knowledge and critical debates
on global development.
In this chapter I will present an overview of the context of development
education in Ireland, tracing the historical trajectory of development education in
Ireland, demonstrating in particular its mainstreaming within the formal education
system. I will focus on the origins of development education in Ireland noting how
influences from this historical path create a key challenge to development
education in Ireland, notably the neglect of power and political aspects. I draw on
three major studies of development education work in Ireland undertaken by
Kenny and O’Malley in 2002; Gleeson, King, O’Driscoll and Tormey in 2007;
Fielder, Bryan and Bracken in 2011.
BRIEF HISTORY OF DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION IN IRELAND
Development education in Ireland began in 1950s and 1960s as in other national

contexts, with returned missionaries and overseas volunteers. According to Mesa’s
(2011) generation model, the first generation of development education took a
charitable and assistance-based approach at this time. A major review of
development education in Ireland conducted in early 2000s noted this approach in
the early days of development education work in Ireland, and describing the
historical influence of religious staff returning to Irish schools from overseas
missionary work on Irish people’s understanding of global development (Kenny &
O’Malley, 2002). These first-hand accounts influenced public awareness of
international conflicts and were supported by media coverage; O’Sullivan (2007)
cites the Biafra War as a major influence on the Irish public and informing the
establishment of overseas development non-governmental organisations (NGOs).
Development NGOs and returned overseas volunteers acted to create greater
understanding of the conflicts and to generate a sense of global solidarity, as well
as fundraising for international causes. When formal support and resourcing for
development education became available from the Irish state from the late 1970s,
these early education initiatives and public awareness activities became more
robust, leading to the establishment of a professional and effective development
education sector in Ireland by 2000s. Fiedler et al. (2011) describe the current
‘integration and acceptance of development education into the mainstream
education … as a major strength of development education in Ireland’ (p. 49). The
study of 119 post-primary schools and 1,193 post-primary teachers in Ireland by
Gleeson et al. (2007) support this statement and found that a majority of teachers
value development education and report teaching development education topics as
part of their subject. Most notably, 65% stated that they saw opportunities for
integrating development education in their main teaching subject. The funding and
resourcing provided by Irish Aid has supported this work to mainstream
development education into the formal education system. Significant progress has
78
NEGLECT OF POLITICS AND POWER ANALYSIS
also been made in developing organisational networks to support professional

development education work in initial teacher education, while a number of Irish-
based development NGOs have developed innovative and exemplary development
education programmes.2
Within the Irish formal education system, development education content and
methodologies have been mainstreamed, notably in Civic, Social and Political
Education (CSPE) at post-primary level (Dillon, 2009). In 1997 CSPE was
introduced as a mandatory, examinable subject at Junior Cycle level of the post-
primary programme. The Department of Education and Science (DES) described
the CSPE syllabus as creating in students a sense of belonging, the ability and
confidence to participate in democratic society and capacity to access information
and structures relating to the society in which they live (DES, 2005). The CSPE
syllabus centres on the core concepts of democracy, rights and responsibilities,
human dignity, interdependence, development, law and stewardship and is
examined in the Junior Certificate state examination. However it is not without
critics, with some dubbing it a Cinderella subject as it is allocated just one class
period per week during the 3 year Junior Cycle, the lack of teacher preparation to
teach the subject, and the absence of a Senior Cycle subject which includes
citizenship or political education for students to continue their interest in the
subject (Redmond & Butler, as cited in Jeffers, 2008). Changes to the current
CSPE syllabus are expected in the coming years with a new syllabus which
promotes more action projects in the assessment rather than one as the current
requirement; however the subject will become shorter in overall number of
teaching hours. Additionally the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment
(NCCA) has approved the syllabus for Politics and Society, a new Senior Cycle
subject to address the absence of civic or political education at this level. At
present in 2014, there are strong hopes this new subject will be introduced soon
into Irish post-primary schools. The content of this new subject centres on human
rights and global development, with the two core units of study titled
Interdependence and Conflict, and Globalisation and Localisation (NCCA, 2009).
These curriculum changes will strengthen and build on the existing provision of
development education in Irish schools.
These origins of development education in Ireland presented above share much
with other national contexts. Drawing on the UK experience, Bourn (2003)
highlights the impact of NGOs on development education and global citizenship
work in schools which is in keeping with the Irish context. Hicks’ (2003) review of
30 years of global education in the UK, including the curriculum development
project World Studies 8–13 from the 1970s and 80s, demonstrates development
NGO influences within the formal education system with some similarity to the
Irish historical path. However for Ireland, a key difference lies in the overlap in
both personnel and organisations between missionaries, development NGOs and
schools (especially school management) which enabled the inclusion of a global
perspective within the formal education system. Essentially in Ireland it was not an
outside agency encouraging a global perspective, rather the impetus for change was
from within. Management and school patronage by numerous religious orders is a
79
MAGS LIDDY
key feature of the Irish education system (Kieran, 2008) and the Catholic Church
exercises a vast influence on the Irish educational system through its patronage and
ownership of primary and post primary schools. Lynch and Lodge (2002) note that
secondary schools serve the largest proportion of the population (61% of students)
and majority of these are under Catholic management while State-supported
vocational and community colleges account for 26% of students.3 At primary level,
Coolahan, Hussey and Kilfeather (2012) report that 2,841 primary schools in
Ireland (out of a total of 3,169 schools) are under Catholic Church patronage, with
the rest under a variety of other religions including Church of Ireland, Presbyterian
and Islamic. These figures demonstrate the influence of religious organisations
within the Irish education system. But Kieran (2008) debates whether this religious
influence on school management is beneficial or negative as the Catholic Church is
not uniform in its approach to education; for example they support both fee-paying
and free education, and school personnel can express a variety of political ethos
from radical to conservative. From the perspective of development education, I
believe the personnel and organisational overlap enabled greater inclusion and
mainstreaming of development education into the Irish school system. Kenny and
O’Malley (2002) support this in their listing of the achievements of development
education in Ireland noting the on-the-ground experience of development education
staff and volunteers, and direct contact with Majority World (Global South). In
keeping with Kieran (2008), observations on the range of beliefs and political
attitudes, the influence of church organisations and returned missionaries are also
mixed as many would be greatly influenced by their experiences overseas. Many
retain strong links with social movements in the Majority World; one prime
example is Sister Majella McCarron’s lengthy friendship and correspondence with
Ken Saro-Wiwa until his execution in 1995 (Corley, Fallon, & Cox, 2013).
Yet despite some notable individuals and schools, I argue that critical forms of
development education (Andreotti, 2006) or politically informed development
education is a marginal discourse in Irish education, for two reasons set out earlier.
These two points will be elaborated on the following sections, namely the soft
aspects to development education, and how development activism arising from this
approach tends to focus on the charitable or lifestyle changes.
SOFT DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION EMPHASISES THE HUMAN

AND SOCIAL ASPECTS
Recent analysis of development education has brought the emphasis onto critical
forms as opposed to soft approaches (Andreotti, 2006). These soft forms could be
read as education about development where learning centres on facts and
information about the developing world (Liddy, 2013), for example, global
inequalities, poverty and hunger, gender and maternal health. A soft approach
builds moral commitment to the developing world building the values base of
development education (Bourn, 2003); it could be read as focusing on the human
and social aspects to the global development story. However, Andreotti’s (2006)
analysis suggests that soft development education is not critical as it does not take
80
a politically informed and aware stance on the causes or the power structures which
work to maintain global poverty. In many ways it corresponds to Mesa’s (2011)
first generation of development education centring on a charitable and assistance-
based approach. In critical and politically informed development education,
learners can become ‘critically literate’ (Andreotti, 2006, p. 49) and address their
assumptions about poverty and inequality; otherwise they may reproduce the
systems and ways of thinking they are trying to question. I argue that this lack of
focus on critical analysis of power and structures of inequality can be seen through
the neglect of power and politics in development education.
The inclusion of global development into these subjects emphasises the human
and social aspects to the global development story. The lack of curriculum
opportunity leads to development education in Ireland being strongly linked to
what is termed softer subjects (Jeffers, 2008), for example, Religion, Social
Personal and Health Education, and Civic Social and Political Education. This is
supported by Kenny and O’Malley (2002) who named the key themes addressed in
development education by the 116 respondents; these themes were social justice
and peace addressed by 19 respondents in their teaching of development education;
human rights by 13; intercultural awareness by 11; and 5 respondents made local
and global links (p. 19). This emphasis on the human aspects can be positive as it
can work to develop strong intercultural awareness, cooperation and a socially just
orientation, which Bourn (2003) argues is the particular values base to
development education. The emphasis on human aspects to global development is
also noted in Mesa’s (2011) generational model, where the fourth generation of
development education centres on human aspects of development education,
influenced by the United Nations’ emphasis on development effects upon the lives
of the people and sustainable development. This fourth generation approach
addresses issues such as gender inclusion, participation in processes of social
change, reduction of racial or ethnic tensions, and environment preservation. The
focus on the personal and human aspects to global development makes the linkage
to soft development topics and brings a focus towards inner and the self in the
activism arising which is elaborated later in this chapter.
The emphasis on social and human aspects to global development has both
positive and negative outcomes. On the positive side, this focus places the
educational emphasis on participation for change by engaging learners in working
for social development by emphasising principles of human rights and solidarity
with others, recognising global responsibility. It also encourages action for social
change, which is endorsed in the Irish formal education system through the Action
Project element of the Civic, Social and Political Education syllabus (Dillon, 2009).
Whilst soft development education is a good approach to development education
as it engenders care, humanity and possibly solidarity, it is not without question. I
suggest this focus leads to the deradicalisation or ‘de-clawing’ of development
education (Bryan, 2011) through the neglect of political and power analysis of
global issues, and the neglect of local aspects to development such as poverty in
Ireland or Irish nomadic people’s rights. Jeffers (2008) argues that the absence of
power as a concept in the citizenship education (CSPE syllabus) is a serious
81
MAGS LIDDY
weakness. Gleeson et al. (2007) raise concerns about the over-reliance on text-book
based pedagogy in development education in Irish classrooms. In their study of
development education and global citizenship topics in Irish textbooks, Bryan and
Bracken (2011) note the focus on narratives of poverty in the developing world and
modernisation-orientated explanations of development, with just some senior cycle
textbooks showing a ‘more critical inquiry of the political, cultural and social
arrangements underpinning global inequality’ (p. 17). These studies raise many
questions as to what beliefs and messages on global development are expressed in
Irish classrooms. Furthermore, it is possible that the emphasis on social and human
aspects has heightened a sense of difference and similarity between ‘us’ and ‘them’,
and may reinforce a sense of privilege or ‘luckiness’. For example Devine (2005)
questions if teachers are challenged on their classed and racialised conceptions, or
do they work to ‘enact and react a cycle of power’ (p. 66). In a similar vein,
Andreotti (2006) questions if soft development education works to unintentionally
reinforce and reproduce systems and ways of thinking that maintain inequalities.
This depoliticisation of development education content is a major factor in the
deradicalisation of development education (Bryan, 2011). Fiedler et al. (2011)
identify state support and funding for development education as encouraging more
mainstream education programmes, citing in particular the restrictions placed on
campaigning on global development issues. I agree with their argument but I think
there are more factors at play here. The neglect of politics is reinforced by a
conservative political environment in Ireland (Coakley & Gallagher, 1992) which
can work to prevent debate (Liddy, 2011). The political attitudes of Irish teachers
teaching development education are also a consideration; one study found the
majority to be in the political centre, with just 21% on the left (Gleeson et al., 2007)
reflecting the weakness of Left politics in Ireland (Puirseil, 2007). A human focus
to the global development story can lead to the absence and neglect of the local
aspects to development, such as poverty in Ireland, the International Monetary
Fund (IMF) bailout packages, nomadic Irish people’s rights or making connections
between Shell gas explorations in Ireland and Nigeria.
All of these factors described above (the absence of a civic or political education
subject at Senior Cycle education, state funding restrictions, human orientated
development education content, political culture and dominant beliefs), support the
teaching of soft development education. I acknowledge that both forms (soft and
critical) development education are valuable and at times necessary dependant on
context such as students’ age. However I argue here that the emphasis on the soft
development education approach maintains a depoliticisation of development
education. This is clearly seen in the activism arising from development education
addressed in the next section.
LACK OF POLITICS LEADS TO DEVELOPMENT-AS-CHARITY AND

INDIVIDUALISED ACTIVISM
The second reason why I argue that critical development education is marginal
discourse can be seen in the activism arising, namely the practices of ‘acting to
82
transform the social, cultural, political and economic structures’ (Irish Aid, 2003, p.
9) or development activism (Bryan & Bracken, 2011). Development education
often cites Freire’s (1979) conception of education as the practice of freedom by
engaging students in working for social development and becoming more engaged.
This action element of development education places an emphasis on development
activism as participation for social and political change. However when a critical
and political informed view of global development is absent, the activism arising
from development education can centre on charitable responses rather than being
more politically engaged. The evidence from Bryan and Bracken’s (2011) review
of development education in Irish post-primary schools showed a dominant
development-as-charity model, and one-to-one, individualised activism rather than
a collective focus.
This approach to development activism could be related to teachers’ political
beliefs as shown above, but also to their actual knowledge of global development
and their teaching skills. In the UK, the Global Teacher Project examined the
knowledge, understanding and motivation of pre-service teachers in education for
global citizenship (Holden, Clough, Hicks, & Martin, 2003). The research
concluded that they lack confidence in their ability to teach controversial or
difficult issues. In a similar vein, Clarke and Drudy’s (2006) study of Irish pre-
service teachers found there was high level of awareness and sensitivity attitudes to
diversity and teaching social justice; however there was more variation in
responses when the issues were related to local and economic concerns. These
findings suggest that while pre-service teachers demonstrate willingness to include
global social justice issues in their work, there are concerns over their confidence
to manage controversial debates, and their knowledge to engage with the local
dimensions to the development agenda. This lack of confidence can be related to
negative attitudes to nomadic people’s rights or to their lack of political knowledge.
The vast majority of Irish teachers do not address political or global development
studies in their degree programmes, coupled with the lack of a senior cycle level
civic or political education subject when they completed post-primary education.
This can be seen in the development education topics addressed in their work: 34%
teaching about multinational companies in the developing world, 21% addressing
civil war conflicts, 19% teaching on militarisation, and 14% on nomadic people; all
of which could be seen as power orientated and critical forms of development
education. In comparison, 60.5% reported teaching environmental destruction,
51% global warming and 44% on health and disease in the developing world,
arguably softer topics (Gleeson et al., 2007).
The lack of power analysis and neglect of political aspects to global
development could lead students to consider global issues as a personal and
individualised concern rather than structural issue at cultural, economic or political
level. Ball (1999) argues that the influence of new managerialism in education has
led to the creation of a new moral environment based on market ethics emphasising
competition over cooperation, and the personal struggle for advantages. In
applying his analysis to development education, soft and human orientated
explanations of global inequalities neglect analysis of structural factors. Choice
83
MAGS LIDDY
predominates in new managerialist thought, as if poverty is solely a result of

personal motives rather than structural economic or cultural factors. In her classic
account of dominant discourses in Irish education system, Lynch (1987) identified
a prevailing discourse of consensualism in Irish education which prevents strong
social critique and analysis of difference. Within a consensualist society there is a
belief that society is an undifferentiated whole, based on a failure to recognise
difference in terms of class, gender or race and ethnicity. This creates difficulties
when subject content clashes with the dominant thinking and culture of the system,
and can act as a barrier to the promotion of positive attitude to social justice (Liddy,
2011). These tendencies could lead many students to consider global development
as a personal problem and an individualised concern rather than an issue to be
considered from a cultural, economic or political level.
Thus the neglect of politics and power analysis encourages activism towards an
inner orientated agency and focus on lifestyle (Liddy, 2013). Lifestyle activism
centres on personal innovation, for example questioning Northern consumerist
lifestyles or examining personal consumption patterns.
Rather than campaigning and political advocacy, mobilisation for action arising
from development education remains lifestyle orientated. The inclusion of local
development issues and stronger political focus allows for more critical forms of
development activism to result. Wilson’s (2008) research on the action projects in
CSPE notes that of the 3,308 submitted for assessment in 2004, 662 projects were
fundraising (the second highest category) while just 10 involved a protest/petition.
This activism may not relate to global development as such; however these figures
do show a lack of critical politically informed or collective activism. Bryan and
Bracken’s (2011) study noted particular features such as obedient activism,
development-as-charity and celebrity humanitarianism concluding that
development activism in Irish schools is generally underpinned by a charity
framework and dominated by a ‘three F’s’ approach, comprising Fundraising,
Fasting and having Fun (Bryan & Bracken, 2011, p. 268). The activism of post-
primary teachers themselves was assessed in the study by Gleeson et al. (2007);
90.5% said they gave a donation to developing world and 34% bought a global gift,
while 38% signed a petition, 12 % wrote a letter to the Government, and just 3%
participated in a protest on a developing world issue. The softer and human side of
the development story dominates in development education, and teachers’ lack of
knowledge of the overall topic prevents critical and politically informed activism
for global change from being implemented either by students and teachers.
CONCLUSION
The historical origins of development education in Ireland highlight the influence

of returned missionaries and religious groups on the creation of global awareness
and in the establishment of development education within the education system.
This religious influence is not unique to Ireland; however the overlap in personnel
and organisations between the missionaries and the formal education system
played a key role in the mainstreaming of development education into formal
84
education. At present development education is valued in Irish schools, and the

development education sector is professionalised and well-resourced through state
funding.
This chapter explores the dominance of soft forms of development education in
Ireland, giving an overview of the multitude of factors leading to this approach.
The emphasis on social and human aspects to global development works to
engender a strong ethic of global cooperation and empathy which is the values base
of development education. It can also emphasise peace and conflict resolution
aspects to the global development story. However as I argue here, the over-
emphasis on the human and social aspects to global development in Ireland leads to
the neglect of politics and power analysis of economic, cultural or political
structures. In turn this emphasis on soft development education or the human
aspects marries development education to softer subjects in the curriculum such as
Religion or Social, Personal and Health Education. The absence of a senior cycle
level civic or political education subject reinforces the neglect of political aspects
of the global development leading to the predominance of fundraising and
development-as-charity model of social action projects. Additionally the Irish
conservative political culture as well as the influence of new managerialism
undermines structural accounts and emphasises personal factors in perpetuating
poverty. Other factors such as state restrictions on funding for campaigning,
teachers’ political behaviours and activism, and dominant beliefs which mask
differences are also highlighted. Cumulatively all of these elements add to and
maintain the depoliticisation of development education.
When politics and power analysis are neglected, the action and activism arising
from development education remains focused on the charitable or lifestyle changes,
as the focus remains on individual actions rather than collective responses. The
purpose of development education in engendering awareness of the rapidly
changing, interdependent and unequal world can be met through soft approaches to
development education. However the neglect of politics and power analysis does
not generate full understanding of the way the world works, and it does not fulfil
the purpose of development education in acting to transform the social, cultural,
political and economic structures which affect their lives.
NOTES
1
Irish Aid is the Irish Government’s official overseas aid programme and is managed by the
Development Co-operation Division of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.
2
Examples include the Ubuntu Network at post-primary teacher education (www.ubuntu.ie) and the
Development and InterCultural Education (DICE) Project at primary teacher education level
(www.diceproject.ie); NGO programmes include Trócaire (www.trocaire.ie), Amnesty Human
Rights Education (www.amnesty.ie) and the www.developmenteducation.ie education resource
website.
3
The figures for the post-primary sector date from early 2000s and I acknowledge that school
patronage and management in Ireland has undergone considerable change in recent years,
85
MAGS LIDDY
particularly through the Forum on Patronage and Pluralism. However the figures presented here are
indicative of the Irish school management system in place for the late 20th century.
REFERENCES
Andreotti, V. (2006). Soft versus critical global citizenship education. Policy and Practice: A
Development Education Review, 1(3), 40–51.
Ball, S. (1999, September). Global trends in educational reform and the struggle for the soul of the
teacher! Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference,
University of Sussex, Brighton. Retrieved from http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/
00001212.htm
Bourn, D. (2003). Towards a theory of development education. Development Education Journal, 10(3),
3–6.
Bryan, A. (2011). Another cog in the anti-politics machine? The ‘de-clawing’ of development education.
Policy & Practice: A Development Education Review, 12, 1–14.
Bryan, A., & Bracken, M. (2011). Learning to read the world? Teaching and learning about
international development and global citizenship in post-primary schools. Dublin: Irish Aid.
Clark, M., & Drudy, S. (2006). Teaching for diversity, social justice and global awareness. European
Journal of Teacher Education, 29(3), 371–386.
Coakley, J., & Gallagher, M. (Eds.). (1992). Politics in the Republic of Ireland (1st ed.). Galway: PSAI
Press.
Coolahan, J., Husset, C., & Kilfeather, F. (2012). The forum on patronage and pluralism in the primary
sector: Report of the Forum’s Advisory Group. Dublin: Department of Education and Skills.
Retrieved from http://www.education.ie/en/Press-Events/Conferences/Patronage-and-Pluralism-in-
the-Primary-Sector/The-Forum-on-Patronage-and-Pluralism-in-the-Primary-Sector-Report-of-the-
Forums-Advisory-Group.pdf
Corley, I., Fallon, H., & Cox, L. (Eds.). (2013). Silence would be treason: Last writings of Ken Saro-
Wiwa. Dakar: Books for Change CODESRIA, and Bangalore: Daraja Press.
Department of Education and Skills. (2005). Civic Social and Political Education syllabus and
guidelines for teachers. Dublin: Government of Ireland.
Devine, D. (2005). Welcome to the Celtic Tiger? Teacher responses to immigration and increasing
ethnic diversity in Irish schools. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 15(1), 49–70.
Dillon, S., (2009). Trócaire and development education: Remembering the past, signposting the future.
Kildare, Trócaire. Retrieved from http://www.trocaire.org/sites/trocaire/files/resources/edu/trocaire-
history-development-education.pdf
Fiedler, M., Bryan A., & Bracken, M. (2011). Mapping the past, charting the future: A review of the
Irish government’s engagement with development education and a meta-analysis of development
education research in Ireland. Dublin: Irish Aid.
Freire, P. (1979). The pedagogy of the oppressed. London: Sheed and Ward.
Gleeson, J., King, P., O’Driscoll, S., & Tormey, R. (2007). Development education in post-primary
schools: Knowledge, attitudes and activism (Research Report). Limerick: Shannon Curriculum
Development Centre and University of Limerick.
Hicks, D. (2003). Thirty years of global education: A reminder of key principles and precedents.
Educational Review, 55(3), 265–275.
Holden, C., Clough, N., Hicks, D., & Martin, F. (2003). Education for global citizenship: The
knowledge, understanding and motivation of trainee teachers. Unpublished report for the World
Studies Trust. Retrieved from http://www.globalteacher.org.uk/grg_report.htm
Irish Aid. (2003). Irish Aid and development education: Describing … understanding … challenging …
the story of human development in today’s world. Dublin: Irish Aid. Retrieved from
http://www.developmenteducation.ie/teachers-and-educators/transition-year/DevEd_Explained
Resources/ Irish-aid-book.pdf
86
Jeffers, G. (2008). Some challenges for citizenship education in the Republic of Ireland. In G. Jeffers &
U. O’Connor (Eds.), Education for citizenship and diversity in Irish contexts (pp. 11–23). Dublin:
Institute of Public Administration.
Kenny, M., & O’Malley, S. (2002). Development education in Ireland. Challenges and opportunities
for the future. Dublin: Dóchas Research Report.
Kieran, P. (2008). Embracing change: The remodelling of Irish Catholic primary schools in the 21st
century. In E. Maher & J. Littleton (Eds.), Contemporary catholicism in Ireland: A critical appraisal
(pp. 43–68). Dublin: Columba Press. Retrieved from http://dspace.mic.ul.ie/bitstream/
10395/1227/2/Kieran,%20P.%282008%29.%20%27Embracing%20Change%3A%20The%20remod
elling%20of%20Irish%20Catholic%20primary%20schools%20in%20the%2021st%20century%27%
28Pre-Published%20Version%29%28Book%20Chapter%29.pdf
Liddy, M. (2011). Mainstreaming education for sustainable development: Obstacles or opportunities? In
R. Tormey & T. Bateson (Eds.), Teaching global perspectives (pp.18–29). Dublin: Liffey Press.
Liddy, M. (2013). Education about, for, as development. Policy & Practice: A Development Education
Review, 17, 27–45.
Lynch, K. (1987). Dominant ideologies in Irish education thought – Consensualism, essentialism and
meritocratic individualism. Economic and Social Review, 18, 101–122.
Lynch K., & Lodge, A. (2002). Equality and power in schools: Redistribution, recognition and
representation. London: Routledge Falmer.
National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. (2009). Politics and society: Draft syllabus for
consultation. Dublin: Author. Retrieved from http://www.ncca.ie/en/Curriculum_and_Assessment/
Post-Primary_Education/Senior_Cycle/Politics_and_Society/Politics_and_Society_draft_
syllabus.pdf
Mesa, M. (2011). Reflections on the five-generation model of development education. The International
Journal for Global and Development Education Research, 0, 161–167. Retrieved from
http://educacionglobalresearch.net/en/manuelamesa2issuezero/
O’Sullivan, K. (2007). Biafra to Lomé: the evolution of Irish Government policy on official
development assistance, 1969–75. Irish Studies in International Affairs, 18, 91–107.
Puirseil, N. (2007). The Irish Labour Party 1922–73. Dublin: UCD Press.
Wilson, M. (2008). The Action Project as a teaching/learning tool. In G. Jeffers & U. O’Connor (Eds.),
Education for citizenship and diversity in Irish contexts (pp. 176–188). Dublin: Institute of Public
Administration.
Mags Liddy
Department of Education and Professional Studies
University of Limerick
87
TREVOR DAVIES
7. THE IMPLICATIONS FOR SECONDARY TEACHER

TRAINING OF LARGE-SCALE POLISH
IMMIGRATION INTO ENGLAND
INTRODUCTION
Polish communities represent one major ethnic group of recent immigrants in the
UK. They do, like many other groups, have their own special histories of
international relationships with England. In order for a society to survive together,
all of its citizens must share some values and precepts for life and living, which
in today’s world must encompass the global dimension (GD) – meaning the
world’s interconnectedness. Many secondary schools in the UK now have strong
cohorts of Polish students with differing degrees of assimilation into UK society.
This chapter examines the core values and attitudes trainee teachers and their tutors
possess and how well teachers are trained to manage the essential elements of
global education for all pupils and the related matters of global citizenship (GC).
Global citizenship or world citizenship typically defines a person who places their
identity with a global community above their identity as a citizen of a particular
nation or place.
It is believed that Poles are one of the most assimilated groups into the UK
as they come with the ability and readiness to work for low wages and a strong
work ethic reflecting their educational and cultural backgrounds. A major impact
is the pressure exerted on essential services such as medical, social, housing
and education. In certain areas of Britain, still recovering from the demise of
the industrial society and in the throes of recent recession, it is perceived
that indigenous workers’ jobs have been taken in these areas of high
unemployment, leading to racial tensions and the growth of far-right political
forces.
In order to review and understand the attitudes and values of trainee teachers
towards teaching the GD, a small-scale comparative research project was
constructed.
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
– To review and understand the attitudes and values of trainee teachers towards
teaching GE in secondary schools.

TREVOR DAVIES
– To consider how the attitudes and values of teacher trainers might feature in
promoting GE in initial teacher training (ITT).
REVIEWING THE LITERATURE
An article published in January 2011 by the Daily Telegraph in the UK stated

that “towns and villages in parts of rural England are seeing eastern European
immigrants arriving in record numbers, it can be revealed.” (Barrett, 2010)
This presents challenges (not new) to the education system in the UK, typical of
those faced by any country in the face of large-scale immigration. Typical are the
needs to address GE to prepare our societies to deal with future-world issues and to
build identities that fit. Roth and Selander (2008) posit the shifting identities of
migrating peoples and populations as a global context for educational challenge
and the need for changes in teaching and learning methodologies.
THE RATIONALE FOR GLOBAL EDUCATION
GE is education that opens people’s eyes and minds to the realities of the world. In
the Global Teacher Project, Midwinter (2005) discusses that GE is not a subject,
but a dimension that runs through the curriculum. GE is a way of approaching
everything we teach and how we teach all subjects with global perspectives in
order to best prepare balanced global citizens.
The issues that challenge a more globalised environment include:
– failure in developing education systems to respond to the changing nature of
society in developing and developed societies (Tickly, 2001; Marginson &
Mollis, 2002; Crossley, 2008).
– the shifting identities of migrating peoples and populations (Ugglee, 2008).
– the inequities of race, gender, disability and marginalised groups (Gundara,
2003; McKencie & Scheurich, 2008).
– the global inability in large parts of the world to create sustainable employment
and social integration (Castells, 1998; Falk, 1995).
– the complexity of the world for young people and the claims of multiple identity
and citizenship (Kress, 2008).
Basit (2009) states that young people need to be provided with an education that
teaches them how to fulfil their roles as citizens in a local and global society with
due sensitivity and tolerance. Ross (2007) argues that in order to be effective,
education for active citizenship must address and encompass both the nature of
multiple identities and the extension of civic rights to minorities. Morgan and
Chung (2010) postulate that in the UK, with the failed assimilation of migrants
from New Commonwealth and Pakistan, the dissolution of the empire and the rise
of racism in the face of economic recession along with the rise of counter-cultural
values all contribute to the sense that the school curriculum is failing to address the
challenges of living in a global society. We do however need to take care with our
approaches. All migrations have a strong political element and democratic debate
90
IMPLICATIONS OF POLISH IMMIGRATION
rages around the issues of implication, cause and effect. Democracy is a necessary
element of good government but not a sufficient one, unless subjective opinion is
enshrined over knowledge. Crick (2007) warns that to stress democracy unduly in
citizenship education can lead to definitional dogmatics about multiple meanings
of the term and can lead to disillusionment. There needs to be a deepening of
understanding as to what needs to be delivered as a curriculum to fashion and
claim well-being in the 21st century. The concept of well-being is seen as one that
not only provides basic goods but rather those things needed for a fuller life in line
with Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy of needs. For example, Poles living in England
need to build quality lives, not just exist for work. They also need to enrich their
lives and their communities if and when they return home.
Beiner (2006), when considering Young’s account of multiculturalism debates,
suggests that the point of group-differentiated rights is not just to allow
disadvantaged groups to compete more effectively for desirable jobs, but to
challenge society about assumptions of what is worth rewarding, contesting the
notion that there should be privileged cultural norms at all! GE is seen as a way of
extending students’ views of the world by exploring their perceptions and
connections, and helping them recognise and think critically about different
cultural, economic and political perspectives.
GLOBAL EDUCATION IN THE UK
The UK Government has been striving to raise the profile and importance of global
dimension (GD) in schools through a wide range of initiatives often supported by
non-governmental organisations (NGOs) such as Oxfam, Development Education
Association (DEA), Reading International Solidarity Centre (RISC), which offer
leadership in GE policy development and consultancy to schools. The desire to
teach the GD, however, is in tension with how national education systems are
construed. Ross (2007) records that the purpose of developing national systems of
education is to promote a sense of national identity in addition to sustaining
national economies. In the case of England, this has resulted in narrow prescriptive
curricula with narrowly focused assessment regimes. Hence governments find it
difficult to balance educational development for national interest with the
increasing need to address issues internationally. The British Council and DEA
(DEA, n.d.) promote the GD as the extent to which global development issues are
integrated within the formal curriculum on the website it manages on behalf of the
UK Department for International Development (DFID).
Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted, 2008) has been paying increasing
attention to how schools in the UK deliver the GD, which they suggest is a term
used to define aspects of the subject-specific and whole school curricula that relate
to peoples, place within the wider world and how they relate to others (McGough
& Hunt, 2012) and want all schools to be sustainable schools by 2020. This
includes promoting GE and supporting the development of global citizens. The
report however records that schools generally are better at promoting pupil
understanding of local issues than global issues. Primary schools are also found to
91
TREVOR DAVIES
be more effective than secondary schools (McGough & Hunt, 2012). O’Hare and
Gay (2006) discuss that in a global society children’s participation in society is a
right in the functioning of the state (UNICEF, 1989) which makes key demands on
education and appropriate teaching to introduce appropriate questions and
experiences for young people. The importance of doing this is confirmed in a
report published by DEA on the impact of global learning on public attitudes and
behaviour towards international development and sustainability. It finds that global
learning is vital if we are to nurture a socially responsible, outward looking
population (DEA, n.d.).
Kress (2008) suggests that learning is thus:
the change produced in the learners’ resources as a result of their active
transformative engagement, on the basis of principles that the learner brings
to the engagement, with that aspect of the world which is in focus. (p. 264)
Breslin and Duffour (2006) believe that a citizen-rich school is a successful school
and a community where there is a positive and harmonious ethos that is tangible.
All members are respected and feel valued and share in the moral leadership of the
community. The challenge is for trainee teachers to encompass the necessary tools
as part of their professional makeup.
TRAINING THE TEACHERS
Harrison (2010) states that the role of teachers is not only to train the powers of the
mind but also to train the habits of the heart.
Several UK initiatives have been resourced over recent years to promote the
global dimension (exploring the world’s interconnectedness) in Initial Teacher
Training, for example through the Department for International Development
(DFID), including: Manchester Metropolitan University developing the GD in
ITT (Training & Development Agency for Schools [TDA], 2008); University
of Birmingham School of Education represented by Prof. Lynn Davies and
colleagues clarifying the nature of global citizenship (GC) education as a
component of GD (Davies, Harber, & Yamashita, 2006); and The Global Teacher
Project run by the World Studies Trust (Holden, Clough, Hicks, & Martin, 2003).
Initiatives are however patchy and inconsistent as they are not driven by the
central requirement to comply with the delivery of the national curriculum in
schools and the ‘required standards’ by Ofsted in teacher education. In order to
progress, we need to understand something about the knowledge base, skills,
values and attitudes of trainee secondary teachers to establish how best to promote
experiences, learning environments and cultural opportunities that will build
capacity for them to teach the GD. Bourdieu (1977) recognises the difficulties
embedded in change management. When faced by unforeseen circumstances,
human beings tend to re-create the structures of the past hence not really solving
the problem at all.
92
RESEARCH METHOD
A mixed methods approach was adopted within an ethical framework that assured
the integrity of the respondents and the institutions participating (Ozga, 2000,
p. 145). The project received full ethical clearance from the University of Reading
Ethics Committee in line with British Educational Research Association (BERA)
guidelines. Fifty English secondary trainees were randomly selected from the
Reading Institute of Education to participate and 10 secondary tutors for
triangulation purposes; 21 English trainees responded and 6 English Tutors. An
anonymous questionnaire was developed for the trainees to understand the
relationships between trainee (ITT) experiences, their understanding and values
about GE and their confidence and ability to deliver and teach GE. The same
questionnaire was distributed to the tutors.
The conceptual framework for the questionnaires was based on concepts of
Global Learning provided by DEA whose definition of GL includes:
global citizenship, interdependence, social justice, conflict resolution,
diversity, values and perceptions, human rights, sustainable development.
(http://www.think-global.org.uk)
These formed the underpinning theoretical platform on which the data was
gathered and analysed. Survey questions were constructed by drawing on the range
of research literature. Data was gathered and collated, transcribed and processed by
a Field Officer using SPSS predictive statistics software.
In the questionnaire, a range of contingency questions, matrix questions,
closed ended questions and a small number of open-ended questions were
used. The Likert scale was the norm response expectation. The questions were
designed to flow through the above topics. The trainers were delivered an
equivalent questionnaire, the responses from whom were triangulated against what
trainees believe they are contributing to the full spectrum of global education
issues.
The research findings are limited by the scale of the study. Responses are
therefore framed by the decision-making and learning associated with the cultural
orientations of that institution.
RESULTS
The results are categorised in a series of tables that report directly on a selection of
question data followed by a summary related to secondary question responses that
were posed.
There were:
– 21 trainee respondents: 14 female; 7 male. 17 aged 20-30; 1 aged 31-40; 3 aged
41-50.
– 6 tutor respondents: 2 male; 3 female. 1 aged 31-40; 2 aged 41-50; 3 aged 51-60.
93
TREVOR DAVIES
Question category Trainees Trainees Tutors Tutors
Introductory Excellent Satisfactory Excellent or Satisfactory

questions or good Good
Understanding of 9/21 8/21 4/6 1/6

GE
Ability to teach GE 8/21 5/21 3/6 1/6
All trainees and tutors agreed that working actively towards a peaceful world is
central to GE. Two thirds of the trainees and the tutors believe that teaching GE in
schools is at least as important as teaching traditional subjects. Three quarters of
trainees and all tutors believe in the importance of cross cultural interactions to GE.
Global Citizenship Excellent Satisfactory Excellent or Satisfactory

or good Good
Understanding of 16/21 4/21 4/6 2/6

GC
Agree Disagree Agree Disagree
Importance of 21/21 0/21 6/6 0/6

incorporating GC
into teaching
Encouragement of 19/21 0/21 6/6 0/6

tolerance through
teaching
GC should be a 8/21 9/21 2/6 2/6

curriculum subject
Most trainees (13/21) consider themselves first as citizens of England whilst 4/6
tutors consider themselves as citizens of the world. The most popular ways of
describing GC by trainees were awareness of the wider world and the place of the
individual in it and respect for diversity. Tutors added sustainability and taking
responsibility for actions.
94
Interdependence Agree Disagree Agree Disagree
Community action 17/21 1/21 6/6 0/6

to support others
locally and globally
13 out of 21 trainees believe that each of us as individuals were responsible for

solving global problems. 4/6 tutors prioritised all countries needing to be involved.
The majority of trainees and tutors believe that pupils should learn about the causes
and horror of war.
Question Trainees Trainees Tutors Tutors

category
Social Justice Agree Disagree Agree Disagree
Belief of own 7/21 7/21 1/6 0/6

country being
socially just
Belief that people 19/21 0/21 5/6 0/6

of different
cultures can be
good neighbours
Young people 7/21 9/21 3/6 0/6

should experience
the effects of
social deprivation
Sweden, New Zealand and Norway are thought to be examples of socially

just countries. Syria, Libya and China are thought to be unjust. Responsibility
for solving many of the big global problems such as poverty, climate change
and over-population is seen to be shared between global agencies such as
the UN, governments and each individual by both trainees and tutors.
95
TREVOR DAVIES
Conflict Agree Disagree Agree Disagree

resolution
Conflict 18/21 1/21 5/6 0/6

resolution should
be taught in
schools
Conflict is 9/21 6/21 5/6 0/6

unavoidable, it is
part of being
human
Respondents 17/21 1/21 4/6 0/6

teach learners to
compromise
Major causes of conflict were thought to be hatred, cultural difference and

religion by trainees and lack of food, water and hatred by tutors. Both groups
agreed that bullying is best addressed in schools by letting pupils create rules for
themselves and teachers policing conduct. In this way morality is taught.
Diversity Agree Disagree Agree Disagree
Governments are 9/21 1/21 5/6 0/6

responsible for
creating tensions
with other
countries
It is easier to 6/21 7/21 1/6 1/6

establish peaceful
relationships
within one ethnic
group
It is important for 18/21 0/21 4/6 0/6

children to play
with other
nationalities
96
Most agreed that countries working together can solve global problems more
effectively. A full range of responses existed that immigration is a good thing from
an immigrant’s point of view. There was general agreement that collaborative
curriculum projects, exchanges with other schools, reading about the lives of others
in books, watching TV programmes about others’ lives and social networking with
other children are all helpful for pupils to gain understanding of global issues
leading to celebration of difference.
Values and Agree Disagree Agree Disagree

perceptions
Teachers should 2/21 10/21 3/6 2/6

make their values
explicit when
teaching pupils
about other
cultures
All pupils should 16/21 0/21 5/6 0/6

be taught about
global issues
through school
subjects
Pupils should be 14/21 2/21 5/6 0/6

taught how to
behave as
democratic
citizens through
subjects
There is broad agreement that global issues should be taught through school
subjects but varied opinion about whether teaching pupils to behave as democratic
citizens should be taught as a separate subject or not.
97
TREVOR DAVIES
Human Rights Agree Disagree Agree Disagree
The human rights 13/21 1/21 5/6 0/6

act is helpful for all
countries
Minority groups 8/21 6/21 1/6 0/6

are dealt with
appropriately in
England
The United Nations 6/21 4/21 3/6 0/6

are effective at
promoting peace in
the world
There is broad support that human rights should be taught in schools. It is

thought that empathy and keeping an open mind are valued very highly as
important attributes for children to develop to make good relationships with people
and hence build a platform for respecting human rights. There is general firm
agreement amongst trainees that aboriginal groups have been persecuted unfairly
over the planet. Respondents are more confident that legislation deals well with
human rights abuses in their country. For promoting human rights globally, the
Red Cross received the largest support followed by Oxfam.
Sustainable Agree Disagree Agree Disagree

development
Teachers should 13/21 4/21 5/6 0/6

help to change the
behaviour of
individuals to be
more sustainable
Teaching about 14/21 1/21 3/6 0/6

sustainability
should be
compulsory for all
children
98
Agreement existed, but not strong agreement, that pupils should be taught about
political activism. The main fears about the future of the world cited are: terrorism,
followed by war, famine and extreme weather each of which received lower
support.
DISCUSSION – BUILDING FOR THE FUTURE
There is a growing sense across the planet that all of our problems are
interconnected, that local issues are often directly influenced by global activities or
relationships resulting in complex demands upon young people as identified earlier
by Kress (2008). How individuals perceive their roles as global citizens, or citizens
of their country depends upon their history, culture and the power relationships that
exist within their spheres of interest and influence.
Trainees supported by tutors feel confident in their understanding of global
citizenship issues, sufficient to teach it even though there is disagreement about
how this should be organised. In Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, all are
trying under devolution to find ways to develop their individual identities in the
world, hence the global dimension has received more attention and support from
their national governance bodies than is the case in England whose history is one
of empire and dominance. Many argue the case that English people are often self-
deprecating of their own culture and only in the face of large-scale immigration,
far-right political movements have materialised perhaps in response to the
paradigm Ross (2007) warns of.
Spring (2008) argues that schools need to take into account ‘major global
discourses’ (p. 178). These concern the present crisis and nature of economic
activity, particularly the knowledge economy and the need to encompass skills and
competencies taught in more pupil-centred, progressive educational ways. Most
respondents in the study recognise that individual responsibility is central to
solving global problems. The very nature of restructuring economically and
socially means that education needs to be seen as a lifelong enterprise not merely a
mandatory formal phase, with a clearer focus on skills and capacities, not just
regurgitating facts learned in narrow contexts. Learning how to learn will be as
important as the learning of the discourses of others, which will aid understanding
of those less fortunate and give perspective to what one learns.
What worth does the individual have in our global world and what contributions
should society expect from individuals? Respondents clearly believe that people
from different cultures can be good neighbours but there is an alarmingly low
regard for England being socially just compared with, for instance, Scandinavian
countries. Scandinavian countries have a shared respect for their societal
approaches whilst countries that are perceived to have a poor record are associated
with the political agendas of England such as Syria and China. Sandström Kjellin,
Stier, Einarson, Davies, and Asunta (2010) discuss the importance of holding
respect as central in the culture of schools which in a highly legislated system is
present in England; trust is a suspect entity. Inequities identified by Gundara (2003)
and McKencie and Scheurich (2008) might well explain the responses of
99
TREVOR DAVIES
respondents. Shah and Brown (2009) find that once trainee teachers have the
knowledge base to implement values of equality, they are committed to those
values as professionals. This need not necessarily be true once they mature as
teachers and develop themselves as individual citizens.
Peace and conflict resolution education generated a range of opinions across all
respondents. Emphasis on understanding the implications of actions and that every
hostile action has consequences is thought to be an important principle for building
educational strategies. Most respondents thought that conflict resolution should be
taught in schools. However, emphasis was placed on active learning, conflict
resolution, standing up for oneself and compromise as key attributes of good
citizens. Whilst overpopulation is considered to be the major conflict threat to
humankind on the planet, there is minor recognition of this amongst respondents
who are more concerned with the symptoms of lack of food, water, work and so on.
Most agree on the need for countries to work together to solve global problems
but the challenge to education is how to construct curricula and pedagogies based
on global understandings, not ones of prejudice and adherence to nationalistic
agendas. Diversity is respected in Canadian history, reported by Thompson and
Hall (2008) to have been a key factor in shaping policy on citizenship and
citizenship education.
There is recognition that individuals should exercise individual responsibility
and contribute to volunteering and community activity. England is a country where
civic duty is embedded at different levels and people expect to contribute to ‘their
worlds’ – expecting to make personal philanthropic gains from this as well as to
give. Few trainees believe that teachers should make their values about other
cultures explicit even though tutors do. Is this down to lack of knowledge or
confidence? This needs to be examined closely to establish more precisely what the
role of the teacher is in scaffolding democratic knowledge with pupils.
Human rights is contested amongst respondents. Those that imply caution show
concern that some in a modern world claim rights before responsibility. Empathy,
and keeping an open mind are valued very highly as important attributes for
children to support good relationship-building with people. There is uncertainty
amongst the respondents about whether minority groups are dealt with well in
England and about whether the UN does a good job. There is a general agreement
that human rights should be taught in school and a cautious agreement that the
human rights act is helpful for all countries.
‘Managerialist’ approaches to education have reduced the possibilities of
teachers and learners building relationships in natural and empowering ways in the
English education system. There needs to be a deepening of understanding as to
what needs to be delivered as a curriculum to fashion and claim well-being for all
in the 21st century. Many of us are even more concerned about this since the
beginning of the recent economic crisis. The concept of well-being is seen as one
that not only provides basic goods but rather those needed for a fuller life in line
with Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy of needs. Amartya Sen (1993) developed this
concept in a modern context and made the distinction between basic functionings
of well-being, and those required for a much fuller life. This work on well-being
100
shows the impoverishment of allowing basic functioning to be a reliable guide to a

life, which allows for options for choice.
What are the demands of new learning scenarios? Children born today may
easily achieve lifespans unknown to us today – certainly 100 plus. This is in the
context of the planet not imploding due to some climate catastrophe, internecine
warfare or unhealthy living context, but it does sharply focus education into
teaching that the nature of work and sustainable relationships is a long one. This
would mean the reconstruction of relationships is necessary because of the
difficulties in preparing students not only for their formal education, but for
lifelong and informal education. Changes in society and global penetration gaining
intensity in certain areas have led some researchers to see it as an age of
uncertainty and insecurity. This provides an impetus for reform and a focus on the
need to live together. Indeed Carneiro and Draxler (2008, p.149) feel that:
practical application of this principle in school systems is often assumed,
neglected or limited to the early years of schooling before academic and
practical learning for the economic sector begins.
It is the trust that a learner has in the teacher’s ability to prepare him/her for their
future world – not the present one. Trust always involves vulnerability (Frowe,
2005) but if the basis for trust is built solidly into the way teachers are trained,
opportunities for abrogation of trust are minimised and the discretionary powers
given to a professional are amply rewarded.
The data overall illustrate trainees who are orientated to support and scaffold
their learners in a committed and compassionate way. Uncertainty in a number of
complex areas as to what constitutes GE undermines confidence particularly as
teachers are required to respond directly to what they are mandated by government
to do. It is important to note that every politician realises that by controlling
education you can control the future of your society. Perhaps a notion that doesn’t
crop up sufficiently in public discourse is that education is about preparing learners
for the future – but no one knows what the future will bring – not even tomorrow!
So who has the right to control education? Aubusson, Steele, Dinham and Brady
(2008) describe how Action Learning that places an emphasis on inquiry-led action
can help schools build the capacity to improve. Davies (2008) notes that teachers
were fearful of making decisions that affected learners’ lives and futures unless
they had built relationships with learners, and the knowledge base of the learner
and their needs to make sound judgments. He cites that:
if you trust teachers and they are properly trained to the highest level possible
and there are continuous opportunities to upgrade both subject knowledge
and pedagogical knowledge they will continue to raise their aspirations and
abilities to perform as teachers. Their identity becomes so closely linked to
the identity of the learners that in ‘best practice’ scenarios, performance of
teachers and learners are inextricably linked, provided that the ‘processes of
learning’ are at the heart of their concern. (2008, p. 15)
101
TREVOR DAVIES
It is evident that we need to look again at the operation of schooling and the
relationships as found in schools and teacher training establishments. The need to
look at the formal working time of pupils at school as well as the informal and
contextual area of pupils’ lives needs continuously to be examined. Further, this
must be seen in a context which ranges in dimension from the local to the global.
The intensity of technological communication systems, 24 hour news, different
population and migratory groupings have led to a more multilayered society. There
is also the preconception that there is a need to reform schools themselves in order
to understand and act on these influences and change the very nature of the
learning experience with its consequent implications for teacher training
institutions. At the heart of educational reform is the re-definition of relationships
between policy-makers, professionals and stakeholders. To define the framework
with which that takes place this means re-defining professionalism for the
educators.
Aubusson et al. (2008) recognise how important close nurturing is to generate
and maintain professional learning communities. Teacher learning through training
courses are at the heart of reform agendas including teacher research as part of
training. Because of the complexity of schools and teacher communities there are
no simple methods to instigate or drive the process through teacher training.
Belgeonne, Chambers, Gadsby, and Pout (2010) conclude in their study of how the
GD is addressed in teacher training programmes that university courses need to
build in more explicit guidance for student activities on developing critically
reflective practice. Utilising such approaches in a bolt-on way however can never
achieve sustainable change. Within the context of an extensive literature of change
management such an approach can stimulate and contribute to sustainable change
for teacher training over time resulting in large-scale shifts in values and attitudes
sufficient to promote the most rigorous forms of GE and GC that produces the best
of local and global outcomes together.
REFERENCES
Aubusson, P., Steele, F., Dinham, S., & Brady, L. (2008). Action learning in teacher learning
community formation: Informative or transformative? Teacher Development, 11(2), 133–148.
Barrett, D. (2010, June 13). The towns in England where Poles are still arriving. The Telegraph.
Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/7823326/The-towns-in-
England-where-Poles-are-still-arriving.html
Basit, T. H. (2009). White British; dual heritage; British Muslim: Young Britons’ conceptualisation of
identity and citizenship. British Educational Research Journal, 35(5), 723–744.
Beiner, R. (2006). Multiculturalism and citizenship: A critical response to Marion Young. In M. Sardoč
(Ed.), Citizenship, inclusion and democracy (pp. 23–36). Hong Kong: Blackwell Publishing.
Belgeonne, C., Chambers, C., Gadsby, H., & Pout, L. (2010). Using the global dimension to develop
cross-curriculum teaching with beginning teachers. In S. Inman & M. Rogers (Eds.), Developing
critical perspectives on education for sustainable development / global citizenship in initial teacher
education (pp. 76–84). London: UK Teacher Education Network for Education Sustainable
Development/Global Citizenship.
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: University Press.
102
Breslin, T., & Duffour, B. (2006). The way forward: Building the citizenship-rich school. In T. Breslin
& B. Dufour (Eds.), Developing citizens (pp. 342–351). London: Murray.
Carneiro, R., & Draxler, A. (2008). Education for 21C: Lessons and challenges. European Journal of
Education of Research, Development and Policy, 43(2), 149–160.
Castells, M. (1998) The information age, Vol III: End of millennium. Blackwell, Oxford.
Castells, M. (2001). The internet galaxy: Reflections on the internet, business and society. Oxford:
Crick, B. (2007). Citizenship: the political and the democratic. British Journal of Educational Studies,
55(3), 235–248.
Crossley, M. (2008). Bridging cultures and tradition for educational and international development:
Comparative research, dialogue and difference. International Review of Education, 54(3–4), 319–
336.
Davies, L., Harber, C., & Yamashita, H. (2006). Global citizenship education: The needs of teachers
and learners. Retrieved from http://www.tidec.org/further-reading-reflections/global-citizenship-
education-needs-teachers-and-learners
Davies, T. C. (2008). Shifting the boundaries of professionalism: empowering learners and teachers
through assessing creativity during a collaborative CARA2 project. British Educational Research
Association Conference, Herriot -Watt University, Edinburgh, 3–6 September 2008.
The Development Education Association. (n.d.). Think global the global dimension. Retrieved from
http://www.think-global.org.uk
Falk, B. (1995). On humane governance. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Frowe, I. (2005). Professional trust. British Journal of Educational Studies. 53(1), 34–53.
Gundara, J. (2003). Intercultural education: World on the brink? London: University of London,
Institute of Education.
Harrison, T. (2010). A curriculum full of character. In J. Arthur (Ed.), Citizens of character (pp. 177–
192). Exeter, UK: Imprint.
Holden, C., Clough, N., Hicks, D., & Martin, F. (2003). Unpublished report to the World Studies Trust.
Global Teacher Project. Retrieved from http://www.globalteacher.org.uk/grg_report.htm
Kress, G. (2008). Meaning and learning in a world of instability and multiplicity. Studies in Philosophy
and Education, 27(4), 253–266.
Marginson, S., & Mollis, M. (2002). The door opens and the tiger leaps: Theories and reflexivities of
comparative education for a global millennium. Comparative Education Review, 45(4), 581–615.
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Retrieved from http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/
Maslow/motivation.htm
McGough, H., & Hunt, F. (2012). The global dimension: A practical handbook for teacher educators.
London: University of London, Institute of Education. Retrieved from http://www.ioe.ac.uk/
Handbook_final%281%29.pdf
McKencie, K. B., & Scheurich, J. J. (2008). Teacher resistance to improvement of schools with diverse
students. International Journal of Leadership in Education, II(2), 117–133.
Midwinter, C. (2005). Supporting the standards: The global dimension in ITET. London: World Studies
Trust. Retrieved from http://www.globalteacher.org.uk/resources/supporting-standards.pdf
Morgan, J., & Chung, H. L. T. (2010). The global dimension in initial teacher education. In S. Inman &
M. Rogers (Eds.), Education of hope: The impact of ESD/GC on the well being of teachers and
young people (pp. 125–129). London: London South Bank University.
Office for Standards in Education [Ofsted]. (2008). Schools and sustainability: A climate for change?
London: Ofsted. Retrieved from http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/surveys-
and-good-practice/s/Schools%20and%20sustainability%20%28PDF%20format%29.pdf
O’Hare, P., & Gay, O. (2006). The political process and citizenship education. London: House of
Commons Library.
Ozga, J. (2000). New labour, new teachers. In J. Clarke, S. Gewitz, & E. McLaughlin (Eds.), New
managerialism new welfare? London: Sage.
103
TREVOR DAVIES
Ross, A. (2007). Multiple identities and education for active citizenship. British Journal of Educational
Studies, 55(3), 286–303.
Roth, K., & Selander, S. (2008). Introduction: Changed conditions for identity formation,
communication and learning. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 27(4), 207–209.
Sandström Kjellin. M., Stier, J., Einarson, T., Davies, T., & Asunta, T. (2010). Pupils’ voices about
citizenship education: Comparative case studies in Finland, Sweden and England. European Journal
of Teacher Education, 33(2), 201–218.
Sen, A. (1993). Capability and well-being. In M. Nussbaum & A. Sen (Eds.), The quality of life (pp. 30–
53). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Shah, H., & Brown, K. (2009). DEA thinkpiece: Critical thinking in the context of global learning. In S.
Inman & M. Rogers (Eds.), Developing critical perspectives on education for sustainable
development / global citizenship in initial teacher education (pp. 21–26). London: UK Teacher
Education Network for Education Sustainable Development/Global Citizenship.
Spring, J. (2008). Research on globalization and education. Review of Educational Research, 78(2),
330–363.
Thomson, P., & Hall, C. (2008). Opportunities missed and/or thwarted? ‘Funds of Knowledge’ meet the
English National Curriculum. The Curriculum Journal, 19(2), 87–103.
Tickly, L. (2001). Globalisation and education in the postcolonial world: Towards a conceptual
framework. Comparative Education, 37(2), 151–171.
Midwinter C. (2005). The global dimension in initial teacher education and training: Supporting
Standards. World Studies Trust. Available at: http://www.globalteacher.org.uk
Ugglee, B. K. (2008). Identity, communication and learning in an age of globalization. Studies in
Philosophy and Education, 27 (4).
UNICEF. (1989). UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Retrieved from
http://www.unicef.org.uk/Documents/Publication-pdfs/UNCRC_PRESS200910web.pdf
Trevor Davies
Institute of Education
University of Reading
104
SECTION 3
EMPOWERING CITIZENS FOR

GLOBAL EDUCATION
JAVIER CALVO DE MORA
8. DEMOCRATISING SCHOOLS
INTRODUCTION
A democratic school is an ideal associated with the meaningful participation and

the self determination of citizens of a school. It is concerned with the achieving
universal realisation of social justice, respect, tolerance and human dignity. In this
chapter, I am going to adopt a definition of democratisation for schooling proposed
by Davies (2002):
A process, instead of a status – such as social relations based on mutual
respect and mutual trust, empathy, shared responsibility, capacity building of
people to solve educational problems, and social legitimacy of the school as
valuable public space to learn practical knowledge to the people’s life. (p.
252)
Democratisation is a key process in our current world with many new democracies
emerging around the globe and many varied ideas as to how best to educate for
democracy. Consideration of how schools can lead democracies is an important
global imperative.
Schooling as an institution for the public good competes with claims for
education and its contribution to economic and social growth and development of
the state. Institutions are multifaceted, durable social structures, made up of
symbolic elements, social activities and material resources (Scott, 2001). A school
institution despite this is challenged to be democratic in terms of learning outcomes
and global empowerment. However, the hegemonic discourse of the school with its
standards, market values, corporate culture and reproduction of social class
threatens the innate ability of the school to enact democratising processes (Bidwell,
2001).
The process of democracy – democratizing – may be a pragmatic and important
alternative to the dominant discourse of the educational systems and traditional
approaches. Schools can create spaces for democratic social relations that are
anchored to the wider social and cultural environment in which school is rooted. In
these sites, both the ‘collective mind’ of society and teachers’ and students’ sense
making about the world exist.

COLLECTIVE MIND IN SCHOOL ORGANISATION
Evidence of informal side of school, a part of schooling that can encourage

democratisation, is made clear by the existence of a collective mind (Weick &
Robert, 1993):
The concept of collective mind is developed to explain organisational
performance in situation requiring nearly continuous operational reliability.
Collective mind is conceptualised as a pattern of heedful interrelations of
action in a social systems interrelated of cognitions and actions whose main
aim is to provide a clear picture of people perceptions, motivations and
interests related to school and education. (p. 357)
Daily evidence of a collective mind appears in situations of critical incidents at
schools (Angelides, 2010) when people must solve a problem that is of concern or
interest to the majority of the population or school community. It requires a
collective mental process to manage unexpected events in situations requiring
recovering the legitimacy of organisations as public institutions. For instance,
children from deprived areas may come regularly to school without lunch. This
problem is a societal and school problem that highlights global and local
inequalities and demands interdependent and democratising actions to resolve. In
this example teachers and schools are able to understand and apprehend a situation
and create collective deliberation to deliver a sustainable structure to offer meals to
local under-privileged children. This approach can be transferred to other similar
issues that compel a significant section of the school population such as climate
conditions, school violence, and sexual abuse at schools. Such collective solutions
are evidence of strengthening the school dimension of education through a concept
of institutional interdependencies. This serves to increase the democratisation of
schools (Calvo de Mora, 2008).
TEACHERS’ ‘SENSE MAKING’
Democratic teachers and schools, extend children’s minds (Jaegher, 2013) in a

form of participatory sense making. This offers the children a more important and
relevant influence over the school and enables teachers to share expertise and
practical knowledge with others. The effect is to create a new understanding and
meaningful sense of teaching, as well as learning, for all school participants
(Weick, 1995).
Young people have a strong sense and belief in democracy as a way of life
(Yalçinkaya, 2013; Kennedy, 2012). This is related to students’ perception of the
value of participation at school. Students’ interests in politics and social issues;
students’ sense of internal political efficacy and students’ attitudes towards the
influence of religion on society, in which identity and students’ family projects
exert powerful influences on behaviour. Additionally, students’ attitudes towards a
general scheme of liberal democracy (Isac, Ralf, Creemers, & van der Werf, 2014)
and the dynamics of ethnic and racial relations at schools (Bartolome & Macedo,
108
DEMOCRATISING SCHOOLS
1997) are important. These attitudes inform the formal learning of the curricula and
serve as an internal influence on students’ aspirations, participation and decision
making, group socialisation, personal autonomy and human development (Ginns,
Martin, & Papworth, 2014).
Schools are not merely organisational units of instruction (Barr & Dreeben
(1983) but rather have different levels of authority, spaces and powers to
implement and assess student learning that can lead to democratising processes.
The school’s organisational flexibility and democratic capacity enables people to
reflect, prioritise, take decisions, focus on personal expectations and promote
assumable ways of effort to reach their learning targets (Roberts-Gray, Gingis, &
Boernm, 2007; Durrant, Peterson, Hoult, & Leith, 2012).
DEMOCRATISING SCHOOLS ASSISTS IN ENHANCING INSTITUTIONAL

INTERDEPENDENCIES
From a postcolonial approach, democracy is enhanced through collective

bargaining processes by different members of each school to create new patterns of
vision, beliefs, values and missions of school (Warren & Hytten, 2004; Dodds &
Ankeny, 2006; Mullen, 2008; Fisher, Frey & Pumpian, 2012). The full inclusion of
civil society in the implementation of school policy and school democracy is an
example of open organisation (Scott, 2001). Schools can be institutions for people
empowerment. This is the essence of democracy as a social process building upon
a growing practice of direct involvement through deliberation and decision making
processes. This process (used by ancient Greeks – Isonomia, Isegoria and
Isomeria), refers to the creation of open institutional spaces of education and
practical knowledge in which people can express their values, deploy attitudes and
activities into a balanced and intertwined respect amongst them. In other words, a
democratic school is a utopian concept dominated by ideology of trust in the
education beyond the process of self-regulation proposed by standards and
institutional incentives. Democratic schools and education democracy, then, is a
space where people are conscious of knowledge acquisition for their practical lives
(Bäcman & Trafford, 2006).
Schools are social realities full of meanings and social relations in which
teachers and learners work together in the same place and time (Kiraly, 1999). In
the words of Yakov Hecht (2011) mutual respect and tolerance should be the basis
of democratic education. Democratic education is a free, rational, social and
emotional dialogue amongst people at schools with civic rules based on rights and
responsibilities of collective, as well as individual (Rosie, 2000).
Focus in on ‘what is signified’; relates previous knowledge to new
knowledge; relates knowledge from different courses; relates theoretical
ideas to everyday experience; relates and distinguishes evidence and
argument; organises and structures content into coherent whole; emphasis is
internal, from within the student; intention to understand; vigorous
interaction with content; relate new ideas to previous knowledge; relate
109
concept to everyday experience; relate to conclusions and examine the logic

of the argument. (Rosie, 2000, p. 49)
In more practical terms, democracy at school has a mission to create a learning
culture (Fisher et al., 2012) through a process of co-production of public services
(Pestoff, 2014).This synthesised approach of practical knowledge (Calvo de Mora
& Wood, 2014) implies that democratic education should be proximal to a
student’s life and personal challenges. It advocates that learning is an important
and enjoyable action that everyone can achieve, and that teaching using a
collaborative strategy of learning motivates students to be the best that they can be
when undertaking learning challenges.
PARTNERSHIPS IN ACTION
The challenge is how we can democratise schools. Firstly, a collaborative learning

culture is needed. This occurs through the establishment of networks amongst
different and related organisations to provoke inter-influences around mutual
understanding of goals, values, procedures and learning requirements (Fullan,
2009). Secondly, learning practice through learning cycles is opened up and
teaching is informed by collaborative action research and democratic ethos
(Brydon-Miller & Coghlan, 2014). Thirdly, continuity of learning needs to be
created amongst the different spaces and temporalities that students exist in. This
continuity of learning blends informal and formal learning acquired through social
and cultural academic and curricular activities. Actors involved in this learning
process aim to create equal opportunities to deepen learning. Figure 1 shows a
model of multi-stakeholder process (van Hoof & Thielli, 2014) delivering
strategies to create wider common objectives whose targets encompass all people
concerned with school learning. This figure is informed by the neo institutional
theory from Walter W. Powell (1990) – theory of organisational networks.
The first task of this network is to learn from each other about what underlying
background interests influence their respective policy decisions. The second step is
to diagnose common problems about defining education as public right and
learning as an individual student right. Once these democratising steps have
occurred it leads to partnerships in action. Successful democratising partnerships
comprise three major elements: shared knowledge, mutual dependency and
organisational linkages.
Shared Knowledge occurs when partnerships are built on a deep foundation of
shared knowledge between partner organisations. University-school partners must
understand the environment and culture that affects how the other works if they are
to support and influence each other in critical areas.
Mutual Dependency is needed for the partnership to flourish. In every
partnership there are distinctive competencies and resources, so that if the
partnership fails, each member of the partnership loses. Successful formal and non
formal organisations and school partnerships can learn how to manage an
environment where each holds critical cards tied to the other’s success.
110
Figure 1. Learning Cycle of Democracy. Author
Organisational Linkages are successful partnerships characterised by formal

and informal relationships at all levels in the organisation. These bonds promote
democratising processes because entails dialogues and reciprocal understanding,
and mutual respect, each other on the same topic within one or several areas of
discussion.
These constructs inform a framework for developing a successful model of
democratising schools based on three ethical and political principles:
– Transparency: Schools should be visible to citizen.
– Participation: Civic engagement.
– Collaboration: Civic involvement and democratic participation, collaboration
can be defined as a form of democratic participation that differs in important
ways from traditional participative and deliberative practices that often take
places in circumstances disconnected from decision making.
111
CONCLUSION
Based on the assumption that schools can play a significant role in the citizenship
development of students, contemporary schools are obligated to provide citizenship
education. However, the effectiveness of different forms of citizenship education is
still unclear. The theory of deliberative democracy is a framework to build cultural
knowledge where people have the right to share and connect directly, with
technologies enhancing these collaborative arrangements and making their effects
transparent. Collaboration helps schools to address educational problems by
bringing together families, teachers, administrators, and students, because they
possess complementary information that can be used to solve educational problems
in a democratic participatory way.
School governance is the process of planning and reflecting about goals and
results achieved by every organisation. No boundaries should exist. Traditional
school classifications deflect attention from hidden discourses about inequality,
disadvantage, poverty and oppression. On reflection governing schools should
consider not only cognitive achievement, but also economic, emotional and social
contexts and discourses
At schools, the relationship between information, transparency, and democracy
is fundamental. Openness and transparency is essential for teachers and students in
democratic schools. Transparency may enhance the integration of families,
students, and teachers into the educational project. Participation is the process by
which public concerns, needs, and values are incorporated into governmental and
corporate decision-making processes. It is difficult ideal to encourage, but it is
worthy of pursuing, if we aim for a more equitable global community.
REFERENCES
Angelides, P. (2010). The development of an efficient technique for collecting and analyzing qualitative
data: The analysis of critical incidents. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education,
14(3), 429–442. doi: 10.1080/09518390110029058
Bäcman, E., & Trafford, B. (2006). Democratic governance of schools. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Bartolome, L., & Macedo, D. O. (1997). Dancing with bigotry: The poisoning of racial and ethnic
identities. Harvard Educational Review, 67(1), 222–246.
Barr, R., & Dreeben, R. (1983). How schools work. Chicago, IL: University Chicago Press.
Bidwell, C. E. (2001). Analyzing schools as organizations: Long term permanence and short time
change. Sociology of Education, 74, 100–114.
Brydon-Miller, M., & Coghlan, D. (2014). The big picture: Implications and imperatives for the action
research community from the SAGE Encyclopedia of Action Research. Action Research, 12(2),
224–233. doi: 10.1177/14766750314533135
Calvo de Mora, J. (2008). School organisation paradigm based on an interactionist approach. In J. Calvo
de Mora (Ed), Sharing responsibilities and networking through school process (pp. 25–57). Granada:
University of Granada Press.
Calvo de Mora, J., & Wood, K. (2014). Practical knowledge in teacher education. London: Routledge.
Davies, L. (2002). Possibilities and limits for democratisation in education. Comparative Education,
38(3), 251–266.
112
Dodds, S., & Ankeny, R. (2006). Regulation of HESC research in Australia: Promises and pitfalls for
deliberative democratic approaches. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 3(1–2), 95–107. doi:
10.1080/00131881.2012.710087
Durrant, I., Peterson, A., Hoult, E., & Leith, L. (2012). Pupil and teacher perceptions of community
action: An English context. Educational Research, 54(3), 259–283.
Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Pumpian, I. (2012) How to create a culture of achievement in your school and
classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.
Fullan, M. (2009). Motion leadership: The skinny on becoming change savvy. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin.
Ginns, P., Martin, A. J., & Papworth, B. (2014). Student learning theory goes (back) to high school.
Instructional Science, 42, 485–504. doi: 10.1007/s 11251-013-9291-4
Hecht, Y. (2011). Democratic education, a beginning of a story. Israel: Alternative Education Resource
Organization.
Hoof, B. V., & Thielli, M. (2014). Collaboration capacity for sustainable supply chain management:
Small and medium-sized enterprises in Mexico. Journal of Clearer Production, 67, 239–248. doi:
10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.12.030
Isac, M. M., Ralf, M., Creemers, B., & van der Werf, G. (2014). The contribution of schooling to
secondary school students’ citizenship outcomes across countries. School Effectiveness and School
Improvement: an International Formal of Research, Policy and Practice, 25(1), 29–63. doi:
10.1080/09243453.2012.751035
Jaegher, H. (2013). Rigid and fluid interactions with institutions. Cognitive Systems Research, 25–26,
19–25. doi: 10.1016/j.cogsys.2013.03.002
Kennedy, K., (2012). Asian students’ citizenship values and their relationship to civic understanding:
An explanatory study comparing Thai and Hong Kong students. Research in Comparative and
International Education, 7(2), 248–259.
Kyraly, D. C. (1999). A social constructivist approach for translator education: Empowerment from
theory to practice. Manchester, UK: Saint Jerome Publishing.
Mullen, C. A. (2008). Democratically accountable: Leadership: A social justice perspective of
educational quality practice. Teacher Education Quarterly, 35(4), 137–153.
Pestoff, V. (2014). Collective action and the sustainability of co-production. Public Management
Review, 16(3), 383–401.
Powell, W. W. (1990). Neither markets nor hierarchy: Network forms of organizations. Research in
Organization Behavior, 12, 295–336.
Roberts-Gray, C., Gingis, P. M., & Boernm, M. (2007). Evaluating schools capacity to implement new
programs. Evaluation and Program Planning, 30, 247–257.
Rosie, A. J. (2000). ‘Deep Learning’: A dialectical approach drawing on tutorial-led web resources.
Active Learning in Higher Education, 1(1), 45–59.
Scott, W. R. (2001). Institutions and organizations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Warger, T., EduServe, & Dobbin, G. (2009). Learning Environments: Where space, technology, and
culture converge. Retrieved from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI3021.pdf
Warren, J. T., & Hytten, K. (2004). The faces of whiteness: Pitfalls and critical democrat.
Communication Education, 53(4), 321–339. doi: 10.10/036345032000305931
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sense making in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Weick, K. E., & Robert, K. H. (1993). Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating of flight
decks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 357–381.
Yalçinkaya, E. (2013). The effects of performance assessment approach on democratic attitudes of
students. Educational Research and Reviews, 8(8), 440–448.
Javier Calvo de Mora

Faculty of Education
University of Granada
113
SUZANNE MACQUEEN & KATE FERGUSON-PATRICK
9. WHERE’S THE ACTION IN GLOBAL EDUCATION?

Employing Global Education for Lasting Change
through Teacher Education
INTRODUCTION
Despite the well documented variance around definitions of global education, it is

generally agreed by global educators that one role of global education is to make
students aware of and sensitive to the inequities which exist globally, and to
encourage them to be future focussed and willing to take action for change.
Striving for global change is a noble ideal, and appears to affluent Western
communities to be reasonable and attainable (Kirkwood, 2001). If it were so easy
though, surely this goal, given a history of the global education movement going
back over 40 years (Abdullahi, 2011) would be nearing attainment or at least
making substantial inroads. So what has stopped us? There are, in fact, many
barriers to achieving this goal, such as ongoing world crises (Apple, 2010), which
we must persevere in trying to overcome (Apple, 2010). We suggest here that our
approaches as global educators, multiple though they may have been, are
inadequate in addressing major worldwide issues. Having developed from
movements in the United Kingdom and North America (for a history see Hicks,
2003), perhaps the fact that the global education movement is born from a position
of relative privilege is one aspect that requires further examination. It has often
been noted that we must avoid viewing those less fortunate—those living in
situations where change is most needed—as ‘other’, as it is so easy to do (Oxfam
Development Education Programme, 2006). Likewise, it has been noted that we
should avoid the reflexive response in the form of charity, which is also easy (for
affluent communities) to do, but does not achieve lasting change (Oxfam
Development Education Programme, 2006). What, then, should we do? How do we
employ global education for lasting change?
As a result of global capitalism and globalisation our 21st century students need
to be interconnected and interdependent to address the global issues that have
arisen, such as human rights abuses (Abdullahi, 2011; Cogan & Grossman, 2009).
When focussing on issues around how we learn to live together in a globally
interconnected world, a more reflective and critical pedagogy and curriculum is
encouraged (Starkey, 2012). This curriculum should examine power and privilege
as well as valuing marginalised knowledge such as third world and Indigenous
traditions and perspectives (Merryfield, 2009; Myers, 2010). We argue it is the
associated values with this reflective and critical pedagogy that help direct the

learning experiences and find ways for our students to take action for change.
Internationally a common set of values have emerged as well as best teaching
strategies to teach global values (Bliss, 2005; Merryfield & Wilson, 2005). In the
Australian context the National Framework for Values Education in Australian
Schools (DEST, 2005) focuses on values such as ‘fair go’ (a very Australian value
meaning social justice and equal opportunity); care and compassion; responsibility;
understanding, tolerance and inclusion; respect for freedom, rights and justice. The
recently published Global Perspectives: A Framework for the Development of
Active Global Citizenship in NSW Schools (Global Education Project New South
Wales, 2014) lists important values and attitudes as a sense of identity and self-
esteem; a sense of community; concern for the environment and commitment to
sustainable practices; a positive attitude towards diversity and difference and
commitment to upholding rights and dignity of all people.
It is important that we ensure explicit teaching of key values using values
terminology and model key globally acknowledged values in our courses while we
also encourage our pre-service teachers to do the same. They also need to develop
skills to discern different perspectives and values associated with key societal
issues, often controversial (Holden, 2007), so it is vital that our courses expose
students to some of the power and politics in teaching global issues and do not
always focus on the humanitarian aspects. Bates (2012) however notes the
importance of understanding the network of personal relationships ‘through the
embrace of diversity and shared purpose across national boundaries’ (p. 268) as
this too may also help people realise the importance of,
their shared common humanity. The overarching theme of the social justice
work being done to eradicate poverty and improve the life possibilities of the
marginalised is a better world is possible. Not content to just challenge the
unjust structures that exist, people throughout the world are joining together
to create social justice … through creating democratic spaces for building
inclusive community, and through action that links the local experience with
the global experience. (Shultz, 2007, p. 255)
It is the action needed to create a socially just world that we will explore in this
chapter. Drawing on research into global education initiatives and strategies with
teacher educators in a regional Australian university, we examine barriers to
meaningful change. We suggest that one barrier to action for real and lasting
change is the lack of that crucial element—ACTION—in Teacher Education (TE)
specifically as well as schooling generally. The importance of including action
with real consequences has been noted in relation to citizenship education (Banks,
2001) and education for the environment (Fien, 1993), and in Inquiry model
pedagogies generally (Reynolds, 2012). We will examine the lack of action in
current global education practice and suggest ways to increase this in our TE
programmes for ‘a better world’ in the future.
116
WHERE’S THE ACTION?
RESEARCHING GLOBAL EDUCATION WITH A LARGE

TEACHER EDUCATION COHORT
Firstly, let us set the scene realistically. Using a global education mindset, this
requires that we describe the researchers in this study in a way that is relevant. The
research reported on here is conducted by a group of like-minded female global
educators mostly from working class backgrounds, but who might now be
identified by many socioeconomic and cultural categorisations or frameworks as
white, middle class. We are employed at a large regional university in New South
Wales (NSW), Australia, and work hard, constrained by the market driven Higher
Education context, but live comfortably. Like most academics we struggle with
workload and feel stress and pressure from the demands of the sector to produce
outcomes and meet Key Performance Indicators, sometimes to the detriment of our
health and family situations (Gonzales, Martinez, & Ordu, 2014). Notwithstanding
those pressures, we strive to do our best in our teaching roles generally, and within
that, to incorporate at all possible times, a focus on the tenets of global education.
We travel, for recreation and conferences. We are teacher educators. We teach in
one of the largest providers of teacher education in NSW Australia with our first
year cohort being about 800 students. This is in comparison with other teacher
education providers who teach smaller cohorts. For example in 2005 the entire
cohorts of first-year pre-service teacher education candidates at three universities
in Sydney and Melbourne was 1,653 students (Richardson & Watt, 2006). Much of
the literature would suggest that like us, our pre-service teacher students are also
overwhelmingly white, middle class (Allard & Santoro, 2006; Mills, 2009). Some
of them are, but not all. At our university 27 percent of students are categorised as
low Socio Economic Status (SES) – the proportion being above the target set for
low SES enrolments by the Review of Australian Higher Education (Bradley,
Noonan, Nugent, & Scales, 2008) for 2020 (and accepted by the then Labor
government, but with a delayed target date of 2025). Within teacher education
programmes at this university, the percentage is substantially higher at well over 30
percent. That is approximately a third of our students coming from the lowest
socioeconomic quartile of the nation’s population. Many are first generation
university students: students whose parents and grandparents did not attend
university (Aspelmeier, Love, McGill, Elliott, & Pierce, 2012). Many of those first
generation students are mature age females with carer responsibilities. Our students
are, admittedly, well off by global standards: they suffer from first world problems
related to internet connections and inconvenient public transport timetables. By
Australian standards, though, they are mostly not middle class. This may mean that
their response to interpretation and implementation of global education may differ
from that of ‘typical’ TE students.
Our research has taken a multi-pronged approach over a period of 4 years
(Brown et al., 2013). We have surveyed undergraduate and postgraduate TE
students at various points in their programmes to determine their understanding of
and attitudes towards global education (Ferguson-Patrick, Macqueen, & Reynolds,
2014). Much of our research to date has been exploratory, while we sought to
117
develop our own practice and determine the needs, responses and future learning
preferences of our pre-service teachers. We have surveyed their responses to
specific courses where global education perspectives were included (Reynolds et
al., 2012) and we have surveyed their experiences of global education as seen
and/or taught during various Professional Experiences (Macqueen, Reynolds, &
Ferguson-Patrick, 2014). Additionally we have reflected on our own
understandings and practices with regard to global education (Reynolds et al.,2014)
In this chapter, we reflect on our research and teaching overall, drawing on
findings from various surveys and our own reflections and teaching to illuminate a
limitation of global education practice, both in our own work and in schools and
current NSW syllabus resources, related to authentic action.
Examining syllabus support documents

Examining NSW syllabus support and programme documents used in our TE
programmes shows that these rarely provide examples of activities requiring school
students to take action. One activity we engage in during a course about teaching
the Primary Human Society and Its Environment (HSIE) (Social Studies) syllabus
is looking at a variety of units of work published as companion to the NSW
syllabus. In analysing these for best practice in HSIE teaching/learning, we ask
students (among other things) to locate or suggest ‘taking action’ activities. As the
HSIE documents recommend an Inquiry Approach to HSIE, all units should
include some form of action, yet our pre-service teachers find such action difficult
to locate. An examination of integrated units (COGS units: Connected Outcomes
Groups) published by the NSW Department of Education and Training
(Curriculum Corporation, n.d.) reveals similar difficulties. Even those units
incorporating a social studies focus lack definitive action. Students may be asked to
consider questions such as ‘what do you think should be done’ (see for example
Living Lands S3) and even ‘what do I do …’, but there is no ‘now we will do …’
indication that positive action should be taken as an integral part of the unit. At
best, some of the units include action in the form of letters to the editor or a
government body as a form of lobbying for change or action. We do not intend to
attribute blame for this lack of action to the units’ authors – it may well have been
decided that the teachers delivering the units were best placed to determine and
incorporate such action and hence this was left open. Unfortunately though, when
units are provided for teachers by government departments, they are often taken at
face value and implemented exactly as they are written, rather than being
contextually modified to suit specific purposes (Macqueen, 2009). For example, in
many NSW schools the HSIE units have been seen as mandatory, rather than
examples of ways that outcomes could be addressed (Macqueen, 2009).
Accordingly, specific units have appeared in many schools’ scope and sequence
documentation, and schools in very different contexts were delivering basically the
same HSIE content in the same way; this was never the intention.
118
Survey data: What students see on Professional Experience

During Professional Experiences our pre-service teachers report seeing few
examples of global education focussed teaching, and even fewer that include action.
We acknowledge that, based on our earlier surveys, second year students may not
understand global education sufficiently to recognise it (Ferguson-Patrick et al.,
2014). However, the only activities that either second or third year students (who
have had additional exposure to global education) report seeing during their formal
placement are cultural days and special semi-regular events such as mini-Olympics
in certain years (Macqueen et al., 2014). Unfortunately this does not imbue them
with the idea that global education takes place in real schools and that it includes
taking action. Rather, they are likely to infer that global education is one of the
things that University Teacher Educators ‘ramble on’ about that has no connection
to ‘what really happens in schools’. With large cohorts, we are constantly
scrambling to find enough offers of placements for our students, so do not have the
luxury of trying to source opportunities where we know our students will be
exposed to good global education practice.
Barriers to teaching global education on Professional Experience

We ask our students undertaking Professional Experience what barriers they
experience or perceive with regard to incorporating global education while on their
Professional Experiences. Surveys were completed by 227 second and third year
students, but only 36 responded to this question. Two students mentioned that
global education was not relevant to their schools due to their rural location.
Another two felt that global education was not relevant for their Kindergarten
classes. These comments, from second year students, demonstrate a lack of
understanding on the students’ part which will hopefully be remedied before the
completion of their programmes. Their observations also suggest, however, that
global education is not happening in some rural and early schooling classes –
otherwise how could they reach such conclusions? Seven students indicated that
individual teachers omitted global education due to lack of interest or
understanding. Another seven comments related to the crowded curriculum with a
focus on standardised testing related to NSW Key Learning Areas of English and
Mathematics (Connell, 2013). These results will be examined in more detail in an
upcoming journal article. We have found that even when students are asked to
design a unit of work to teach on Professional Experience, action is unlikely to be
included (Macqueen, 2009). So, our students are seeing few examples of good
global education teaching in schools and even fewer examples of global education
action, and are unsure of how to include action in their own planning.
Our reflections as GE educators

We have noted the lack of action-taking in our own TE courses. This is partly due
to the crowded curriculum (similar to schools) where time is at a premium and the
119
most efficient (if not always effective) way to cover large quantities of content is
through lecture mode. Our members recall times when our courses were better
linked to communities and schools, with regular off campus excursions and in-
school activities additional to the Professional Experiences where pre-service
teachers could observe and practise in authentic ways. These inclusions, which
involved students in experiences such as teaching geography mapping skills or
experiencing excursions to museums or environmental centres have slowly
disappeared over the last 15 years (in our memories at least) due to factors such as
difficulties in having students attend such opportunities due to work and family
commitments. This led to, in some cases, providers becoming disenchanted by the
university students’ visits, as only a portion of the expected attendance occurred,
making the visits less fiscally viable. Changes in procedure such as more onerous
risk assessment requirements also made it less attractive for academic staff to
organise some community interactions due to additional workload (another issue
common to school teachers as well) in an increasingly demanding profession
(Nikunen, 2012). Although these experiences could not be classed as students
taking action, they could involve students in real teaching experiences that could
lead to such action taking. For example, if a student visited a school to teach
mapping skills, they might also get involved in the School Environmental
Management Plan (SEMP) (NSW Department of Education and Training, 2001)
which involves students in activities such as conducting energy audits. This
experience could show students the importance of sustainability in schools and
how important it is to take action in regard to living more sustainably locally as this
impacts our global resources. This is supported by Fien’s (1993) concept of
education for the environment, with a focus on action and participation, specific
values, social change and personal responsibility.
Our group attempted to rectify this lack of action taking through a project
linking international postgraduate students with our TE courses to provide global
perspectives in a face-to-face situation. A pilot project we ran in one elective
course involved international students sharing narratives about
environmental/sustainability issues from their countries, developing pre-service
teachers’ knowledge of ‘place knowledge and understanding’ and curriculum
practices around the world. International students in our School of Education are
mostly postgraduate, so there are limited experiences for our pre-service
undergraduate teachers to meet international students in their current cohort. It
allowed for comparison and reflection, creating space for cross cultural familiarity,
understanding and empathy. We considered that personalisation of international
issues through this interaction may encourage our students to take action, through
knowing someone with personal experience of a global education issue. Feedback
from international and domestic students suggested that this was a worthwhile and
successful initiative, so we attempted to develop it further. We designed a project
to develop multimedia resources for future blended tutorial groups and as
exemplars of this experiential narrative immersion, and prepared an application for
a modest amount of funding, so that we had time to properly structure the
interaction, create new resources, compensate international students for their input
120
and research the innovation’s effectiveness. Unfortunately economic constraints

have seen the grant scheme through which we were to seek funding disappear.
We are aware that in some other universities, pre-service teachers complete
courses which include intercultural visits, but this is untenable with a cohort with
the size and socioeconomic characteristics of ours. With the low SES backgrounds
of many of our students, the international experience version of global education is
mostly untenable at this point in time. There is limited financial support for such
initiatives, and even if funding was available, time away from home for study is
constrained for many in our student cohort by family and paid work commitments.
Despite this, we are currently trying to develop one such course. It is hoped that
those students able to complete it will bring back with them experiences and
perspectives to share with the remainder of the cohort so that some benefits will
flow on.
At our university there is an outreach programme which links pre-service
teachers with community projects where they can volunteer, providing a service
and gaining experience. Activities include homework centres, school reading
programmes or sporting events, as examples. Some of these opportunities may
involve affirmative action with a GE focus, but such activities are, of course,
voluntary, and university staff have no control over the quality of experience
involved. We are aware that some TE programmes include similar actions as part
of their courses, but we find this untenable due to our large cohorts. Many of our
students with work and family commitments, who are also studying full time so
they can enter the workforce as soon as possible, find it almost impossible to also
commit themselves to involvement in the community projects offered.
The only inclusion of action that we are currently aware of within our
courses occurs within an elective course, which is undertaken by a small
percentage of our students. In this course our students venture off-campus to
engage with school communities and community groups with an interest in
sustainability education. The project involves kitchen gardens within school
grounds and associated learning activities. To read more about one of these
programmes, see http://www.kitchengardenfoundation.org.au/news/news-item/
186/sustainability-week-at-bungwahl-public-school. Despite receiving favourable
formal feedback on behalf of students and informal feedback from community
partners, this initiative is also currently under threat from programme restructuring
which will likely see fewer opportunities for electives under a more prescribed
programme designed to meet multiple accreditation requirements.
DISCUSSION
With many barriers to real action for change, such as those noted above, how can
we hope to overcome this situation? We suggest that this requires a much more
proactive (no pun intended) approach than has been attempted to date. Teaching
through global education gives educators the opportunity to explicitly teach global
ways of acting, being and feeling. As Noddings (2002) asserted, assisting people to
act in caring and compassionate ways is the moral imperative of educators if the
121
values of responsibility and respect for the earth and its people are to be
encouraged. It is important that we encourage our students to view global
education in a way that has them concerned about economic and social justice as
well as understanding about care for the environment, diversity and peace
(Noddings, 2005).
Ensuring the better world proposed above requires more than adhering to certain
values. It requires enacting those values. We propose to develop global education
action as a lifelong way of being, and any action that helps to link the local
experience with the global one will assist with this. Action in our courses therefore
needs to focus on teaching these global ways of acting, being and feeling and
ensuring some of the more controversial issues that our students shy away from are
embraced.
Teacher education programmes which have tried to address diversity through
piecemeal approaches have been largely ineffective (McDonald, 2005): approaches
to global education must strive to avoid similar practices and fate. Despite the
challenges, we need to incorporate action as a foundational practice in our pre-
service teacher courses so that it becomes an automatic behaviour for our students,
and ultimately their students. It is important that we find ways in our TE courses
when we seek ways to drive action thinking in our students,
to unearth common interests and struggles as well as what is interconnected,
shared or different in educators’ and learners’ experiences … and pay …
attention to the ways in which communities, interests and voices are
constituted and to whose voices are included or excluded from public
debates … as well as pursue … issues that are common across boundaries
despite uneven and unequal material contexts. (Bates, 2012, p. 271)
Some of the ways we envisage this at our university include having students
identify global education actions they can engage in at a time/location which is
accessible for them and reflecting on this engagement in an assignment linked to a
specific course. For example they can contact local community groups and schools
and identify action taking projects they can become involved in. We could also
encourage them to create some of their own global education focussed literacy,
mathematics or physical education resources (in conjunction with proposed
recipients), such as games and hands on materials to be sent and used in
disadvantaged schools either here in Australia or overseas. This could hopefully be
linked to the study abroad programme we envisage, with some of our students
delivering and implementing some of the resources. These actions or similar will
need to be built in to our TE programme in the future to ensure effective global
education.
REFERENCES
Abdullahi, S. (2011). Rethinking global education in the twenty-first century. World Studies in
Education, 12(2), 77–91.
122
Allard, A., & Santoro, N. (2006). Troubling identities: Teacher education students’ constructions of
class and ethnicity. Cambridge Journal of Education, 36(1), 115–129.
Apple, M. (Ed.). (2010). Global crises, social justice, and education. New York: Routledge.
Aspelmeier, J., Love, M., McGill, L., Elliott, A., & Pierce, T. (2012). Self-esteem, locus of control,
college adjustment, and GPA among first- and continuing-generation students: A moderator model
of generational status. Research in Higher Education, 53(7), 755–781. doi: 10.1007/s11162-011-
9252-1
Banks, J. (2001). Citizenship education and diversity. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(1), 5–16.
Bates, R. (2012). Is global citizenship possible, and can international schools provide it? Journal of
Research in International Education, 11(3), 262–274.
Bliss, S. (2005). Learning to think by studying global education. Geography Bulletin, 37(3), 34–41.
Bradley, D., Noonan, P., Nugent, H., & Scales, B. (2008). Review of Australian higher education.
Canberra: Australian Government.
Brown, J., Donnelly, D., Bradberry, D., Ferguson-Patrick, K., Macqueen, S., & Reynolds, R. (2013).
Teaching global education: Lessons learned for classroom teachers [online]. Ethos, 21(1), 18–22.
Cogan, J., & Grossman, D. (2009). Characteristics of globally minded teachers: A twenty-first century
view. In T. Kirkwood-Tucker (Ed.), Visions in global education and the rest (same as for the
Merryfield ref (pp. 240–255). New York: Peter Lang Publishers.
Connell, R. (2013). The neoliberal cascade and education: An essay on the market agenda. Critical
Studies in Education, 54(2), 99–112.
Curriculum Corporation. (n.d.). Curriculum planning, programming, assessing & reporting to parents
K–12. Retrieved September 9, 2014, from http://www.curriculumsupport.education.nsw.gov.au/
timetoteach/cogs/unitses1.htm
Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST) (2005). National Framework for Values
Education in Australian Schools. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.
Practice, 20(2), 470–482.
Fien, J. (1993). Education for the environment. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University Press.
Global Education Project New South Wales. (2014). Global perspectives: A framework for the
development of active global citizenship in NSW schools. Sydney: Global Education Project New
South Wales.
Gonzales, L. , Martinez, E. , & Ordu, C. (2014). Exploring faculty experiences in a striving university
through the lens of academic capitalism. Studies in Higher Education, 39(7), 1097–1115. doi:
10.1080/03075079.2013.777401
Hicks, D. (2003). Thirty years of global education: A reminder of key principles and precedents.
Educational Review, 55(3), 265–275. doi: 10.1080/0013191032000118929
Holden, C. (2007). Teaching controversial issues. In D. Hicks & C. Holden (Eds.), The global
dimension (pp. 55–67). London: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.
Kirkwood, T. (2001). Our global age requires global education: Clarifying definitional ambiguities. The
Social Studies, 92(1), 10–15.
Macqueen, S. (2009). Values education through authentic integration: An example. The Social Educator
27(1), 16–22.
Macqueen, S., Reynolds, R., & Ferguson-Patrick, K. (2014). Practices and barriers in global education:
Reflections from professional experiences. Manuscript in preparation.
McDonald, M. (2005). The integration of social justice in teacher education dimensions of prospective
teachers’ opportunities to learn. Journal of Teacher Education, 56(5), 418–435.
Merryfield, M. (2009). Moving the center of global education. In T. Kirkwood-Tucker (Ed.), Visions in
global education: The globalization of curriculum and pedagogy in teacher education and schools:
Perspectives from Canada, Russia, and the United States (pp. 215–239). New York: Peter Lang.
Merryfield, M., & Wilson, A. (2005). Social studies and the world. Silver Spring, MD: National
Council of Social Studies.
123
Mills, C. (2009). Making sense of pre-service teachers’ dispositions towards social justice: Can teacher
education make a difference? Critical Studies in Education, 50(3), 277–288.
Myers, J. (2010). The curriculum of globalisation. In B. Subedi (Ed.), Critical global perspectives:
Rethinking knowledge about global societies (pp. 103–120). Charlotte, NC: IAP.
Nikunen, M. (2012). Changing university work, freedom, flexibility and family. Studies in Higher
Education, 37(6), 713–729.
Noddings, N. (2002). Educating moral people: A caring alternative to character education. Williston,
VT: Teachers College Press.
Noddings, N. (2005). Global citizenship: Promises and problems. In N. Noddings (Ed.), Educating
citizens for global awareness (pp. 1–21). New York: TC Press.
NSW Department of Education and Training. (2001). Implementing the environmental education policy
in your school. Ryde: NSW Department of Education and Training Curriculum Support Directorate.
Oxfam Development Education Programme. (2006). Education for global citizenship: A guide for
schools. Oxford, UK: Oxfam GB.
Reynolds, R. (2012). Teaching history, geography and SOSE in primary schools. Melbourne: Oxford
University Press.
Reynolds, R., Bradbery, D., Brown, J., Donnelly, D., Ferguson Patrick, K., & Macqueen, S. (2012,
December). Globalizing teacher training: Embedding global education perspectives in multi-
disciplinary pre-service teacher programs. Paper presented at the International Conference of the
Australian Association for Research in Education (AARE ) and the Asia Pacific Educational
Research Association (APERA), Sydney.
Reynolds, R., Bradbery, D., Brown, J., Donnelly, D., Ferguson-Patrick, K., & Macqueen, S. (2014).
Teacher educators teach global education: Addressing teacher educator decision making. Manuscript
submitted for publication.
Richardson, P., & Watt, H. (2006). Who chooses teaching and why? Profiling characteristics and
motivations across three Australian universities. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 34(1),
27–56. doi: 10.1080/13598660500480290
Shultz, L. (2007). Educating for global citizenship: Conflicting agendas and understandings. Alberta
Journal of Educational Research, 53(3), 248–258.
Starkey, H. (2012). Human rights, cosmopolitanism and utopias: Implications for citizenship education.
Cambridge Journal of Education, 42(1), 21–35. doi: 10.1080/0305764X.2011.651205
Suzanne Macqueen
School of Education
Kate Ferguson-Patrick
School of Education
124
DEBORAH BRADBERY & JOANNA BROWN
10. TEACHING WITH A VALUES STANCE FOR

GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP
Integrating Children’s Literature
INTRODUCTION
Children’s literature as a selection and compilation of symbols, words, diagrams

and pictures is a message mechanism that is today multimodal in its delivery.
Tschida, Ryan and Ticknor (2014) assert that children’s literature is ‘one of the
primary conduits for sending messages to students’ (p. 28). This message delivery
system is globally accepted as it is familiar, has the potential to educate, to
entertain, to stimulate and provoke thought; activities all of which have the power
to transform children’s thinking and actions for the good (Helterbran, 2009).
Literature ‘reflect[s] in one way or another ideology and the values of the society
in which they are written’ (Regev, 1992, p. 33). It is also an ‘expedient vehicle
through which to contest cultural systems and present marginalised views within a
majority form’ (Miller, 2014, p. 137). The author and illustrator’s deliberate
selection of symbols, words, diagrams and pictures assembled into the multiple
genres of children’s literature, represents a particular values stance. In the
examples represented in this article it is a stance associated with global education
and global citizenship skills and dispositions. This values stance portrays a cultural
language, tradition and identity of a particular group of people, places or things all
presented from the author’s chosen perspective. It delivers a particular message.
TEACHING WITH A VALUES STANCE
The values stance referred to in this article is a teaching, learning and research
approach identified by the Global Education, Research and Teaching Team
(GERT) at the University of Newcastle, Australia, and is guided by particular
values such as equality, social justice, cooperation, care for others and the
environment, diversity and difference, tolerance and inclusion, and respect for all
people (Reynolds et al., in press). It builds on ideas associated with transactional
theory developed by Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1999), Rosenblatt (2004) and
Vinterek (2010) reasoning that when we consider a situation we are guided by a
particular attitude or stance. It was asserted that taking a global stance meant that
the GERT team viewed the world through a particular global lens and we assumed

particular values (and enact particular strategies) as both a cause and as a result of
this lens. This values stance can serve as a filter for teachers when selecting
children’s literature to support global education lessons and units of work.
Carefully selected children’s literature can provide a wealth of information on key
societal and global issues, globally acknowledged values, or lack thereof, and
caring or intolerant communities. Children’s literature has the capacity to present
values in familiar and child friendly scenarios that enable teacher scaffolded
clarification, discussion and debate aimed at classroom and student transformation
for the good (Milson & Mehlig, 2002). Research has long recognised the benefits
of including children’s literature into teaching programmes aimed at promoting
personal transformations and community values (Miller, 2011; Edgington, 2002;
O’Sullivan, 2004). Purposefully chosen examples of high quality children’s
literature selected for teaching programmes, can develop feelings of curiosity,
initiative, persistence and resilience in children and promote dispositions of global
citizenship. As Ozolins (2010) asserts, teaching for morally virtuous people is what
schools should be aiming for, and children’s picture books should be included in
teaching programmes to help teachers to plan for this.
LITERATURE AS A TOOL TO HELP CHILDREN ENGAGE WITH VALUES:

THE TEACHER’S ROLE
The actual process of choosing which pieces of children’s literature to use is a

culturally and socially mediated process where the teacher takes on the role of the
arbitrator (Helterbran, 2009). The teacher, thus, has a crucial role to play during the
literature selection process. In this role the teacher will hold particular assumptions
and values that will influence which books are chosen over others. This is not a
linear approach but a complex web of influence where each of the values held by
the teacher choosing the texts impact on and are impacted by values at all levels.
The teacher’s personal values are influenced by the school or systemic determined
values in which they work and these of course are influenced by societal, spiritual
and community values which in turn usually influence personal values (Brady,
2011). An unstated assumption in the Australian Curriculum, that perhaps should
be stated, is that teachers must select all resources carefully being cognisant of the
fact that there exists ‘manipulation by particular groups attempting to assert a
specific cultural imperative’ (Miller, 2014, p. 137). We suggest that the self
clarification of their values stance by teachers in the resource selection process
provides a mechanism for awareness of and filtering of such manipulation.
The teacher has a role to play in not only critiquing the literature to determine
the values stance taken by the author but then determining if this values stance fits
with the principal values guiding their own approach to planning lessons and units
of work. Deakin Crick (2009) writes of the importance of a pedagogy of inquiry
which ‘addresses questions of value … through the narratives uncovered in the
world-as-it-is-experienced by the learner’ (p. 73). Literature is able to bring
versions of the world, its narratives of people and events, to the classroom,
mediated carefully by the teacher. Reynolds et al. (in press) posit that through a
126
pedagogy of inquiry students are encouraged to develop feelings of curiosity,

initiative, persistence and resilience; all of which provide a sound conceptual basis
for understanding and questioning values. This pedagogy of inquiry can be
initiated and developed using well-chosen literature that enables understanding and
negotiating one’s place in our world from a values stance.
LITERATURE AS A TOOL TO HELP CHILDREN TO ENGAGE WITH VALUES:

CLASSROOM STRATEGIES
Milson and Mehlig (2002) suggest that although teachers believe they can model
the values and global citizenship dispositions that students need and deserve,
students can also benefit from this infusing of and integrating values education and
global citizenship dispositions into the curriculum (Swick & Freeman, 2004).
Literature is fortunate in being able to deliver to the curriculum both familiar and
unfamiliar contexts where the reader or viewer can exist vicariously and safely as
they engage with discussion and debate about what can at times be difficult issues
and values. For example, in pre-school and kindergarten, children are given
opportunities to realise their own responsibilities and to understand personal
conflicts such as guilt (Krause, Bochner, Duchesne, & McMaugh, 2010). They
move on from these developmental understandings to those where they see
themselves not always from an isolated egocentric position but as a coming
together with others, at times competing and striving for success. Comparison with
peers becomes inevitable, not always positively, and can result in both ‘favourable
and unfavourable self-concept outcomes’ (Krause et al., 2010, p. 106). Feelings
and emotions during engagement with personal conflicts and competitive peer
processes can be powerful, so sharing with children well-chosen literature, guided
by values such as, diversity, difference and cooperation can help them to navigate
what is often uncertain and at times rocky terrain to help build and strengthen their
resilience (Australian Government Department of Health, n.d.).
As children’s literature is not confined to a single genre, the differing text
structures such as plot, characterisation, subject and visual elements (Liang,
Watkins, & Williams, 2013) all offer various ways of portraying diverse values to
help children identify and clarify their problems. The idea of a plot where there is a
beginning, middle and end provides guidance for the child in that they can see
some sort of resolution to issues and problems that arise in their lives. The
characters and events portrayed in literature can help children identify with human
feelings attached to values. The subject of the literature may be dedicated to a
particular value such as honesty, tolerance, inclusion and respect for all people or it
may simply be one of many values that can be elicited from a text. The visual
elements in literature likewise provide an alternative method of presenting simple
to complex ideas, some of which will be linked to globally oriented values such as
social justice, diversity and cooperation.
The safe and secure environment of the classroom allows school students to test
their skills as critics of what can often be seen as controversial issues (Holden,
2002) presented in an alternate world provided by literature (Bradbery, 2013) . In
127
this safe world of the classroom, supported by their teacher, students enacting the
roles of the reader (code breaker, text participant, text user and text analyst) (Luke
& Freebody, 1999) have the opportunity to see, think about and discuss examples
and non examples of values based concepts such as inclusive practices, honesty,
resilience and respect for others. They can also query the purpose of the writer.
When utilising children’s literature and asking students to adopt the role of text
analyst, teachers are helping students to question such issues as who wrote the text,
what the author wanted the reader to believe, and what information the author
chose to include or exclude from the text, thereby integrating teaching about the
values of honesty and integrity (McLaughlin & DeVoogd, 2004).
The difficulty with defining exactly what and how to teach for the values
education expected by the education systems in which these schools and these
students exist, is evident when examining the literature surrounding these debates
(for example, see Department of Education, Science and Training, 2005; Lovat,
Dally, Clement, & Toomey, 2011). Highly controversial and very important
problems in our society such as bullying, racism (Applebaum, 2005), diversity and
social justice, and spirituality are all issues common in our schools and relate to the
teaching of values in some way. Teachers have an obligation both to care for their
students and to teach their students to care (Noddings, 2010), offering diverse
perspectives representative of our world and supportive of global citizenship skills
and dispositions.
LITERATURE AS A TOOL TO HELP CHILDREN TO ENGAGE WITH VALUES:

SOME EXAMPLES
Issues such as inclusivity and acceptance of diversity can be explored and

examined through children’s picture books such as Todd Parr’s (2009) It’s Okay
To Be Different. Utilising this text as part of a globally focussed curriculum,
teachers can activate knowledge about diversity by exploring the words different
and similar and teaching what the term diversity means. Through the use of
discussions about diversity and by providing students with practice working
collaboratively in small groups, ideas can be generated and books about diversity
can be created. Another beautiful text that celebrates diversity in cultures,
sameness, difference and friendship is Whoever You Are (Fox, 1997). This text can
assist teachers to explore and provide models for values such as tolerance,
understanding, care and compassion (Arthur & Carr, 2013) through the simple text
and visually stimulating illustrations by Leslie Straub. Texts such as Rose Meets
Mr Wintergarten by Bob Graham (2004) help to connect children to real people in
their local communities. It is perfect for raising moral issues such as being kind and
the effects of prejudice and a lack of tolerance on other people’s lives. This is a
beautifully crafted story with larger than life characters and a fully developed plot
in which symbolism of words and pictures is central.
Very current, news-making and relevant global issues such as peace building,
conflict resolution, tolerance and understanding of refugees and asylum seekers can
be examined and discussed by teachers utilising the children’s picture book, The
128
Little Refugee (Do & Do, 2011). Using Do’s story of his amazing journey, teachers
can program for themes such as refugees and war and dispossession while teaching
about the values of compassion, resilience and hope. In one part of the story, after
having her sewing machines stolen from the backyard shed, Anh Do’s mother
stoically hugs her son huddling under his bed and says, ‘you must always have
hope’ (p. 21). Teaching programmes can demonstrate how children could learn to
empathise with Anh and his family in this situation and understand their struggle to
make friends and earn a living in a new and sometimes unwelcoming land. The
book can also be used by teachers to help refugee children to know that they are
not unique in their struggle to make friends and integrate into what is sometimes a
hostile or at the best indifferent schooling system. The use of the first person
narrative in Anh’s story can be used to help children understand that refugees are
simply ordinary people caught in extraordinary circumstances (Hope, 2008). This
story of hope and resilience can be utilised to help children to understand the
importance of the fair and equitable treatment of all people, no matter where they
have come from or are now living. Other very valuable picture books that can
assist teachers in confronting and offering different perspectives on the global issue
of refugees and asylum seekers are The Arrival by Shaun Tan (2006), The Island
by Armin Greder (2007) and Home and Away by John Marsden and Matt Ottley
(2013).
To introduce and discuss the issue of living for a sustainable future the text The
Tomorrow Book by Jackie French and illustrated by Sue deGennaro (2010) can be
utilised by teachers. The book emphasises the need to work together as global
citizens to save our world and focuses on our influences on the environment and
how we can work together to reduce our impact on the earth. It is concerned with
the values of responsibility and understanding: that by seeking to understand each
other and the natural world we are closer to becoming global citizens by reducing,
reusing and recycling the limited natural resources on Earth. Living for a
sustainable future can be made a high priority for teachers helping to promote
behaviour change so that children can feel they could make a difference. Actions
can be small but developmentally appropriate. Utlising The Tomorrow Book
(French & deGennaro, 2010) many activities can be applied to the everyday lives
of children, teachers, and parents.
Sustainability is also a focus of many of Jeannie Baker’s books. By using a
window to frame the changing views of a landscape, a landscape that could be
familiar to many urbanised children, Jeannie Baker focuses the reader’s attention
on the environment and the changes brought about by man’s urban sprawl and
urban gentrification in Where the Forest Meets the Sea (1988), Window (1991),
Belonging (Baker). By doing so she also provides readers with opportunities to
formulate their own plans for regeneration to live for a sustainable future and take
action in their local communities. Wordless picture books such as Baker’s Window
(1991), Mirror (2010) and Belonging (2004) give children and adults the
opportunity to use more words and a richer vocabulary than may have been
provided by the author and bring the teaching of morally virtuous, resilient people
to the fore of their programming.
129
Uno’s Garden (Base, 2006), a children’s picture book depicting an ecological

account of what happens when humans occupy a natural area, could be utilised to
chart the data presented on each page to illustrate the effects on non-sustainable
urbanisation (Pike & Selby, 2000) and to work for habitat restoration and
demonstrate the benefits of reforestation. When Uno realises the effect his ‘love’
for the forest he has found has on the lush plants and the most fantastic creatures he
has ever seen, to help combat the encroaching civilisation, he starts a special
garden that does not have the vegetables and flowers of other gardens, but allows
his children and grandchildren to have hope for the future. This text helps teachers
to assist children to examine and change personal lifestyles to secure a sustainable
future; to identify, investigate, evaluate and undertake appropriate action to
maintain, protect and enhance local and global environments; to challenge
preconceived ideas, accept change and acknowledge uncertainty and to work
cooperatively and in partnerships with others to truly embody and enact the
knowledge, skills and values of living for a sustainable future (Davis, 2008), clear
focuses when teaching for global citizenship.
CONCLUSION
Children’s literature that encourages children to develop critical thinking abilities,

an appreciation for diverse cultures, and a sense of fairness are vital for a child’s
intellectual, social and cultural development (Baker, Martin, & Pence, 2008). This
literature has the potential to help children examine and change personal lifestyles
to secure a sustainable future; to identify, investigate, evaluate and undertake
appropriate action to maintain, protect and enhance local and global environments;
to challenge preconceived ideas, accept change and acknowledge uncertainty and
to work cooperatively and in partnerships with others (Medress, 2008). Thus the
use of children’s literature is a well-documented approach to instilling values in
children’s responses to important issues in education (O’Sullivan, 2004) and
examining carefully selected texts based on globally oriented values, those that can
provide direction for our society, can help teachers to integrate teaching for global
citizenship skills and dispositions. Children’s literature provides the opportunity
for a values stance.
REFERENCES
Applebaum, B. (2005). In the name of morality: Moral responsibility, whiteness and social justice
education. Journal of Moral Education, 34(3), 277–290.
Arthur, J., & Carr, D. (2013). Character in learning for life: A virtue-ethical rationale for recent
research on moral and values education. Journal of Beliefs & Values, 34(1), 26–35.
Australian Government Department of Health. (n.d.). Mind matters. Retrieved from
www.mindmatters.edu.au
Baker, J. (1988). Where the forest meets the sea. Sydney: Harper Collins.
Baker, J. (1991). Window. Sydney: Julia MacRae Books.
Baker, J. (2004). Belonging. Sydney: Walker Books.
Baker, J. (2010). Mirror. UK: Walker Books.
130
Baker, M., Martin, D., & Pence, H. (2008). Supporting peace education in teacher education programs.
Childhood Education, 85(1), 20–25.
Base, G. (2006). Uno’s garden. Australia, Penguin Viking.
Bradbery, D. (2013). Bridges to global citizenship: Ecologically sustainable futures utilising children’s
literature in teacher education. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 29(2), 221–237.
Bradbery, D., Brown, J., Donnelly, D., Ferguson Patrick, K., Macqueen, S., & Reynolds, R. (2013).
Teaching global education: Lessons learned for classroom teachers. Ethos, 21(1), 18–22.
Brady, L. (2011). Teacher values and relationship: factors in values education. Australian Journal of
Teacher Education, 36(2), 56–66
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (1999). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in
communities. Review of Research in Education, 24, 249–305.
Curriculum Corporation. (2008). Global perspectives: A framework for global education in Australian
schools. Carlton South, VIC: Curriculum Corporation.
Davis, J. M. (2008). What might education for sustainability look like in early childhood? A case for
participatory, whole-of-settings approaches. In I. Pramling-Samulesson & Y. Kaga (Eds.), The
contribution of early childhood education to a sustainable society (pp. 18–24). Paris: UNESCO
Report.
Deakin Crick, R. (2009). Inquiry-based learning: Reconciling the personal with the public in a
democratic and archaeological pedagogy. The Curriculum Journal, 20(1), 73–92.
Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. (2011). National framework: Nine
values education for Australian schooling. Retrieved from http://www.valueseducation.edu.au/
values/default.asp?id=14515
Department of Education, Science and Training. (2005). National framework for values education
in Australian schools. Retrieved from http://www.valueseducation.edu.au/verve/_resources/
Framework_PDF_version_for_the_web.pdf
Do, A., & Do, S. (2011). The littlest refugee. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.
Edgington, W. D. (2002). To promote character education, use literature for children and adolescents.
The Social Studies, 93(3), 113–116.
Fox, M. (1997). Whoever you are. Florida: Harcourt Books.
French, J., & deGennaro, S. (2010). The tomorrow book. Sydney: Harper Collins
Graham, B. (2004). Rose meets Mr Wintergarten. Sydney: Walker Books, Australia.
Greder, A. (2007). The island. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.
Helterbran, V. R. (2009). Linking character education and global understanding through children’s
picture books. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 45(2), 69–73.
Holden, C. (2002). Teaching the tricky bits: Topical, political and controversial issues. Education 3-13,
30(2), 17–23.
Hope, J. (2008). One day we had to run: The development of the refugee identity in children’s literature
and its function in education. Children’s Literature in Education, 39(4), 295–304.
Krause, K., Bochner, S., Duchesne, S., & McMaugh, A. (2010). Educational psychology for learning
and teaching. Victoria, Australia: Cengage Learning.
Liang, L. A., Watkins, N., Williams, V. (2013). A step toward global awareness: An examination of
USBBY outstanding international books for the primary grades. Journal of Children’s Literature,
39(1), 16–24.
Lovat, T., Dally, K., Clement, N., & Toomey, R. (2011). Values pedagogy and teacher education:
Reconceiving the foundations. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(7), 31–44.
Luke, A., & Freebody, P. (1999). Further notes on the four resources model [Online forum
commentary]. Retrieved from http://www.readingonline.org/research/lukefreebody.html
Marsden, J., & Ottley, M. (2013). Home and away. Hachette Australia: Lothian Books.
McLaughlin, M., & DeVoogd, G. L. (2004). Critical literacy: Enhancing students’ comprehension of
text. New York: Scholastic.
Medress, A. (2008). Storybooks: A teaching tool for sustainability. Independent Study Project (ISP)
Collection, Paper 65.
131
Miller, A. (2014). Unsuited to age group: The scandals of children’s literature. College Literature, 41(2),
120–140.
Miller, S. (2011). Positive role models vs. bullies: Can they be distinguished by following articulate
animals into worlds of suspended disbelief? Forum on Public Policy Online, 2011(1), 0–16.
Milson, A. J., & L. M. Mehlig (2002). Elementary school teachers’ sense of efficacy for character
education. The Journal of Educational Research, 96(1), 47–53.
Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affair. (2008). Melbourne
declaration on education goals for young Australians. Canberra: Author.
Noddings, N. (2010). Moral education in an age of globalization. Educational Philosophy and Theory,
42(4), 390–396.
O’Sullivan, S. (2004). Books to live by: Using children’s literature for character education. The Reading
Teacher, 57(7), 640–645.
Ozolins, J. T. (2010). Creating public values: Schools as moral habitats. Educational Philosophy and
Theory, 42(4), 410–423.
Parr, T. (2009). It’s okay to be different. New York: Little Brown & Co.
Pike, G., & Selby, D. (2000). In the global classroom. Toronto: Pippin Press.
Regev, M. (1992). Reflections, society, ideology and values in Israeli children’s literature. Tel Aviv:
Ophir (Hebrew).
Reynolds, R., Bradbery, D., Brown, J., Donnelly, D., Ferguson-Patrick, K., Macqueen, S., & Ross, A.
(in press). A values-based pedagogical stance: Teaching teachers for global education in Australia.
In B. Maguth & J. Hillburn (Eds.), The state of global education: Learning with the world and its
people. New York: Routledge.
Rosenblatt, L. M. (2004). The transactional theory of reading and writing: Article 48. In R. B. Ruddell
& N. J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., pp. 1363–1398).
Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Swick, K. J., & Freeman, N. K. (2004). Nurturing peaceful children to create a caring world the role of
families and communities. Childhood Education, 81(1), 2–8.
Tan, S. (2006). The arrival. London: Hodder Children’s Books.
Tschida, C. M., Ryan, C. L., & Ticknor, A. S. (2014). Building on windows and mirrors: Encouraging
the disruption of “single stories” through children’s literature. Journal of Children’s Literature,
40(1), 28–39.
Vinterek, M. (2010). How to live democracy in the classroom. Education Inquiry, 1(4), 367–380.
Deborah Bradbery
School of Education
Joanna Brown
School of Education
132
SECTION 4
DECONSTRUCTING GLOBAL EDUCATION

FRAN MARTIN & FATIMA PIRBHAI-ILLICH
11. SERVICE LEARNING AS

POST-COLONIAL DISCOURSE
Active Global Citizenship
DEFINING THE AREA OF STUDY
In this section, we define service-learning (SL) and show how, whether enacted
locally or internationally, it can take on a neo-colonial form. Service-learning is
experiential and thus is ‘active’ citizenship. We argue that while the intentions of
SL are usually to make a positive difference to the communities in receipt of the
service, the actions themselves often unwittingly reinforce the status quo due to a
lack of understanding of the socio-political and historical factors that affect the
server-recipient relationship. To highlight these factors we provide an overview of
postcolonial theory, which we use as a framework for our research into service-
learning.
Service-learning
Service-learning, sometimes called community service-learning, is a form of
experiential learning and has been around for almost a century (Kraft, 1996), being
largely based on the work of John Dewey, Jean Piaget, Paulo Freire, David Kolb,
and Ivan Illich. Kolb (1984) defined experiential learning as ‘the process whereby
knowledge is created through the transformation of experience’ (p. 38) and Dewey
(1938) noted that not all of these experiences ‘are genuine or equally educative. …
Everything depends on the quality of the experience’ and affects our future
because, ‘every experience lives on in further experiences’ (pp. 25–26). Dewey’s
instrumental and foundational contribution to the field include linking education to:
1) experience, 2) democratic community, 3) social service, 4) reflective inquiry, 5)
education for social transformation.
Two types of service-learning are commonly identified: traditional service-
learning and critical service-learning, both of which are practised at different
scales, locally and internationally. Traditional service-learning, a widely
recognised and much used pedagogical approach for civic involvement in
education, is a mediating tool between educational institutions and the community.
At local levels, we generally see civic engagement at sites such as local food banks
and working at shelters for the homeless whilst at the international level,
institutions in the global north tend to send their students to the global south1 to
learn and serve in the fields of health and medical fields, business, education and

development. This traditional and highly varied practice may provide students the
necessary knowledge about the community through civic engagement. However
this conceptualisation of service-learning has the potential to reinforce, perpetuate,
and reproduce notions of privilege, inequity and power.
An alternative approach – critical service-learning – is envisioned as a
politicised and social justice oriented pedagogical practice that not only attempts to
meet the needs of a particular community but also, ‘embraces the political nature of
service and seeks social justice over more traditional views of citizenship’
(Mitchell, 2008, p. 51). Thus it becomes ‘a problem-solving instrument of social
and political reform’ (Fenwick, 2001, p. 6) resulting in a more complex politicised
project that attempts to raise critical consciousness, self-reflexivity and
engagement in advocacy for social and civic transformation.
In our respective research projects into service-learning, we use postcolonial
theory as an analytical lens for interpreting policy, practice, and our data. We argue
that colonial ways of knowing and being, prevalent during the spread of
imperialism, are still privileged in relations between the Global North and the
Global South today.
Postcolonial theory
Joanne Sharp (2009) makes a distinction between post-colonial, with a hyphen, and
postcolonial, without a hyphen. The former refers to a period after colonialism in
countries (often in the Global South) that were formerly colonised and gained
independence. The latter is the term given to a theory that developed in the Global
South as a coherent set of ideas that enabled those who were colonised to ‘speak
and write back’ to the colonisers (Spivak, 1990). Central to the theory are a number
of key ideas, including:
1. The world is in a post-colonial era. However, postcolonialists argue that while
this has brought political and some economic independence there has yet to be a
‘decolonisation of the mind’ (Sharp, 2009).
2. Postcolonial theory focuses on the politics of knowledge. It shows how
colonising societies used a binary, hierarchical structure of knowledge to create
distinctions between self and the Other (Said, 1985) creating a binary power-
relationship of us-them, like-unlike, civilised-savage. Colonised countries were
placed in an inferior, deficit light by the standards of the colonising countries
that perceived themselves as superior – modern, industrial, technologically
advanced, democratic and able to generate wealth through the processes of high
mass consumption.
3. The coloniser-colonised relationship was based on an exploitative model
whereby colonised countries were dominated and plundered for high value
resources, including human beings, for the colonisers’ economic benefit. It
enabled colonisers to argue that the savage, backward Other had little
sophisticated use for physical resources, and that as savages they were somehow
less than human.
136
LEARNING AS POST-COLONIAL DISCOURSE
4. The positioning of the Other as less than human enabled colonisers to justify
taking power, since the colonised were depicted as helpless, childlike, unable to
make rational decisions, and in need of a father-figure to help them develop
towards modernity.
Postcolonial writers emphasise that the legacy of colonialism is visible in the
structures and inter-relationships of the 21st century at a variety of scales, locally
and globally. Sociologists use the concept of the ‘imaginary’ (Anderson, 1991;
Taylor, 2007) to describe how representations of people, cultures and societies are
often more to do with the imagination and symbolism than with reality. For
example, a colonial imaginary is often based on notions of identity that are
simplistic rather than multidimensional, exotic rather than everyday, and are
essentialist (based on the idea that the characteristics of groups are a matter of
nature). In the colonial imaginary the characteristics of, for example, Africa and
African identity have become fixed into a stereotype that the Nigerian author,
Chimamanda Adichie, describes as both
a place of beautiful landscapes, beautiful animals, and incomprehensible
people, fighting senseless wars, dying of poverty and AIDS, unable to speak
for themselves, and waiting to be saved by a kind, white foreigner. (Adichie,
2009, p. 2)
Stuart Hall (2007) argued that it was necessary to deconstruct the colonised
imaginary if people in the West were ever to learn to live with difference. His ideas
can be applied to global relations including activities such as international service-
learning. Andreotti (2011) observed that in deconstructing the colonising discourse
the aim was not to privilege another discourse in its place, but rather to raise
awareness of the discourses that are evident, which discourses or ways of knowing
and being are silenced, and to offer a pluralistic way forward.
ISSUES IN GLOBAL EDUCATION AND SERVICE-LEARNING: DECONSTRUCTING

GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP DISCOURSES IN CANADA AND THE UK
The practices of service-learning and global citizenship are not neutral. They are
underpinned, consciously or not, by particular ideologies or orientations (Van Dijk,
2006). In this section we explore the influence of different ideologies on global
citizenship and service-learning, as evident in policy and curriculum documents.
We are both involved in an international project on Ethical Internationalism in
Higher Education that has identified four broad ideologies for global citizenship
education (Table 1).
These ideologies intersect with different imaginaries. In the context of service-
learning and global citizenship, we identify two imaginaries as being particularly
influential on education policy and practice: the political (as evident in policy
documents) and the social (as evident in popular social discourse). In the
following, we explore the political and social imaginaries evident in Canadian and
British global citizenship education policy, and the ideologies that appear to
underpin them.
137
Table 1. Four ideologies for global citizenship education (adapted from

http://eihe.blogspot.co.uk)
Ideology Educational Aims
Neo-liberal To produce citizens who are economically productive, mobile

and able to successfully compete in a global economy
Classical To produce national citizens who have gained cultural

knowledge and are able to be nationally-integrated
autonomous subjects
Liberal To produce citizens who are personally autonomous,

compassionate, able to think for themselves and to act for the
betterment of the world
Critical To produce citizens who are oriented towards change of a

radical kind, being critical of systems that reproduce injustice
and seeking to destabilise the status quo
Canada has no national curriculum – each province makes its own

arrangements. In Saskatchewan, Citizenship is identified as one of three broad
themes that should be integrated into the nine curriculum areas of study. There is
an emphasis on developing engaged citizens as shown in the following educational
outcomes:
Students demonstrate confidence, courage, and commitment in shaping
positive change for the benefit of all. They contribute to the environmental,
social, and economic sustainability of local and global communities. Their
informed life, career, and consumer decisions support positive actions that
recognise a broader relationship with, and responsibility for, natural and
constructed environments. Along with this responsibility, students recognise
and respect the mutual benefits of Charter, Treaty, and other constitutional
rights and relationships. Through this recognition, students advocate for self
and others, and act for the common good as engaged citizens. (Saskatchewan
Ministry of Education, 2010, p. 23)
The focus on democracy, legal rights and sound economic management reflect
elements of the neo-liberal and liberal ideologies. It could also be argued that the
inclusion of shaping positive change, sustainability and interdependent
relationships with social, built and natural environments provides a liberal
orientation with elements of criticality. However, Tupper (2006) notes that
‘citizenship operates in schools to espouse a vision for students and teachers of
what is “good” and “responsible” without really interrogating the concept itself’
(p. 45). She argues that the notion of citizenship as a universal idea, as indicated in
‘for the common good’, masks ‘the inequities that exist for many individuals
138
attempting to live fully as citizens’ (Tupper, 2006, p. 47). In the enacting of

citizenship, rather than developing an understanding of what might be involved in
‘shaping positive change for the benefit of all’ (Tupper, 2006, p. 47), the focus is
on acting responsibly within existing socio-political structures – doing good being
reduced to individual actions of recycling, voting, making charitable contributions
and obeying laws.
In the UK a national curriculum for citizenship has been in place since 2002.
The citizenship curriculum aims to:
provide pupils with knowledge, skills and understanding to prepare them to
play a full and active part in society. In particular, citizenship education
should foster pupils’ keen awareness and understanding of democracy,
government and how laws are made and upheld. Teaching should equip
pupils with the skills and knowledge to explore political and social issues
critically, to weigh evidence, debate and make reasoned arguments. It should
also prepare pupils to take their place in society as responsible citizens,
manage their money well and make sound financial decisions. (Department
of Education, 2013, p. 1)
This suggests a relatively even balance across the neoliberal, classical and liberal
ideologies. Although criticality is mentioned, it is against a backdrop of upholding
current laws, developing knowledge of current systems, and taking place in society
as it is, rather than as it might become. However, the political imaginary for global
citizenship is much more neoliberal in orientation. UK education policy is full of
references to global citizenship education being an instrumental political tool to
maintain the UK in a prime position in the world economy (Andreotti, 2011). The
social imaginary, on the other hand, is more aligned to liberal goals based on ideals
of ‘voluntourism’ (Elliot, 2013), a term coined to reflect the desire of many in the
West to combine exotic tourist experiences with volunteering. As Zakaria (2014)
pointed out, ‘as admirably altruistic as it sounds, the problem with voluntourism is
its singular focus on the volunteer’s quest for experience, as opposed to the
recipient community’s actual needs’ (p. 2). We argue that the voluntourism
imaginary has strongly influenced how students position themselves in
International Service-Learning, which has become threaded through by a White
Saviour Industrial Complex (Krabill, 2012), where the orientation towards the
service provided is based on sentimentalism. Although social and community
engagement is promoted as a form of social justice, the reality is often ‘about
having a big emotional experience that validates privilege’ (Krabill, 2012, p. 52).
From a postcolonial perspective, the ideologies show different aspects of the
legacy of colonialism. Neo-liberalism is based on exploitation and domination of
global markets and economic capital; classical ideology is based on reproduction of
western forms of knowledge, cultural capital and privilege; liberalism is based on
paternalism and the saviour mentality. Critical ideology is the only one that aims
for radical change of a systemic kind, but even here there is the danger that at the
point of contact and interaction, unless deeply held assumptions based on a
colonial mindset have been challenged and deconstructed, inequalities will
139
continue to prevail. This process of decolonising the mind (Thiong’o, 1986) is the
subject of the two pieces of empirical research that we go on to report below.
TWO CASES: SERVICE-LEARNING AND THE

PRODUCTION OF GLOBAL CITIZENS
Canada: Local critical service learning with active global citizenship dimensions
In Canadian educational institutions, Aboriginal students are the most
disadvantaged (Riecken, Tanaka, & Scott, 2006) with few reaching and completing
tertiary level education. In Canada, the term Aboriginal refers to three groups of
peoples: First Nations, Metis (people of mixed white and First Nations ancestry),
and Inuit. For the purposes of this paper, we use the terms Aboriginal and First
Nations interchangeably. It appears that mainstream educational institutions
continue to use assimilative and ethnocentric curricula, have insufficient role
models, and have minimum requirements for intercultural education. The ensuing
academic struggles of Aboriginal students are often depicted from a deficit
perspective where students, parents and community are seen as being responsible
for the lack of academic success.
A culturally responsive literacy education course with a critical service-learning
component was created to explore ways in which to educate young adolescent
Aboriginal students who are at promise to both achieve the academic demands for
secondary school completion and to participate in an increasingly complicated
cultural and technological society. Following Swadener and Lubeck (1995) we use
the term ‘at-promise’ to indicate that these students demonstrate potential; potential
to succeed, thus moving away from positioning the students from a deficit lens as a
starting point.
This local critical service-learning project took place in a mid-western province
in Canada between two institutions, the faculty of education at a medium sized
university and a residential alternative school (OTAS) for students in care where
more than 80% of children and adolescents are of Aboriginal descent. The
compulsory requirement was tutoring an Aboriginal student on a one-to-one basis,
twice a week for 45 minutes each over 6 weeks in a fourth year 13-week elective
course on literacy assessment, diagnosis, and instruction course that is offered to
teacher candidates in their final term prior to teacher certification and to
postgraduates working towards their certificate of inclusive education.
Nineteen female teacher candidates enrolled in the Elementary Years Program
took part in this study. Eighteen of these participants self-identified as white,
monolingual (English) and from middle or working class socioeconomic
backgrounds. One teacher candidate self-identified as being from First Nations
ancestry, bilingual (Cree and English) and from a working class background. Their
ages ranged from 22 to 33. Nineteen urban adolescents of First Nations ancestry
enrolled in grades 7, 8, and 9 who were identified as struggling readers were
selected by their classroom teachers to participate in the tutoring program. Their
school records indicated that they were from low socioeconomic backgrounds and
140
had high levels of transciency prior to attending OTAS. Pseudonyms are used for
confidentiality.
In the first six weeks of the course, the teacher candidates were exposed to anti-
oppressive literacy pedagogy including learning about Canada’s colonial legacy in
relation to some of the First Nations historical, political, and current context; funds
of knowledge (Moll, Amanti, Neff, & González, 1992), culturally responsive
pedagogy (Ladson-Billings, 1999) critical literacy (Comber & Simpson, 2001),
multiliteracies (New London Group, 1996) and white privilege (McIntosh, 1988).
Consciousness-raising tasks and discussions around identity, power, privileges, and
institutional racism were critically analysed to understand how hegemonic ways of
being, viewing and doing the world does not serve all students.
Throughout the semester, the teacher candidates were required to keep an in-
class and a bi-weekly reflection log to reflect on class discussions, readings, their
tutoring, and the context that they were working in. These provided them with
opportunities to critically and reflexively examine conceptualisations of race,
identity, and discrimination in relation to citizenship, democracy, and social
responsibility. Additional data included the teachers’ portfolios and interviews with
classroom teachers, the parents, school-aged children and administrators at OTAS.
The data reported in this chapter is based on the teacher candidates’ in-class and
on-going reflective logs. Critical discourse analysis (Van Dijk, 2006) was used to
analyse the data.
Active citizenship in a local context

In the first few weeks of the course, the teacher candidates were asked to reflect on
issues of alternative education and youth from First Nations backgrounds. This was
based on class readings and discussions which scaffolded them in critical literacy
to enable them to analyse identity, stereotypes, racism, and educational
opportunities. Analysis of the reflective logs at this point demonstrates that more
than three quarters of the students used neo-liberal discourses to situate the youth.
This was evident in their use of mainstream lifestyles to make judgements about
their students which automatically positioned them as deficient, ‘students who
attended the alternative school either were or had been in trouble with the law. …
Students often had attendance issues in the past … lacking in social skills and
communication skills’ (JM, in-class freewrite January 15, 2008). This was
accompanied for some pre-service teachers by low expectations, with racist
overtones evident in the assumed inferiority of the Other. ‘These students would
benefit very much from life skills training (home economics, industrial arts, skills
in the trades)’ (CT, in-class freewrite January 15, 2008). There were indications of
some understanding that students are bad kids because of external pressures, but on
the whole this was contextualised within the family/community rather than societal
structures. However, there were exceptions to this as shown in the following
teacher candidate’s reflections where she identified elements of institutional racism
in the dominance of mainstream cultures of schools over those of indigenous
youth.
141
Again, I have little experience with students who may attend alternative
schools, but they may be students who just have a difficult time performing
in a mainstream classroom. This may have nothing to do with their ability to
learn, but their life circumstances may just prohibit the type of learning that is
expected in these schools. I believe these are students who just need to go
about school in a different way, a way that adapts to individual needs and
expectations. (TC, January 15, 2008)
During their service-learning element of the course, the teacher candidates began to
show an element of conscientisation – becoming aware of their own privilege, ‘as a
student in high school I never felt that I was privileged’ (JM, in-class freewrite,
February 11, 2008), and that the issues indigenous youth face are not ones that
‘many children in mainstream schools, myself included, are faced with’ (MR, in-
class freewrite February 5, 2008). For some this led to a more critical lens as they
shifted from an individualisation of blame to an understanding that it is difficult for
indigenous youth to ‘succeed because they are marginalised by society’ (LB, in-
class freewrite February 7, 2008). At the same time this particular teacher
candidate (TC) continued to hold on to deficit views stating that ‘school is valued
differently by children who attend mainstream schools’ (LB, in-class freewrite
February 7, 2008), suggesting that students in alternative schools do not value
schooling. In another mixture of neo-liberal and liberal ideologies, a pre-service
teacher felt lucky that she ‘did not have to contend with the societal and structural
pressures that our culture and people at large was and is pressing down upon
minorities’ (AM, in-class freewrite, February 12, 2008), but continued to believe
that whatever circumstance one is born into, ‘what we do have control of is our
future and our choices’ (AM, in-class freewrite, February 12, 2008), suggesting
that Aboriginal youth, the most marginalised in Canadian society, only need to get
control of their lives to succeed thus negating the consequences of Canada’s
colonial project that caused the bad luck in the first place.
At the end of the course, course evaluations included a discussion about what
they had learned. All four of the ideologies can be seen in their evaluations, but
few teacher candidates fitted neatly into one category. This was not unexpected.
One of the criticisms postcolonial theory makes of categories is that they can
appear as fixed with firm boundaries, whereas most people will have multiple
aspects to their identities and often apparently conflicting views, one or other of
which might be revealed depending on the situation.
One teacher candidate continued to adhere to a neo-liberal, colonial discourse
that privileges self over other, and assumed an unquestioning right to exploit the
Aboriginal youth for their own academic ends,
I really wonder though if there should be some sort of contract for … tutoring
students at [OTAS] based on their expectations of what is to happen. For
example, I am still working on my diagnostic report because my student was
not available for testing. So I have to go on my own time which is fine, but it
requires me to inconvenience some of my family members, interrupt a
teacher’s time by pulling the student out, have the student miss work that
142
they need to know. … I know it is a learning experience but it is hard not to

be frustrated. (AH, in-class freewrite, March 31, 2008)
While another showed a mixture of neo-liberal and liberal discourses where on the
one hand there was an assumption that once the tutoring is over ‘I am concerned
that she will not have this positive role model any longer in her life’ (SC, journal
entry, March 31, 2014) while at the same time being grateful for the chance ‘to
make a difference’ (SC, journal entry, March 31, 2014). The patronising, saviour
discourse, as discussed above, is a strong element of the social imaginary in
Western countries and can be traced back to the feminisation of the ‘Other’ during
colonial times.
These examples were in the minority, and overall the teacher candidates wrote
about how necessary the experiential, practical component was to their
understanding of social justice. The relevance of the critical literacy approach to
service-learning was appreciated as being not ‘abstract or idealistic, but …
presented in such a way that I feel I can actually do this!’ (CT, course evaluation,
April 10, 2008). In this excerpt there is evidence of connecting theory to practice,
providing a critical rationale for learning to read, and questioning her own
complicity in the lack of culturally responsive methods and curriculum in
mainstream classrooms;
It was only once I submerged myself into teaching that I began to understand
the implications for social justice. Seeing first hand some of the challenges
that the students at [OTAS] faced made me realise, or rather put the
connection to what I was seeing and what I was reading about. … It is
sometimes difficult to truly look at ourselves and ask honestly if how or what
we are teaching is truly in the best interest of the ALL our students. (BL,
course evaluation, April 10, 2008)
The need for change in the profession was identified by most of the teacher
candidates, and a few went beyond this and reflected on how professional change
had to go hand in hand with personal change:
Above all, I feel the most integral aspect of this course, which will not only
inform my future teaching practices but my own attitude, governance, and
integrity in my daily life, was our practical experience at [OTAS]. … My
ideas towards social justice issues were challenged and transformed. I
engaged with asking the ‘why’, wrestling with the issues behind the lives of
the students at [OTAS]. My eyes were opened to the injustices of our society,
and how truly privileged I am. (VC, course evaluation, 10 April 2008)
It is the critical dismantling of the socio-political and historical contexts and the
nature of the questions posed that enabled teacher candidates to become aware of
multiple discourses and the ideologies that underpin them. We return to this in the
final section of the chapter.
143
UK: Global partnerships as sites for mutual learning

The research reported here investigated a study visit for teacher candidates in a UK
university to a children’s home in Southern India. The study visit took place over
three weeks in July 2010, with ten days spent in the children’s home for the
service-learning component. The preparatory phase in the UK consisted mainly of
managerial tasks such as getting visas, informing about health requirements, and
doing some initial research on the areas to be visited. Once in India, the days in the
children’s home were preceded by an orientation weekend in a tourist site on the
coast, and followed by a return to this area for a final few days with time for
relaxation and reflective sessions to help process what they had learnt.
The aim of the research was to try to understand what types of personal and
professional learning took place as a result of the study visit. Data were gathered
from both the visiting group (n=12) and the host community (n=10), using
participant observations, tape-recorded reflective sessions, and semi-structured
interviews with a smaller sample before, during, and 6 months after the study visit.
For the purposes of this chapter the focus is on the learning of the visiting teacher
candidates (see Martin & Raja, 2013, for findings from the host community). The
UK group were encouraged to keep a private reflective learning journal that acted
as an aide-memoire during discussions, written evaluations and interviews. During
the service-learning component they were also invited to take part in daily critical
reflective sessions.
In the following section we focus on findings that indicate changes in
perspective, disruptions to previous ways of thinking, and resistance to change.
Active citizenship in an international context

One of the tutors, who devised the form that the study visit took and co-led all of
them from 2000 to 2010 when data were collected, summarised his view of the
main purposes of the study visit thus:
It’s eye opening and challenging because … it throws into sharp relief all the
different assumptions and theoretical and philosophical stances which
underpin one’s own practice [in a way that is] extremely difficult to identify
while you’re in the UK. It is the process of standing outside [the UK] and
looking in from a distance. It suddenly challenges your identity in a big way
(Group leader 1, interview, July 17, 2010).
These purposes were not explicitly shared with the teacher candidates before the
visit as the tutors believed that this might limit their learning. Through study visit
documentation and the focus of pre-visit gatherings, the course leaders conveyed
that the children’s home was funded by a UK-based charity, that the teacher
candidates would be helping house mothers and doing some teaching in the on-site
primary school, and that they would need to prepare themselves for coping in a
country that is hot and where Western facilities are lacking. Data gathered by the
UK research assistant, a fully participating member of the study visit group,
144
confirmed this neo-liberal view. During a social gathering before leaving for India,
she recorded that
someone was telling me that ‘there would be no showers and that you have to
wash your hair with a bucket’ and that one pre-service teacher ‘had raised
£500 through abseiling … and was going to take footballs and other things
out there’, (Research assistant 1, research diary, June 6, 2010).
These factors are now briefly explored through two cases. Pseudonyms are used for
confidentiality: Teresa, a white, British female in her final year of a Bachelor of
Education degree, had secured her first teaching post for September; William, a
white, British male, was in the second year of a three-year Education Studies
degree.
Teresa
Teresa took part in the study visit because she wanted to experience poverty first
hand,
I think, if I had the choice, I probably would have picked Africa. … I think
that’s a continent where poverty’s … highlighted more … like on comic
relief.2 (Pre-visit interview, July 8, 2010)
and she wanted to experience ‘the challenge of actually working and living in the
basics’ as it would help her appreciate a lot more ‘what [we’ve] got’ (Teresa, pre-
visit interview, July 8, 2010). She demonstrates racism in her attitude towards the
volunteerism aspect of the study visit which verges on being insulting towards the
host community. For example, she also anticipated finding children who ‘value
education as a way of getting out of their life’ (Teresa, pre-visit interview, July 8,
2010), demonstrating a neo-liberal, patronising understanding of the Other. This
neo-colonial imaginary was evident in her response to photographs during a
preparatory session,
I thought it [the children’s home] was going to be kind of some …
stereotypical, like run down little place, but it’s not, it looks quite modern on
the outside and really, sounds horrible, but clean, sort of, stuff like that,
which really surprised me to begin with. (Teresa, pre-visit interview, July 8,
2010)
In general, both the prevalent colonial imaginary and the media are complicit in
perpetuating colonial representations and stereotypes of those in the Global South.
The strength of these images acted as a filter to how she made sense of the study
visit from start to finish. In her interview at the end of the study visit, she found it
perplexing that people in tribal villages ‘would have things like mobile phones and
satellite dishes’ and that families were quite small rather than with the ‘eight or six
children you kind of sometimes have been led to believe’ (Teresa, end of visit
interview, July 24, 2010). Although she saw that modern and traditional could co-
exist, she was not yet questioning, or even apparently aware that her views were
145
based on a modernist, stages of development model (Rostow, 1960). Nor did she
show awareness that modern and traditional co-exist in her own society.
In general, Teresa’s concerns were more about what she could apply to teaching
in her new post:
I’ve got a lot more resources to help aid my teaching. … I think when I sort
of go to teach [India] I will kind of try to express what I’ve seen but then be
very specific about the place that is … and maybe sort of develop their
thinking as well and develop life skills so they can actually challenge aspects
that I’ve said. (Teresa, end of visit interview, July 24, 2010)
Although some consciousness-raising has occurred, it was nonetheless partial,
hence the need to develop critical literacy skills. Additionally, she was confident
that her new surface level understanding of culture and society knowledge would
bring a certain authority to her teaching. A little knowledge can be a dangerous
thing.
William
William’s motivations for applying to take part in the study visit were very much
related to his active membership of the Rotary Club – an international organisation
that has a service mission:
I had sort of a Rotary upbringing … there are sort of Rotary principles which
you know Rotarians follow about fellowship, global outlook and helping
people, service above self encapsulates all those sort of … service above self.
(William, pre-visit interview, June 24, 2010)
William’s experiences in Kenya included raising money for a new school
generator, decorating classrooms and so on. He said that his aim in going to India
was not based on any particular agenda, and seemed unaware that he also held an
aim that was exploitative – using the Other for his own betterment.
I am not even going to go with an idea of what I really want to focus on
looking at I am just going to avoid all of that kind of work, go with a
completely open mind, absorb the stuff as it comes and when I come back
pick out bits which I see that are going to help me in the future. (William,
pre-visit interview, June 24, 2010)
In his interview immediately after the study visit there was evidence that William
was becoming aware of the limitations of a stages model of development. He
observed that India was developing in many different ways and that this was about
achieving potential rather than meeting any one particular [Western] standard. He
could see that superiority of the giver is an issue in a donor-recipient relationship,
but he was clearly struggling with reconciling his new perspectives with his
previous understandings.
What’s wrong with giving them something which we have and they don’t
have? … It depends what … standards you’re trying to bring them up to. … I
146
think that sometimes we feel … that we are developed in the western world,
when we’re not, but we feel like we are … and that we don’t need to be
taught anything, that we know best. (William, end of visit interview, July 25,
2010)
One year later, in the post-visit focus group interview, William seemed better able
to articulate how his experiences in India had transformed aspects of his identity.
Before going to India William had tried to read Pedagogy of the Oppressed (Freire,
1972) but had found that he ‘couldn’t understand what he was trying to say, where
he was coming from or put it in any kind of context’ (William, focus group
interview, June 1, 2011). On return he felt drawn to read the book again and found
that he
could then start to understand what he was trying to say and the context was
put into place, because of what I had experienced in India and the people I’d
met in India. … I felt that … I could relate my experiences of India into some
of what Paulo Freire was saying. (William, focus group interview, June 1,
2011)
One could argue that he had developed a schema or consciousness about the
contexts and realities of the people he had encountered in India, and that it was the
space (in the form of his university assignment) for continuing critical reflection
and dialogue with alternative perspectives that enabled this to happen.
TENSIONS, CHALLENGES AND THE FUTURE OF SERVICE-LEARNING AS

ACTIVE GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP
A postcolonial reading of the two studies shows that the divide between North and
South exists at both the global and the local level. The international service-
learning shows a division between the Global South (India) and the Global North
(UK) while the local community service-learning shows a division between
Canada South (First Nations) and Canada North (European settlers). In each case
issues of exoticisation, racism and development live on creating an ideological and
racist divide, which is part of the colonial imaginary. This imagined division is felt
as a reality and guides people to act and position themselves in dichotomous ways.
McQuaid (2009) argues that education in Western countries ‘continues to teach
learners to divide the world’ (p. 12), and this division is not only through actions,
but also the orientations that actions are based on.
A key tension emerging in the 21st century is that while policies in Western
countries are neo-liberal and colonial, there is a growing movement in the practices
of global education and service-learning that shows the limitations of such policies.
This has led to the use of critical pedagogies in many local service-learning
programmes. However, as globalisation drives higher education institutions to
increase opportunities for international service-learning (ISL), as the practice is
scaled up it appears to meet the imaginary of the ‘white saviour industrial complex’
(Krabill, 2012, p. 52). Thus, while in the ISL above the intent of the tutors was to
decolonise the teacher candidates’ minds, this was largely unsuccessful because a
147
critical understanding of the socio-political contexts was not explicitly developed.

In effect, both SL and ISL are forms of local-local interaction, affected by global
forces. The challenge for leaders of service-learning is to develop a critical,
relational imaginary as a basis for alternative practices that dismantle the colonial
imaginary without being oppressive itself. This is something we are exploring in
the next phases of our work.
In this chapter we have discussed the trend towards neo-liberal interpretations of
global education, and argue for more critical approaches, that include unsettling
historical, political, contextual discourses in order to prevent the perpetuation of
hegemonic agendas. We discussed how the term service-learning sets up a neo-
colonial imaginary and thus is doomed to fail as a means of achieving social
justice. To be effective in changing systemic inequities, such as institutional
racism, requires an active citizenry who have a critical understanding of the
contextual issues based on the local, global, political and historical contexts. We
argue that to develop practices that are equitable and provide access to education,
resources, and employment for all global citizens, the goals of global citizenship
education must include developing and engaging in practices that foster pluralism
rather than multiculturalism. Understanding identity is crucial to this process.
Identities are always in a state of flux and are constructed and reproduced through
social action. Unless one is able to see how issues of power and privilege, and how
the historical and political dimensions of colonisation have affected local and
global relations and life chances, there is the danger that neo-colonial patterns of
relating along dichotomous lines will continue. Interrogating the relationship
between history and identity is an essential part of developing positive relations in
the present, as the following teacher candidate’s reflective evaluation of his
service-learning course in Canada, 2010, testifies,
Canada has not only failed the Aboriginal population but has gone to great
lengths to systematically destroy it in order to ‘civilise’ them. Historically,
Canada has used tools like residential schools to separate Aboriginal
individuals from their cultural background. Atrocities have been done to
children as young as three by separating them from family, friends,
community, language, and spiritual beliefs. Because these children often
spent the majority of their childhood away from parents, they missed out key
developmental lessons especially relationship and family interaction lessons.
What we are now dealing with, and by ‘we’ I mean all of us, educators,
aboriginal peoples, and non-aboriginal peoples, is the fall-out of these
catastrophic events. We talk about white privilege, but what needs to be
understood is that this privilege came about through force, bloodshed and
tears. This historical perspective must be understood in order for educators to
make an impact. There is a lot to overcome and the sad part is our society is
not quite there yet. People still make ignorant comments about the free pass
those Indians are getting. Until people acknowledge the past, it will be a hard
climb in the future. Is this a social justice question? You’re damn right it is.
148
Am I implicated in it? I am Canadian and therefore I am. I am a white Middle

class Christian male. This is the exact model of the oppressor. But I can live
my life with the goal of bettering all students who walk into my class,
regardless of their ethnicity, socio-economic status, religion, and sexual
orientation. (PO, reflective evaluation, April 15, 2010)
NOTES
1
We use the terms global north and global south to represent what some also call minority and
majority worlds, or developed and developing worlds. We recognise that these terms are problematic.
However, we use them as political, rather than geographical, terms as discussed by Andreotti, (2011)
and as a means of ‘speaking back’ to those who divide the world on binary lines.
2
Comic Relief is a UK charity that every two years conducts a fund-raising campaign to help
alleviate poverty in the UK and Africa. This campaign is targeted at young people and called ‘Red
Nose Day’ (http://www.rednoseday.com).
REFERENCES
Adichie, C. N. (2009). The danger of a single story. TED Global Lecture. Retrieved from
http://www.ted.com/talks/chimamanda_adichie_the_danger_of_a_single_story
Anderson, B. (1991). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism.
London and New York: Verso.
Andreotti, V. (2011). Actionable postcolonial theory in education, New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Comber, B., & Simpson, A. (2001). Critical literacies and local action: Teacher knowledge and a ‘new’
research agenda. In B. Comber & A. Simpson (Eds.), Negotiating critical literacies in classrooms
(pp. 271–282). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Department of Education. (2013). National curriculum in England: Citizenship programmes of study
key stages 3 and 4. Available from www.gov.uk, accessed 20/6/14.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Toronto: Collier-MacMillan Canada Ltd.
Elliott, D. (2013). Giving back: A special report on volunteer vacations. Accessed 3/6/2014,
www.cntraveler.com/ecotourism/2013/02/volunteer-vacations-rewards-risks
Fenwick, T. J. (2001). Experiential learning: A theoretical critique from five perspectives. Columbus,
OH: EERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education.
Hall, S. (2007). Living with difference: Stuart Hall in conversation with Bill Schwarz. Soundings, 37,
148–158.
Krabill, R. (2012). American sentimentalism and the production of global citizens. Contexts, 11(4), 52–
54.
Kraft, R. J. (1996). Service learning. Education and Urban Society, 28, 131–159.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. New
Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1999). Preparing teachers for diverse student populations. A critical race theory
perspective. Review of Research in Education, 24, 211–247.
McIntosh, P. (1988). White privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack. In P. S. Rothenberg (Ed.),
Race, class, and gender in the United States: An integrated study (4th ed., pp. 165–169). New York:
St. Martin’s Press.
McQuaid, N. (2009). Learning to ‘un-divide’ the world: The legacy of colonialism and education in the
21st century. Critical Literacy: Theories and Practices, 3(1), 12–25.
Martin, F., & Raja, L. (2013). Transformative learning: Indian perspectives on a global partnership.
Indian Journal of Adult Education, 74(1), 59–80.
149
Mitchell, T. (2008). Traditional vs. critical service-learning: Engaging the literature to differentiate two
models. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 14(2), 50–65.
Moll, L., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: A qualitative
approach to developing strategic connections between homes and classrooms. Theory into Practice,
31(2), 132–141.
New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60–92.
Riecken, T., Tanaka, M., & Scott, T. (2006). First Nations youth reframing the focus: Cultural
knowledge as a site for health education. Canadian Journal of Native Education, 29(1), 29–42.
Rostow, W. W. (1960). The stages of economic growth: A non-communist manifesto. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Said, E. (1985). Orientalism. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Saskatchewan Ministry of Education. (2010). Renewed curricula: Understanding outcomes.
Available as download http://www.education.gov.sk.ca/Renewed-Curricula-Understanding-
Outcomes, accessed 6/11/14.
Sharp, J. (2009). Geographies of postcolonialism. London: Sage.
Spivak, G. (1990). The post-colonial critic: Interviews, strategies, dialogues. London: Routledge.
Swadener, B., & Lubeck, S. (1995). Children and families ‘at promise’: Deconstructing the discourse of
risk. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Taylor, C. (2007). A secular age. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Thiong’o, N. (1986). Decolonising the mind: The politics of language in African literature. Nairobi:
Heinemann Kenya.
Tupper, J. (2006). Education and the (im)possibilities of Citizenship. In J. Tupper (Ed.), Troubling the
canon of citizenship education (pp. 45–54). New York: Peter Lang
Van Dijk, T. A. (2006). Ideology and discourse analysis. Journal of Political Ideologies, 11(2), 115–
140.
Zakaria, R. (2014, April 21). The White tourist’s burden. Al Jazeera America. Retrieved from
http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/4/volunter-
tourismwhitevoluntouristsafricaaidsorphans.html
Fran Martin
School of Education
University of Exeter
Fatima Pirbhai-Illlich
Language & Literacy Education
University of Regina
150
KAY CARROLL
12. GOING GLOBAL
WHAT IS GLOBALISATION?
Globalisation can be argued to have replaced nation states, changed geographic

boundaries, toppled traditional forms of knowledge and revolutionised thinking
and modern educative approaches (Brynjolfsson & van Alstyne, 2005). From 9/11
to the recent downing of M17, the bloody conflict in Gaza and the kidnapping of
the school girls in Nigeria, globalisation exposes us to difficult challenges of un-
sustainability, inequality and instability (Patton, 2001). In this modern era the
bystander is absent, we cannot look away; we are consuming and documenting
phenomena without pause. Selfies, texting, hash-tagging and tweeting create
constant communication. In this world globalisation has created techno-savvy
digital junkies addicted to 24 hours of social media and information and children
who learn to swipe digital tablets before reading print texts many with a constant,
insatiable and relentless demand for bite-sized chunks of knowledge. The impact of
globalisation has been ubiquitous. Since 1990s there has been an exponential
acceleration of information sources and published content, exported by Wi-Fi, high
speed broadband, smart phones and apps. We have come to place of plasticity
where geographic and political boundaries have shifted and are stretched into
different patterns and shapes. Globalisation is driven by economic and
technological convergence and hybridism. We adapt, consume, transform and
mash-up knowledge. In the developed world, we are connected, inter-dependent,
switched on and hooked up.
The connectivity and convergence of globalisation is evident in daily life,
economics, politics and the media. Globalisation has subsumed nationalism and
ousted state apparatuses that control knowledge and labour forces. While
globalisation has emancipated ideas it is still challenged by the structural
inequalities and instabilities that exist in communities. Globalisation according to
Dower and Williams (2002) confronts young people with their own global impact
and identity. Globalisation requires students to grapple with their identity,
ethnicity, culture, politics, economics, societal norms, religion and dependency
(Dower & Williams, 2002). These are major challenges for schools.
SCHOOLS AND GLOBALISATION
In this hyper-globalised context, the traditional landscape of Australian schooling

with its highly regimented curricula, bell times and structures is antiquated.
Australian students exist in two worlds; the traditional didactic classroom and the

KAY CARROLL
modern, fluid and discursive real world (Meacham, 2002). To overcome the divide,
students need to develop skills to decode, detect and critically interrogate
knowledge and interact with present global challenges. To divorce schools and
curricula from modern contexts and texts is to deny children and young Australians
the tools and opportunities for them to participate and survive in a post-modern
society.
THE DIGITAL LINE
Within an Australian context, there has been increased focus on traditional forms
of literacy and functional texts as part of the modern classroom discourse. The
National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) introduced
into all Australian schools in 2008 is a national literacy and numeracy assessment
for students in years 3, 5, 7 and 9. NAPLAN measures and quantifies the
performance of children against pre-determined standards using objective choice
and written responses to a range of texts and problems. It is the basis of national
comparisons of schools and amongst students. NAPLAN builds on earlier literacy
work and benchmarking that commenced in 1999 when the inaugural tests in
reading and writing commenced, creating a virtual line or hurdle for Australian
children to pass.
External benchmarking occurs also at an international level with the
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) Program for
International Student Assessment (PISA) that assesses reading, mathematics, and
science. PISA assesses 15 year old students from schools from 65 countries. In
2012, 34 OECD and 31 partner countries participated including Australia involving
500,000 students. In Australia, 775 schools comprising 14,481 students were
assessed (Thomson, De Bortoli, & Buckley, 2013).
Currently NAPLAN and PISA testing and standardised approaches privilege
traditional forms of literacy and knowledge. In this neo-liberalist context, PISA has
become synonymous with achievement and benchmarking. In Australia,
governments have become increasingly concerned with alleged falling standards
and gaps. In 2012 the message that Australia had been outperformed by Shanghai–
China, Hong Kong–China, Singapore, Japan, Korea, Finland, Ireland, Chinese
Taipei and Canada was cause for reactionary policy and alarm.
PISA standardises and measures concepts and applications of literacy that are
limited. Literacy according to PISA is understanding, using, reflecting on and
engaging with written texts, in order to achieve one’s goals, to develop one’s
knowledge and potential, and to participate in society (Thomson et al., 2013).
While this definition includes participation in society it does not extend to global
understanding, awareness, consciousness or engagement. The PISA assessment
includes educative, occupational and transactional texts in a range of digital and
print forms, yet it does not include a global framework. It assesses meaning,
inference and some analysis. Yet it fails to provide students with an authentic
assessment of critical literacy in a globalised context. Increasingly, students require
these skills to enact their individual and collective goals to transform disadvantage,
152
GOING GLOBAL
inequality or to promote sustainable or culturally sensitive actions. It measures

skills rather than authentic engagement and critical advocacy. These 2-dimensional
texts and approaches to literacy are inadequate for children today (Johnson &
Kress, 2010). Critical literacy, critical inquiry and critical understanding are needed
for a global context and engagement (Cervetti, Damico, & Pardeles, 2001; Johnson
& Kress, 2010).
DEFINING CRITICAL LITERACY IN A GLOBAL CONTEXT
Critical literacy is the ability to use text to see what is visible and invisible to create
meaning and understanding. It is socially constructed and enacted. Critical literacy
empowers students to disrupt the dominant discourses that normalise social
inequities and injustices. According to Friere (1970), critical literacy becomes a
vehicle by which the oppressed are equipped with the necessary tools to
reappropriate their history, culture, and language practices. Critical literacy in a
globalised context develops sceptical sensitivities to texts and enables young
people to detect bias, perspective, reliability and agency. It illuminates hidden
discourses and provides tools for emancipation (Cervetti et al., 2001). Critical
literacy challenges the universality of knowledge and seeks to discover the
hegemonic discourses and ideologies that shape society and generate conflict or
injustices (Cervetti et al., 2001; Gee, 1994).
This compares to the standardised forms of literacy that are taught, replicated
and measured often in a vacuum (Meacham, 2002). Traditional literacy refers to
reading, writing, speaking and listening (Meacham, 2002). In this context reading
and writing is privileged and remains the primary focus of standardised
international tests such as PISA or NAPLAN. Meacham (2002) suggests that the
elevation of traditional literacy in high stakes testing is a reactionary and western
response to re-impose historic power relationships and singular narratives about
cultural identity. This is a superimposed and linear construct of literacy that does
not reflect the multicultural global space.
In a globalised context with the advent of mobile phones, web based tools and
social media reporting on collective phenomena traditional literacy is simply
inadequate (Meltzer & Hamann, 2004). There has been a textual shift (Walsh,
2006) for young people who inhabit a device-rich world that requires them to
connect, communicate, compose and critique digitally multi-modal texts. Reliance
on a singular and flattened text composed of print and traditional boundaries
excludes learners from making meaning in this diverse and complex world
(Meacham, 2002). Essentially the privileging of traditional print and spoken neo-
liberalist texts over the fluidity of digital text, images, voices and interests excludes
learners from the plurality and complexity of their world (Gee, 1994). The social
context and the immediacy of the digital world are subsumed by preoccupations
with past eras. This focus on fundamentals serves to elevate or reinforce the social
and cultural capital of elite groups who were educated and schooled in these
traditions and forms of assessment (Johnson & Kress, 2010). Willis and Harris
(2000) acknowledge the importance of stretching historic constructs of literacy to
153
KAY CARROLL
include the cultural, family and global context. Currently schools are being
challenged to prepare students who can live and co-exist in such digital and plural
spaces and understand the texts that surround them. The digital age has distorted
and stretched concepts of literacy creating a new dialogue. Young people need to
develop fluency in multi-modal literacy to survive and engage in this new space.
Au and Raphael (2000) suggest that a critical framework that enables young people
to contest social, political and historic positions is needed in this space. Making
sense and challenging traditional boundaries creates opportunities for schools and
students to engage with global literacy or go global.
GOING GLOBAL
Global literacy seeks to address inequality, conflict and injustice and build peace
and cultural understanding with recognition of personal and collective identity and
agency. It provides a way of framing and exploring these issues for students,
enabling young people to make sense of their world and the texts that are hurdled
24/7 demanding instantaneous text or tweet. This phenomenon has been described
by Michael Goldhaber as the ‘attention economy’(as cited in Stevens & Bean,
2007). In this space texts compete for attention (Stevens & Bean, 2007). Texts are
visual, graphic, animated, digitalised, print creatures subjecting young people to
loud, extreme and unrelenting attacks. We are provoked, manipulated and prodded
to respond (Lankshear & Knobel, 2002). Traditional literacy based on meaning
making, inference or analysis offers little defence to this global onslaught. To
withstand, students need to focus on the discourses that position them and respond
to prevailing ideologies.
These messages and texts shape thought and action and influence individual
identity and direction. Global literacy, in this sense, transforms and provokes
thought and action. Students require these skills to participate in life-long learning.
In this space the passive transfer or construction of knowledge is challenged.
Knowledge, understanding, consciousness and advocacy are actively constructed
and traditional spaces and ideas resisted or re-defined. Global literacy morphs with
global citizenship and students come to see texts as dynamic, with multiple edges
and shapes that inform them about discourses that can be challenged (Johnson &
Kress, 2010). This connection with the text allows for global citizenship to be
enacted in a powerful way. Global citizenship according to Schurgurensky (2005)
fosters caring and critical citizens who are able to advocate for change against
norms, standards or authority.
We promote a notion of citizenship agency as ‘the state of being in action or
exerting power’ and understand citizens as social actors, who—rather than acting
as equal, autonomous agents – exercise citizenship within ‘concrete social relations
mediated by power’ (Schugurensky, 2005, p. 4). This form of citizenship is
characterised by its critique of present power discourses and its dynamism.
Underpinning this is the theoretical work of Andreotti (2006) that suggests ‘soft
citizenship’ does little to acknowledge how social problems are constructed and
replicated. Her view is that critical citizenship identifies post-colonial discourses
154
GOING GLOBAL
and generalisations and students to be reflexive and responsive. This enables

students to understand authentic contexts and see what is and what could be. This
form of global x-ray vision is needed to deflect antipathy and lethargy about social
problems. Lorenzini (2013) discusses the importance of global action and
attention for young people as a way to counter depression and overwhelming
bombardments. In this 24 hour news cycle and constant textual simulation students
require tools to counter cultural stereotyping, text positioning and paradigms of
inequality, unsustainability and instability (Anheier, Glasius, & Kaldor, 2001). It is
suggested that ‘global learning is enhanced when students recognise that being part
of a larger global community carries with it social and civic responsibilities’
(Lorenzini, 2013, p. 418).
FOUR STEPS FOR GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP
To enact this informed global citizenship four stages are necessary (Lorenzini,
2013). In this model of global citizenship engagement, learners should be exposed
to issues and texts that raise transnational awareness and understanding of cross-
cultural diversity (Gee, 1994; Johnson & Kress, 2010; Lorenzini, 2013). This
Figure 1. Four step model of global literacy (adapted from Gee, 1994; Johnson & Kress,
2010; Lorenzini, 2013)
155
KAY CARROLL
develops global knowledge or a framework for global consciousness to unfold. In

this second stage, students recognise the impact of global issues and seek to
determine independently solutions or detect biases and injustices. In the third stage,
students develop transnational efficacy that translates into individual confidence
and advocacy. Finally students develop informed advocacy that allows them to use
their learning and understanding of discourse to address real world problems
(Lorenzini, 2013).
This model provides context, text deconstruction and analysis and text
recreation in an authentic way. It is multi-modal and dynamic and offers
Australian students a chance to blur traditional boundaries of literacy and inaction
and become part of a broader global epidemic that challenges social norms and
injustices.
CONCLUSION
Globalisation is the inevitable onslaught and convergence of texts that position us

and represent discourses about power. Students who exist in this landscape
require a virtual backpack of tools, processes and concepts to equip them with
questions about interdependence, equity, sustainability, cultural diversity, identity
and power. There is a pressing need for Australian schools and policy-makers
to provide reflexive opportunities for students to detect bias, understand
perspective and disrupt hegemonic discourses. This form of critical literacy is
needed within a global context to enable young people to respond to the increasing
pressures of global problems that bombard them daily (Johnson & Kress, 2010).
It allows young people to participate in the discourses that shape and determine
their world. These discourses are multicultural and linguistically diverse (Johnson
& Kress, 2010). Participation in the construction and negotiation of these
texts enables learners to ‘harness linguistic and cultural difference’ to collectively
build global stories, texts about citizenship and democracy (Johnson & Kress,
2010, p. 9).
Since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, technological developments and
globalisation have transformed traditional geo-political, social and cultural barriers.
Global products, markets, economies, conflicts, disasters, communication and
migration construct local needs and daily lives. The space we inhabit as individuals
is shaped by the global village and within this paradigm education is a collective
benefit to our global society (Gee, 1994; McLuhan & Powers, 1989). As global
citizens understanding our cultural identity and diversity, and building deep
knowledge that delivers environmental sustainability, social justice and builds
peace are increasingly important. To achieve this we must develop critical literacy
or x-ray vision for young people to detect the discourses that perpetuate current
global issues and allow young people to engage, become globally conscious and
develop transnational efficacy and informed advocacy. Going global is a critical
approach for learners to engage with plural social texts and address issues of
inequality, injustice or diversity. This framework resists the current Australian
preoccupation and testing regime of traditional and linear literacies. It re-calibrates
156
GOING GLOBAL
the curriculum to focus on skills and concepts needed for active engagement in the
global village.
REFERENCES
Andreotti, V. (2006). Soft vs. critical global citizenship education. Policy and Practice: A Development
Education Review, 3, 40–51.
Anheier, H. K., Glasius, M., & Kaldor, M. (2001). Introducing global civil society. In H. K. Anheier, M.
Glasius, & M. Kaldor (Eds.), Global civil society (pp. 3–22). New York: Oxford University Press.
Au, K. H., & Raphael, T. E. (2000). Equity and literacy in the next millennium. Reading Research
Quarterly, 35(1), 170–188.
Brynjolfsson, E., & van Alstyne, M. (2005). Global village or cyber-balkans? Modeling and measuring
the integration of electronic communities. Management Science, 51(6), 851–868.
Cervetti, G., Damico, J. S., & Pardeles, M. J. (2001). A tale of differences: Comparing the
traditions, perspectives, and educational goals of critical reading and critical literacy. Reading
Online, 4(9). Retrieved from http://www.readingonline.org/articles/art_index.asp?HREF=/articles/
cervetti/index.html
Dower, N., & Williams, J. (Eds.). (2002). Global citizenship: A critical introduction. New York:
Routledge.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Seabury Press.
Gee, J. P. (1994). New alignments and old literacies: From fast capitalism to the canon. In B.
Shorthand-Jones, B. Bosich, & J. Rrivalland (Eds.), Living literacy (pp. 1–36). Carlton South, VIC:
Australian Reading Association.
Johnson, D., & Kress, G. (2010). Globalisation, literacy and society: Redesigning pedagogy and
assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 10(1), 5–14. doi:
10.1080/09695940301697
Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2002). Do we have your attention? New literacies, digital technologies
and the education of adolescents. In D. Alvermann (Ed.), Adolescents and literacies in a digital
world (pp. 19–39). New York: Peter Lang.
Lorenzini, M. (2013). From global knowledge to global civic engagement. Journal of Political Science
Education, 9(4), 417–435.
Meacham, S. (2002) Literacy at the crossroads: Movement, connection, and communication within
the research literature on literacy and cultural diversity. Review of Research in Education, 25, 181–
208.
Meltzer, J., & Hamann, E. T. (2004). Meeting the literacy development needs of adolescent English
language learners through content area learning. Part one: Focus on motivation and engagement.
Providence, RI: Educational Alliance at Brown University.
McLuhan, M., & Powers, B. R. (1989). The global village: Transformations in world life and media in
the 21st century. New York: Oxford University Press.
Patton, C. (2001, April). Flowers in stony places: Making the most of globalization. Paper presented at
the Annual Meeting of the European Commission’s Delegation to Australia and New Zealand,
Sydney, Australia.
Schugurensky, D. (2005). Citizenship and citizenship education: Canada in an international
context. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/3147128/Adult_citizenship_education_An_
overview_of_the_field
Stevens, L. P., & Bean, T. W. (2007). Critical literacy: Context, research, and practice in the K-12
classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Thomson, S., De Bortoli, L., & Buckey, S. (2013). PISA 2012: How Australia measures up.
Camberwell, VIC: Australian Council for Education Research. Retrieved from
http://www.acer.edu.au/documents/PISA-2012-Report.pdf
157
KAY CARROLL
Walsh, M. (2006). Literacy and learning with multimodal texts: Classroom glimpses. Synergy, 4(1), 43–
49.
Willis, A. I., &. Harris, V. J. (2000). Political acts: Literacy learning and teaching. Reading Research
Quarterly, 35(1), 72–88.
Kay Carroll
Global Literacy
Catholic Education, Diocese of Parramatta
158
SECTION 5
TRANSFORMING CURRICULA FOR

GLOBAL EDUCATION
HENRIK ÅSTRÖM ELMERSJÖ
13. HISTORICAL CULTURE AND PEACE EDUCATION

Some Issues for History Teaching as a Means of Conflict Resolution
INTRODUCTION
In recent years, a significant amount of scholarly interest has been devoted to

history teaching across and beyond borders (see, for example, Gasanabo, 2006;
Dierkes, 2010; Carretero, 2011; Ahonen, 2012; Han, Kondo, Yang & Pingel, 2012;
Korostelina & Lässig, 2013; Elmersjö, 2014). The purpose of such teaching is to
transcend national boundaries in order to enhance understanding of different
cultures and even encourage a sense of global identity and unity with the ultimate
ambition of paving the way for peace and global prosperity. However, it has been
pointed out that the teaching of history, as well as the societal use of history, is
often permeated with the grand national narrative, and by the time pupils learn to
deconstruct this narrative and grasp the complexity of the past they have already
developed an emotional bond to this grand national story (Carretero, 2011).
In both older and newer literature the idea of a history education focused on
global issues that can transcend boundaries and ultimately be the source of peace
and global awareness is salient (Carlgren, 1928; International Institute of
Intellectual Cooperation, 1933; Lauwerys, 1953; Gasanabo, 2006; Pingel, 2010;
Korostelina & Lässig, 2013). This chapter will focus on assessing the underlying
assumption, that history education is capable of playing a pivotal role in creating
peaceful relations. This issue is also related to the much larger question of whether
education can change society, which implies a strong connection between
education and society (Apple, 2013).
Utilising the concept of historical culture and earlier research – mainly on
Scandinavian debates over history and history education – this chapter discusses
the interrelationship of history and culture and the implications of this relationship
for peace-oriented history education as a means to promote global awareness.
History, historical culture, and history education

History and the past are different things. As Jenkins (1991, p. 6) has written:
‘history is a discourse about, but categorically different from, the past’. To bring
forth some part of the past through historical narrative is always a matter of
selection, and it is, therefore, a political and moral act that (re)produces inclusion
and exclusion (White, 1980).

History is told and taught to and by specific groups.1 A group of people – or

representatives of that group – is the protagonist of any historical narrative, and in
the process of narrating its story this group is also (re)produced. In school-based
history curricula this group is often the state or nation, but in other contexts it could
be an ethnic group, a political party, a social class, or any other type of group. In
the context of identity politics, history is one of the more important instruments in
negotiating and maintaining a common ground for a group of people who are
understood to share an identity that may be seen as a basis for political action
(Alfred, 1999; Ahonen, 2012). Therefore, inclusion and exclusion lie at the heart of
any historical narrative; who is it about, and who is it not about (Shore, 2000; Dunn,
2000; Challand, 2009).
Historical culture is a term sometimes used to describe the set of narratives
about the past that is embraced and communicated within a group of people. A
historical culture is both the process and the structure of making sense of the past
within a specific society; it covers both how history is communicated and which
history is communicated (Rüsen, 2002). The concept of historical culture is
important in order to understand how history – the ‘sense-making’ of the past – is
interdependent on the cultural context that it is intended to make sense of.
The narratives within the historical culture of a large cultural group are the
products of intense negotiations and conflicts between different smaller groups –
each with their own overlapping historical cultures. Powerful groups often use their
positions to incorporate the narratives and experiences of less powerful groups into
their own discourses (Apple, 1993). Hence, when minority or aboriginal history is
made visible, it is often these groups’ contributions to the national project (as
envisioned by the hegemonic majority) that is highlighted and not the minority’s
historical experience in its own right (Foster, 1999; VanSledright, 2008). This
indicates that historical culture is also a matter of power and hegemony in both the
negotiation of which history is to be communicated as well as in the
communication of that history through established channels that are often
controlled by powerful groups.
Historical cultures typically change from within; they are, in a sense, ‘owned’
by the people who embrace and co-create them. It could be argued that changes in
a specific historical culture come about because some conditions for the people
who embrace the culture have changed. Therefore, their questions about the past
also change, and this makes way for new historical narratives. These new
narratives could be more overarching and universal than previous narratives, but
they could also be more limited.
Much of the research concerning changes in historical cultures points to times of
crisis – and subsequent orientation problems for groups of people trying to
understand how their situation is connected to where they came from and where
they are going – as the most obvious times when historical cultures change (Rüsen,
2001; Karlsson, 2003; Sjöberg, 2011). However, historical cultures also have the
ability to undergo changes at a slow pace over very long periods, without being
driven by immediate crisis (Elmersjö, 2013).
162
HISTORICAL CULTURE AND PEACE EDUCATION
Many scholars have noted a decline in nationalistic historiography and history

education during the 20th century (Dierkes, 2005; Nygren, 2011; Iriye, 2013). It is
argued that focus has shifted – in historiography as well as in history teaching – to
narratives of international non-governmental organisations, migration, and global
cultural encounters. However, in schools such trends have also been met with
resistance in some cases, by not incorporating such perspectives in classrooms
(Dierkes, 2005; Barton 2012), and even putative global perspectives are infused
with cultural inclusion and exclusion (Dunn, 2000).
It is also possible to perceive a distinction between public history (sometimes
referred to as memory) and the professional study of the past by historians
where the historians conducting the latter are more interested in critically
examining historical narratives than in simply learning or evoking them (Bender,
2009). However, historiography is not only about critical thinking. It is entangled
in the national project through its origins as the nation-state’s means of
creating national cohesion through the study of the nation’s history, which is
still evident today (Berger & Lorenz, 2010). It is also infused with so-called
methodological nationalism where scientific studies are imbued with the idea
of the nation as the terminal unit of social inquiry through the framing of
scientific studies within or between national contexts (Martins, 1974; Thelen,
1999).
History teaching may increasingly be about something other than the nation, and
it is increasingly based on critical thinking. However, because students tend to
interpret what they learn into the narrative they already know (Wertsch, 2000;
Porat, 2004; Malmros, 2012), the teaching of history cannot be separated from the
historical culture within society at large of which schools and education are
integral parts.
APPROACHES TO HISTORY AS PEACE EDUCATION
There is important work, currently being conducted, which aims to move history
education in a less nationalistic and/or ethnic direction, especially in conflict-
ridden parts of the world (e.g., Han et al., 2012; Korostelina & Lässig, 2013). This
work underlines very important issues about history teaching and its role in the
construction of identities. It also highlights the negotiated structure of historical
narratives. This work is vital in trying to combat prejudice, but it is not necessarily
a prerequisite for conflict resolution. It might even have the unintended effect of
focusing too much on the boundaries between different groups instead of
transcending them.
It is my contention that the study and teaching of history does not create
divisions between people. However, history is a tool that is often used to
accentuate such divisions where they already exist. By the reverse logic, history
cannot create peace between peoples in a society with perceived oppression or
injustices. However, it can be used to highlight oppression and urge people to take
action. At times this could be considered problematic because it creates even
greater division, but it could also be considered necessary as it empowers
163
oppressed peoples. The desired outcomes of history education need to be better

elaborated in peace processes, and perhaps history has attracted a disproportionate
amount of attention in different efforts for reconciliation.
When trying to say anything general about the so-called ‘history wars’, i.e., the
highly politicised debate over how history in a certain context is to be written and
understood (Macintyre & Clark, 2003), it is important to pay attention to the
fundamental differences between different history wars. Because all celebrated
and/or remembered events in a historical culture are connected to other events in a
narrativistic chain, the problems of coming to terms with history in each case are
dependent not only on the disputed events themselves, but on how they fit into a
larger and much more complex series of events. There are different ways of
coming to terms with history where competing narratives are at stake. I will
elaborate further upon some of the most used approaches in discussions on history
education.
Compromising corrective narratives or embracing differences?

‘How about just forgetting the past?’ someone might ask. Is it possible to
achieve reconciliation by just forgetting? This Nietzschean approach to history has
been deemed morally insufficient because it has been affiliated with historical
denial (Höpken, 2008; Parkes, 2013), and I will not explore this option for
reconciliation any further in this text because I think it is neither achievable nor
desirable.2
Compromising corrective narratives – which allegedly hold true no matter
where they are taught – was the basic idea behind early projects of reconciliatory
history education (Korostelina & Lässig, 2013). For professional reasons,
positivistic historians might have been confident in this line of action for
reconciliation by arguing that as long as we teach how things really happened, all
sides in a conflict will have to come to terms with the truth. Although many
historians nowadays might have a different attitude towards historical truth, this is
probably still an integral part of peace education processes because there might be
a lingering desire to write singular narratives even in multilateral textbook projects.
Historians are engaged in reconciliatory history projects in order to set the record
straight in a sense (Pingel, 2008; Lässig & Strobel, 2013). A problem that can be
tied to historians’ engagement with these intentions is that it puts historians outside
historical cultures and into an exceptional and superior professional box where
politics, ideology, and other societal features are non-existent. It is as if historians
live outside the rest of society. However, historians are, of course, part of society
and are affected by the historical culture of which they are a part. Because history
is a negotiated discourse, it is still theoretically possible to negotiate compromising
narratives, but these narratives would have to be the product of immense debates
on all levels of society, and more importantly, they would require a corresponding
universal culture.
One of the problems in establishing true correctives is that when international
organisations (e.g., The Council of Europe, the EU, or UNESCO) engage in
164
mediating conflicts about history, this often leads to Western European and
American historians’ involvement in history projects or truth commissions in
Africa, Eastern Europe, East Asia, and the Middle East. Their engagement, while
sometimes partly successful, has shown how difficult it is to approach a so-called
post-conflict society 3 from the outside. These historians are not part of the
historical cultures that they are trying to transform, and even if this is in the service
of peace, it can lead to accusations of Western paternalism (Ahonen, 2012).
However, in societies where physical hostilities have not ceased, and where
divisions between belligerent groups are still very deep, the only way to change
education is to let someone else, someone from outside the particular historical
cultures, force the change, but the impact of their suggestions on educational
practices are often very limited (Höpken, 2008).
In Scandinavia, serious efforts to promote peace through transformed, improved,
and less nationalistic history education have transpired since at least the 1880s
(Elmersjö & Lindmark, 2010). One of the examples often referred to when
discussing successful projects on history teaching that presumably has had an
impact on peaceful relations is the Scandinavian history textbook revision under
the auspices of the Norden Associations from 1919 to the 1970s. The revision was
an effort in line with the Norden Associations’ overarching goal of promoting
cooperation among the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and
Sweden).
This textbook revision, while successful in part, also highlighted immense
differences in the way history was interpreted and written in the different countries.
The fact that professional historians were engaged to make sure that history was
conveyed to pupils without national prejudice – and with sound scientific research
as its only guide – only highlighted the cultural aspects of history. Heated
discussions on overlapping history that were incorporated in the grand national
narrative of the different countries in different ways were very common during the
50 years of continuous textbook revision. For example, Finnish historians and
Swedish historians had immense difficulty coming to terms with each other’s
views on the nationality of the Finns. Swedish historians were reluctant to admit
the existence of any Finnish nation during the centuries of Swedish rule. The same
problem emerged between Norwegian and Icelandic historians on the nature of the
Icelandic nation (Elmersjö, 2013). This could be considered a consequence of
projecting today’s identities onto history. In an area of close physical proximity, if
you go back far enough, the histories of any two national identities will overlap.
The Nordic textbook revisions never accomplished a Nordic narrative because
there was no subject matter that was unspoken for on which to build such a
narrative. Almost all efforts to claim particular past events as part of an
overarching Nordic history were refuted by historians in at least one national
context through their claims on that particular event as part of their own national
history (Elmersjö, 2013).
The efforts of the Norden Associations might have had some impact on the
history textbooks and the history education conducted in schools in Scandinavia
(Elmersjö, 2013; Hovland, 2013). However, it is difficult to assess the causality
165
between efforts made by different organisations to change textbooks and the actual
changes in the textbooks because both the efforts to change textbooks and the
changes themselves are dependent on changes in historical culture. More
importantly, in the Scandinavian case peaceful relations between the nations were
already established when efforts to change history education were made. This was
also the case with successful Franco-German history textbook projects that
flourished in the wake of political and economic rapprochement after the Second
World War, in contrast to similar Sino-Korean-Japanese projects that have not
been as successful in getting a common history accepted. Successful changes in
education in order to promote peace between former combatants (in both internal
and bilateral conflicts) have been recognised as ‘only one part of a more general
policy of reconciliation’ (Höpken, 2008, p. 379).
Overall, currently friendly relations between nations or other groups seem to be
a prerequisite for agreeing on historical interpretations of perceived wrongdoings.
In her study on the different problems of history and history education in South
Africa, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Finland, Sirkka Ahonen has shown that even
though the contexts are very different, there are also very clear similarities in the
mythical motifs portrayed in these different societies. For example, in all of these
societies the perception of history revolved around the mythical notions of guilt,
victimhood, heroes, betrayal, and redemption. Ahonen’s study also shows that
coming to terms with the past after a civil war is very much dependent on the
former warring groups’ perceived degree of contemporary social inclusion within
society (Ahonen, 2012).
Despite the fact that many projects have focused on making history more
overarching and inclusive, agreeing on interpretations of the past does not seem to
be a reasonable instrument for establishing friendly relations between groups that
are in conflict. Rather, agreements on historical matters have often been a
consequence of already established friendly relations between nations or at least
somewhat equal opportunities within them (Ahonen, 2012; Elmersjö, 2013).
However, because nationalism, history education and historiography are strongly
interlinked, it is hard to agree on overarching narratives between nations even
when relations are exceptionally good.
Embracing difference by teaching different narratives – sometimes referred to as
‘multi-perspectivity’ – is a line of pedagogy that addresses the consequences of
post-modern thought and teaches multiple perspectives on history. This approach is
probably a prerequisite in multicultural classrooms where all students cannot be
expected to feel included in the same narrative (Cannadine, Keating, & Sheldon,
2011). However, depending on how it is executed, this way of teaching can also be
problematic because it delineates which history is ours, and which history is theirs,
and this could lead to more focus on the boundaries between groups.
It has been argued that societies have differences and that these differences are
something that should be nurtured and celebrated in a democracy. Emphasising
such differences in history education would likely unveil the cultural dimension of
making sense of the past by not only teaching different narratives, but by providing
insights into the way history is culturally embedded. This would, therefore,
166
explicitly discuss and nurture the friction between different conceptions of history
(Park, 2012). The focus in such history teaching would hopefully not be on
differences between groups, but instead on differences between the narratives these
groups produce and hold true. Thus it would be imperative not to compare these
narratives to a corrective narrative. It could be argued that this line of teaching,
without true correctives, says more about the discursiveness of history than about
supposedly fundamental differences between people of different cultures.
Therefore, it might do more to provide favourable conditions for peaceful relations
than merely teaching different perspectives without drawing attention to the
concept of historical culture. This would mean that the dichotomising of history
and memory needs to be reconsidered.
Regret policy – Historical apologies, recognition, and inclusion

In the wake of less nationalistic, more reconciliatory, and more inclusive history,
the struggle for acknowledgement and reparation for past oppression of minorities
has been coupled with a need to show moral excellence in liberal democracies.
This win-win situation has led to a series of apologies that can be seen as both a
recognition of minorities in the wake of the decline of the nation-state and at the
same time a moral victory for the governments extending the apology (Olick, 2007;
Barkan, 2003; 2009; Höpken, 2008). As a consequence of friendlier and/or more
intense economic relations between nations formerly at war, claims for bilateral
apologies have also been made with the overarching goal of reparation,
acknowledgement, and reconciliation. This trend will become more visible in
history education as the apologies are included in curriculum and become part of
the historical narrative.
One of the ideas behind such apologies could be to recognise and express
respect for a particular group of people as being different (Kruks, 2001). However,
in most cases the idea behind government apologies is probably more related to the
liberal notion of inclusive recognition where groups that have been treated as
different are recognised for their part of something universal rather than for their
uniqueness.
The basic idea behind this latter form of apology is that it could provide an
inclusive environment where both victims and perpetrators can begin to discuss a
joint experience, and from that to also see a potential future together. However,
these inclusive apologies also (re)produce both the group that is apologising and
the group they are apologising to. If a government’s apology on behalf of ‘the
nation’ is extended to a national minority that also considers themselves part of the
same nation, the ambiguity of the apology’s inclusive potential is especially visible.
It could even be interpreted as effectively excluding the minority from the nation
despite the inclusive intention behind the apology (Löfström, 2011).
It has been argued that an institution such as the state, its government, or some
part of that government, can indeed be held responsible for wrongdoings across
generations. The political community of a state is a political agent, and it is,
therefore, responsible for past wrongs in its name in the same sense that individuals
167
are responsible for things they did in the past when they were essentially different
persons (Thompson, 2002).
It has also been argued, however, that nations are not only political communities,
but also cultural communities. These two types of communities, while overlapping,
are often treated as interchangeable when it comes to the nation-state, and this
leads to the reproduction of cultural hegemony within the state. As Jan Löfström
has shown, the act of taking responsibility for historical wrongdoings can be
considered an act of exclusion and a reproduction of the nation as a culturally
exclusive entity. The rhetoric of apologies often refers to a common history, not as
a political community, but as a historically established cultural community
(Löfström, 2011).
Apologies, and the implied transgenerational guilt that accompanies them, are
the product of good intentions, but they can have quite far-reaching implications.
Taking responsibility as a cultural community in the name of a state might lead to
the ethnification of citizenship. This is not exclusive to apologies and is a
consequence of the cultural features of history in general. History is taught and told
to groups, and apologising for history in the name of a group is, of course, a group-
making project in that it clarifies the historical bond between its imagined members.
Even if pride and prejudice is taken out of this history, it is still part of a process
that conveys the group in question as perennial and in effect says: ‘This is our
history, even if we are not proud of it’.
Even if apologies for historical wrongdoings make way for the recognition of
suffering, and are effectively inclusive in that sense, there is an imminent risk of
closing the cultural community even further, and it is not certain, or even likely,
that this will bring about the kind of reconciliation that was intended.
CONCLUSIONS
In this chapter I have examined how culture and history are intertwined in a way
that perhaps makes it futile to fight nationalism and ethnocentric attitudes with
global perspectives on history. Making sense of the past could be considered very
much dependent on the context of what you want to make sense. The different
contexts produce diverse historical cultures that are overlapping and are part of the
process of creating and maintaining identities. One of the major issues for history
education lies in the problematic relation between facts and truth in the
understanding of the past. A historical fact, and one that might even be undisputed,
can be the source of multiple interpretations depending on which culture’s history
it is supposed to explain and which narrative it is incorporated into. If truth is
relative to given conceptual systems (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980), then the act of
incorporating an undisputed fact in different narratives (i.e., different conceptual
systems) will ultimately give rise to multiple, and possibly competing, truths.
History education cannot create new identities because identity and history are
interrelated; identities produce history as much as history produces identity. The
narrative that would have to be formed if history was to produce a new, not yet
168
established, identity would not make sense because the historical questions such a
narrative would answer have not been asked.
The cultural aspect of history is not limited to narratives of superiority or
national pride. When people of different groups have reached agreements – and in
the spirit of fellowship and affinity have apologised for past wrongful deeds – they
still need the instruments of cultural inclusion and exclusion to determine exactly
who is apologising to whom. The process of de-nationalising the world in general,
and history in particular, has not only given rise to more overarching narratives on
Europe, East Asia, and the world in general, but also a more diverse set of
narratives when minorities and oppressed groups are demanding recognition for
their particular experience of history. The historical experience seems to become
more particular, and this means that more people become recognised for a
particular experience and that conflicts between different groups in society are
acknowledged.
Education in general is both a site of, and a tool for, social transformation.
However, it responds in a dialectic relation to changes within its society. When it
comes to so-called ‘post-conflict societies’, history education cannot be expected to
both explain historical conflicts within society and at the same time present an
inclusive narrative. An inclusive narrative could even limit the ability to make
conflicts within society visible and understandable.
When successful steps have been taken to come to terms with the past – within
or between nations – it has been as a consequence of already established friendlier,
more equal, and more inclusive relations. Thus global history might not be the
means by which global awareness can be accomplished, but it might instead be the
outcome of such global awareness. What history education can contribute with in
order to promote peace and reconciliation is to provide insights into how history is
culturally embedded, not by depriving history of culture. Such an approach could
help to create a societal atmosphere in which conflicts are visible and different
narratives are not only tolerated, but where the friction between them is also valued
as an important feature of a democratic and dynamic society.
NOTES
1
When I use the term ‘group’, I am not referring to essentially distinguishable groups but instead to
imagined groups (or perhaps, more accurately, categories) where the members are presumed to feel
associated even if they are not. History and history teaching are in this sense ‘group-making
projects’ (Brubaker, 2002).
2
Perhaps the idea of forgetting the past in order to promote peaceful relations deserves some more
attention from scholars of history education. However, in the global media landscape of today it is
increasingly difficult for entire societies to just forget. Also, the repudiation of such ideas in the
context of peace education has been voiced for a long time. In 1937, as a response to ideas of
forgetting conflicts between the Norwegian and Swedish governments during the union between the
two states, some Swedish historians wrote: From a Nordic perspective it is obvious that earlier
generations’ perceptions of the political problems on our peninsula are of interest for contemporary
youth. Neither historical truth nor our contemporary cooperation would benefit if former friction
between us was essentially avoided in history education (Herlitz, Agvald, Grauers, & Carlgren,
1937, p. 216). It was not only the denial of historical truth that was seen as problematic; the
169
consequences of such denials for the contemporary and future cooperation between the nations were
also addressed.
3
I am sceptical about the term ‘post-conflict society’ because it suggests – to some extent – that there
are societies without conflicts.
REFERENCES
Ahonen, S. (2012). Coming to terms with a dark past: How post-conflict societies deal with history.
Frankfurt, Germany: Peter Lang.
Alfred, T. (1999). Peace, power, and righteousness: An indigenous manifesto. Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press.
Apple, M. W. (1993). Official knowledge: Democratic education in a conservative age. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Apple, M. W. (2013). Can education change society? New York, NY: Routledge.
Barkan, E. (2003). The guilt of nations: Restitution and negotiating historical injustices. Baltimore, MD:
Johns Hopkins University Press.
Barkan, E. (2009). Historians and historical reconciliation. The American Historical Review, 114(4),
899–913.
Barton, K. C. (2012). Wars and rumors of war: The rhetoric and reality of history education in the
United States. In T. Taylor & R. Guyver (Eds.), History wars and the classroom: Global
perspectives (pp. 187–202). Charlotte, NC: International Age.
Bender, T. (2009). Can national history be de-provincialized? U.S. history textbook controversies in the
1940s and 1990s. Journal of Educational Media, Memory, and Society, 1(1), 25–38.
Berger, S., & Lorenz, C. (Eds.). (2010). Nationalizing the past: Historians as nation builders in modern
Europe. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Brubaker, R. (2002). Ethnicity without groups. Archives Européennes de Sociologie, 43(2), 163–189.
Cannadine, D., Keating, J., & Sheldon, N. (2011). The right kind of history: Teaching the past in
twentieth-century England. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Carlgren, W. (Ed.). (1928). Report on nationalism in history textbooks. Stockholm, Sweden: Magn.
Bergvalls förlag.
Carretero, M. (2011). Constructing patriotism: Teaching history and memories in global worlds.
Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Challand, B. (2009). European identity and external others in history textbooks (1950–2005). Journal of
Educational Media, Memory, and Society, 1(2), 60–96.
Dierkes, J. (2005). The decline and rise of the nation in German history education. In H. Schissler & Y.
N. Soysal (Eds.), The nation, Europe, and the world: Textbooks and curricula in transition (pp. 82–
102). New York, NY: Berghahn Books.
Dierkes, J. (2010). Guilty lessons? Postwar history education in Japan and the Germanys. New York,
NY: Routledge.
Dunn, R. E. (2000). Constructing world history in the classroom. In P. N. Stearns, P. Seixas, & S.
Wineburg (Eds.), Knowing, teaching and learning history: National and international perspectives
(pp. 121–140). New York, NY: New York University Press.
Elmersjö, H. Å. (2013). Norden, nationen och historien: Perspektiv på föreningarna Nordens
historieläroboksrevision, 1919–1972 [Nordic national history: Perspectives on the revision of
history textbook by the Norden Associations, 1919–1972]. Lund, Sweden: Nordic Academic Press.
Elmersjö, H. Å. (2014). History beyond borders: Peace education, history textbook revision, and the
internationalization of history teaching in the twentieth century. Historical Encounters: A journal of
historical consciousness, historical cultures, and history education, 1(1), 62–74.
Elmersjö, H. Å., & Lindmark, D. (2010). Nationalism, peace education, and history textbook revision in
Scandinavia, 1886–1940. Journal of Educational Media, Memory, and Society, 3(2), 63–74.
Foster, S. J. (1999). The struggle for American identity: Treatment of ethnic groups in United States
history textbooks. History of Education, 28(3), 251–278.
170
Gasanabo, J. (2006). Fostering peaceful co-existence through analysis and revision of history curricula
and textbooks in Southeast Europe. Paris, France: UNESCO.
Han U., Kondo, T., Yang, B., & Pingel, F. (Eds.). (2012). History education and reconciliation:
Comparative perspectives on East Asia. Frankfurt, Germany: Peter Lang.
Herlitz, N., Agvald, R., Grauers, S., & Carlgren, W. (1937). Till Norges facknämnd för granskning av
historiska läroböcker [To the Norwegian commission of experts for the revision of history
textbooks]. In W. Carlgren, A.R. Cederberg, K. Kretzschmer & H. Vigander (Eds.), Nordens
läroböcker i historia [Nordic history textbooks] (pp. 209–220). Helsinki, Finland: Föreningen
Norden.
Höpken, W. (2008). History textbooks in post-war and post-conflict societies: Preconditions and
experiences in comparative perspective. In S. Richter (Ed.), Contested views of a common past:
Revisions of history in contemporary East Asia (pp. 373–395). Frankfurt, Germany: Campus Verlag.
Hovland, B. M. (2013). From a narrative of suffering towards a narrative of growth: Norwegian history
textbooks in the inter-war period. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 57(6), 625–638.
International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation. (1933). School text-book revision and international
understanding. Paris, France: League of Nations.
Iriye, A. (2013). Global and transnational history: The past, present, and future. Basingstoke, UK:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Jenkins, K. (1991). Re-thinking history. New York, NY: Routledge.
Karlsson, K. G. (2003). The Holocaust as a problem of historical culture: Theoretical and analytical
challenges. In K. G. Karlsson & U. Zander (Eds.), Echoes of the Holocaust: Historical cultures in
contemporary Europe (pp. 9–57). Lund, Sweden: Nordic Academic Press.
K. V. Korostelina & S. Lässig (Eds.). (2013). History education and post-conflict reconciliation:
Reconsidering joint textbook projects. New York, NY: Routledge.
Kruks, S. (2001). Retrieving experience: Subjectivity and recognition in feminist politics. Ithaca, NY:
Cornell University Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, Il: The University of Chicago Press.
Lässig, S., & Strobel, T. (2013). Towards a joint German-Polish history textbook: Historical roots,
structures and challenges. In K. V. Korostelina & S. Lässig (Eds.), History education and post-
conflict reconciliation: Reconsidering joint textbook projects (pp. 90–119). New York, NY:
Routledge.
Lauwerys, J. A. (1953). History textbooks and international understanding. Paris, France: UNESCO.
Löfström, J. (2011). Historical apologies as acts of symbolic inclusion – and exclusion? Reflections on
institutional apologies as politics of cultural citizenship. Citizenship Studies, 15(1), 93–108.
Macintyre, S., & Clark, A. (2003). The history wars. Melbourne, Australia: Melbourne University Press.
Malmros, I. D. (2012). Det var en gång ett land ... Berättelser om svenskhet i historieläroböcker och
elevers föreställningsvärldar [Once upon a time there was a country … Narratives about
‘Swedishness’ in history textbooks and students’ worldviews]. Höör, Sweden: Agerings.
Martins, H. (1974). Time and theory in sociology. In J. Rex (Ed.), Approaches to Sociology (pp. 246–
294). London, UK: Kegan Paul.
Nygren, T. (2011). International reformation of Swedish history education, 1927–1961: The complexity
of implementing international understanding. Journal of World History, 22(2), 329–354.
Olick, J. K. (2007). The politics of regret: On collective memory and historical responsibility. New
York, NY: Routledge.
Park, K. S. (2012). Remembering wars: War memorial halls and historical disputes in northeast Asia. In
U. Han, T. Kondo, B. Yang, & F. Pingel (Eds.), History education and reconciliation: Comparative
perspectives on East Asia (pp. 175–192). Frankfurt, Germany: Peter Lang.
Parkes, R. J. (2013). Postmodernism, historical denial, and history education: What Frank Ankersmit
can offer to history didactics. Nordidactica, 3(2), 20–36.
Pingel, F. (2008). Can truth be negotiated? History textbook revision as a means to reconciliation.
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 617, 181–198.
171
Pingel, F. (2010). UNESCO guidebook on textbook research and textbook revision (2nd rev. & updated
ed.). Paris, France/Braunschweig, Germany: UNESCO/GEI.
Porat, D. A. (2004). “It’s not written here, but this is what happened”: Students’ cultural comprehension
of textbook narratives on the Israeli-Arab conflict. American Educational Research Journal, 41(4),
963–996.
Rüsen, J. (2001). Zerbrechende Zeit: Über den Sinn der Geschichte [A frangible time: About the
meaning of history]. Köln, Germany: Böhlau Verlag.
Rüsen, J. (2002). Geschichte im kulturprocess [History in the process of culture]. Köln, Germany:
Böhlau Verlag.
Shore, C. (2000). Building Europe: The cultural politics of European integration. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Sjöberg, E. (2011). Battlefields of memory: The Macedonian conflict and Greek historical culture.
Umeå, Sweden: Umeå University.
Thelen, D. (1999).The nation and beyond: Transnational perspectives on United States history. The
Journal of American History, 86(3), 965–975.
Thompson, J. (2002). Taking responsibility for the past: Reparation and historical justice. Cambridge,
UK: Polity Press.
VanSledright, B. (2008). Narratives of nation-state, historical knowledge, and school history education.
Review of Research in Education, 32, 109–146.
Wertsch, J. V. (2000). Is it possible to teach beliefs, as well as knowledge about history? In P. N.
Stearns, P. Seixas, & S. Wineburg (Eds.), Knowing, teaching and learning history: National and
international perspectives (pp.38–50). New York: New York University Press.
White, H. (1980). The value of narrativity in the representation of reality. Critical Inquiry, 7(1), 5–27.
Henrik Åström Elmersjö

Department of Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies
Umeå University
172
DEBRA DONNELLY & KATHRYN GRUSHKA
14. THE DIGITAL STUDIO AS A

GLOBAL EDUCATION SITE
Imaging to Examine Issues of Social Justice and Human Rights
INTRODUCTION
The investigation of human rights and social justice are major objectives of an
innovative pre-service teacher-training course at a regional Australian university.
The course immerses a cross curricula cohort of secondary pre-service teachers in
an arts-led critical global education agenda (Gibson, 2011). This chapter argues
that digital technologies and the world of visual representations should be centrally
positioned for learning in this ocular-centric 21st century (Rose, 2007). It further
contends that harnessing the possibilities afforded by arts-based inquiry (Barone &
Eisner, 2012; Davidson, 2011; Finley, 2005) and the manipulation of images
afforded by digital technologies is an excellent strategy for developing
understandings about global issues through visual media culture production. These
digital productive strategies challenge disciplinary prescriptions and can move the
pre-service teacher beyond objectivity and application to critical interpretations and
contextualised understandings as they evolve their global citizenry identity (Osler,
2002; Maguth, 2013). This teacher preparation course seeks to cultivate
investigation, open-mindedness and engagement to develop critical citizenry
insights and empathic understandings that in turn propel agency. The course is
assessed via the produced artworks that are positioned as learning objects for
classroom use. The learning objects aim to counter cultural stereotypes, examining
issues of inequality and human rights and discerning and repairing the view of the
‘other’ in a post-colonial era (Dykes, Furdyk, Hassan, & Corriero, 2013). This
chapter uses the Studio Pedagogy for Visual World Learning model as a
framework to discuss examples of student work and analyse the elements of
effective pedagogical practices.
CREATIVE LEARNING PRACTICES IN THE DIGITAL STUDIO
Arts-based pedagogies have much to offer the digital learning environment as they
accommodate the critical, interpretive and aesthetic experience in learning
(Harding & Ingraham, 2013). A recent report produced by the New Media
Consortium of Higher Education (Johnson, Adams Becker, Estrada, & Freeman,
2014) has identified that the learning practices of new media are ‘learning by

exploring, learning by creating, learning by playing, self-regulated learning,

personalised learning and peer-to-peer collaboration’ and the teaching practices
will involve ‘soft skills, individual strengths, multiple learning styles and multiple
modes of thinking’ (p. 4). The visual arts pedagogies of studio learning, with their
emphasis on problem solving and communication, carry significant educational
impact (Hetland, Veenema, & Sheridan, 2007; Winner, Goldstein, & Vincent-
Lancrin, 2013) that embeds the learning practices identified by the New Media
Consortium (NMC).
It has been argued that teaching practices using digital technology have lagged
(Mishra & Koehler, 2006). Buckingham (2012) argues that notions of teaching and
learning have remained essentially untouched by technology, while the lives of
young people have become increasingly filled with digital technologies and its
productive potential. The theorised model for teaching with technology that has
gained most attention in recent years has been the Technological Pedagogical
Content Knowledge (TPCK) (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). This was designed to
represent the technologically rich multimodal classroom and the integration of
technology, pedagogy and content knowledge in learning events. This model
focused on the development of technological pedagogical reasoning informing
instructional design decisions by the teacher, rather than the design of student-
centred productive learning (Angeli & Valanides, 2009). Recently, critical voices
have argued for a refocus of TPCK to a more student-centred constructivist
position and the TPCK model designers have acknowledged that the premise of
modern technology tools driving teaching and learning is a myth. They now
acknowledge that the generation of new knowledge is grounded in development of
cognitive tools and imaginative endeavours (Lloyd, 2013; Mishra, 2012; Mishra &
Yadav, 2013).
In the arts-studio environment learning moves beyond technology training and
skills-oriented learning to critical and interpretive understandings. It focuses on
dialogical conversations that emerge from critical inquiry about artefacts, concepts,
material practices, digital technologies and critical reflective processes. In this
learning environment, knowledge is co-constructed and teachers and pre-service
teachers learn through creative and interpretive approaches to understanding
experience, experimentation and performative acts in the creation of digital objects.
As multimodal practitioners, learners require a repertoire of visual language and
knowledge of how images and other modalities work together in contemporary
media communication. This pedagogy rejects the learning metaphor of acquisition,
and shifts to learning through participation, collaboration and/or production where
learners have greater levels of agency, social connectedness and autonomy (Lloyd,
2013). Contemporary educational environments and their semiotic complexity
require a shift in pedagogies to a more critical and reflective epistemology driven
by an inquiry focus (Kalantzis & Cope, 2005; Leu, Kinzer, Corio, & Cammack,
2004; Provenzo, Goodwin, & Lipsk, 2011).
174
THE DIGITAL STUDIO AS AN EDUCATION SITE
STUDIO PEDAGOGY FOR VISUAL WORLD LEARNING
Figure 1 offers a model of visual exploration and production that is grounded in

developing global cultural literacy (Donnelly & Grushka, in press). The four
quadrants of the model provide a schema through which to unpack effective
pedagogical practices and illuminate its broad application to a range of learning
environments.
Figure 1. The model of studio pedagogy for visual world learning
The model has been informed by practitioner inquiry (Kemmis, 2011) to

develop a praxis emergent from our own teaching experiences and the literature of
multimodal pedagogies. This practitioner orientation acknowledges that skills in
reading and writing paper text are no longer sufficient for future citizens and that
technology and resulting globalisation requires a more wide-ranging set of skills
and understandings (Kress & Van Leeuween, 2006; Anstey & Bull, 2006;
Kalantizis & Cope, 2005; McLoughlin & Lee, 2008; Zammit & Downes, 2002). It
finds learners navigating, reading and producing across texts and positions them as
image producers. The pre-service teachers are tasked to move beyond the
illustrative to more complex and expressive visual forms of communication,
employing critical and creative image and meaning-making strategies. The model
also draws on the learning-technology-by-design approach where the emphasis is
placed on becoming a technological practitioner through creating artefacts
(Buckingham, 2012). This is student centred learning-by-doing and involves
175
critical reflection, problem solving, dialogue, application of technological

processes and iterative creative acts. The pedagogical approach features an arts-
based inquiry process which involves creative inquiry and performance, inductive
and creative modes of reasoning and problem-solving, collaboration and the co-
construction of meaning, analysis, critical and reflective processes, presentation
and evaluation. Such pedagogies carry the transformational goals of arts education
(Dewey, 2005; Eisner, 2002) and resonate with global education aims, perspectives
and skills (Global Education Project NSW, 2014).
THE LEARNING CONTEXT
The design of this pre-service teacher preparation course aligns with the bottom
quadrants of the model (Figure 1) above and sets up an exploratory framework of
the visual by introducing the learners to the role of images in communication
through time and by implementing an instructional agenda in digital technologies
that allows for the critical manipulation of images and text. Explicit learning
protocols see the cohort introduced to visual education principles, via a short
lecture series, aimed to raise awareness of the visual in interdisciplinary learning,
the role of the visual in media communication and the provision of instruction in
the application of visual design principles or structures.
Learners are introduced to the role of images in multiple text analysis as it
applies to local curriculum documents and empowered to broaden their digital
computer competencies. The course is delivered in a computer lab at university but
has equal application in any classroom as learners in various settings increasingly
have access to technology. The course creates links to the web, a contemporary
communication portal, and current school curriculum learning outcomes. It has a
strong interdisciplinary approach but is driven primarily through image
construction and finds the pre-service teachers working outside their discipline
areas. Mishra (2012) supports this approach arguing that creative work is (in)
discipline but works across discipline boundaries. It applies a critical and
interpretive lens when focusing on: accessing image data sources; refining image
selection; digitally manipulating images; re-contextualising images as digital
montage to make new meaning and using narrative and disruption to trigger
learning. Learners draw on a wide range of images as data, such as historical
images, family photographs, popular media, advertising, maps, letters, histograms,
scientific illustration or other photographical evidence of the physical to inform a
site or case study, event or narrative. Collins (1995) describes this authentic
learning as developing the skill of ‘techno-textuality’, the mediation of knowledge
using new media and new literacies (Anstey & Bull, 2006; Cope & Kalantzis 2008).
The produced posters are used for visual analysis and possible interpretations drive
extended discussions around the key issues or problems such as social justice or
human rights.
The course then moves to the digital studio phase during which learning objects
for classroom use are created or (re)presented in the form of a series of discursive
posters. This hands-on or performative approach finds the learners encountering
176
arts inquiry habits of mind such as close observation, envisioning, exploration,

persistence, expression, collaboration, and reflection (Winner et al., 2013). The
production of learning object/posters and their associated pedagogical applications
taps into the cognitive potential afforded by the dialogues that emerge between this
multi-disciplinary cohort of pre-service teachers. Many of these pre-service
teachers have had little or no background in visual education before. Often this is
their first encounter with the world of semiotic theory and contemporary graphic
communication practices such as image production through appropriation,
juxtaposition, irony, satire or humour. With a focus on the digital montage and
communicating ideas to an audience, pre-service teachers critically examine the
image as artefactual evidence along with the selection of appropriate texts and
resources. They consider how structural and post-structural framings combine to
make meanings through image analysis and consider how the image contributes to
the pedagogies of multiliteracies in their classroom teaching. The pre-service
teachers learn to discern and be critical of the ways the ubiquitous image
unconsciously transfers messages to an audience. In particular, attention is given to
messages as image and how they carry strong undercurrents of power or aim to
influence audience desires or attitudes through the manipulation of truths.
The independent self-directed learning structure of the digital studio
environment provides the learners with a sense of agency and autonomy in their
learning. They are empowered by the freedom to explore issues through the
investigation of how images when combined in different ways can shift meanings
or when they are re-represented with other texts through intentional manipulation
can present new meanings. These posters are not designed to simply retell existing
narratives in a visual form but to create tension and irony for the viewer with the
opportunity to find new interpretations.
Digital technologies provide access to a vast bank of existing world images and
the opportunity to make their own personal digital image repertoire through
individual photographic acts or manipulation. The pre-service teachers are
encouraged to explore the historical legacy of these images to come to a deeper
understanding of their discipline and make links to their own experience. The
studio environment then further deepens the learning through multi-level
collaboration that find the learners in critical conversations about intended
meanings, possible meanings and enacting new meanings through re-
representations. The pre-service teachers not only learn from the staff and from
their own explorations but with and from each other. Learners critique one
another’s work, move around the learning space as they co-construct knowledge
through image analysis, interpretation and through discussing ideas and techniques
refine the meanings of their works.
Clear criteria and deadlines are a feature of the assessment regime with a mid-
course show and tell presentation and the final poster series expo held in the last
week. In the last session of the course, learners display their completed work and
undertake a short presentation and reflection on the creative process and the
product. The focus of this event is celebration of achievement and recognition of
their learning journeys. This is always an enjoyable and casual gathering and
177
culminates in setting up the exhibition in the corridors of the teaching spaces. This
exhibition, while the final stage in the assessment cycle, heralds a new encounter
with a wider audience of peers which sees the learners again re-evaluate the
success of their posters, many considering further refinement at this point or
venturing to new ideas for classroom implementation.
The posters are assessed in relation to conceptualisation and refinement from the
initial presentation, semiotic skills, authenticity to the unit of work, and a
professional presentation standard. A high achieving work will demonstrate the
complex ideas, multiple interpretive possibilities and refinement in visualisation.
This is measured by the ability to present coherent ideas and communicate how
their concepts as images are refined. Each narrative perspective reflects
sophisticated use of semiotics to create multiple layers of meaning using images
and text or other semiotic systems with evidenced high information communication
technology (ICT) and visual digital technical skills. This authentic assessment task
specifically links personal inquiry to motivation and engagement in learning and
addresses the public and accountable aspects of curriculum in the classroom.
CONCEPTUAL UNDERPINNINGS
The conceptual underpinnings of the course align with the top quadrants of the
Studio Pedagogy for Visual World Learning model (Figure 1). Globalised Identity
Learning within the course acknowledges that contemporary life world is now a
collage of ever-increasing hybrid visual and auditory experiences that happen in a
time and spatial compression. Individual social, cultural and national identities
shift, compress and connect at increasing speed and give rise to the notion of the
world citizen. It is new media and digital images that facilitate the productive
forces that occupy this space. The photograph or video can capture individual and
collective memories and digital technology allows for these to be connected to
global community audience.
The work of Case (1993) and Merryfield (2000) have inspired the direction of
this course. Case (1993) identified two interconnected dimensions that facilitate a
global perspective: the substantive and perceptual. He defined the substantive
elements as knowledge of cultural values and practices, global interconnections,
present worldwide concerns and conditions, historic origins and patterns in
worldwide events and future directions. The perceptual dimension included five
cognitive and affective attributes: open-mindedness, anticipation and acceptance of
complexity, resistance to stereotyping, inclination to empathy and gender equity.
This work is sustained by Merryfield (2000), who has promoted the demolition of
post-colonial knowledge structures and a transformation to an understanding of the
‘interaction and synergy of the global human experience’ (Zong, 2005, p. 5).
Merryfield advocates giving voice to the marginalised, the omitted and the mis-
represented and questions accepted power relationships in culture dialogues. It is
these notions that inform the explorations of the pre-service teachers in this course
and it is through creativity, that the intellect and affective domains of learning are
given voice and, revelatory conclusions reached. In order to deal with these
178
complexities, successful citizens of a globalised world need skills and attitudes that
allow them to collaborate, negotiate, think critically and gain multiple perspectives
through dialogic co-construction of meaning with individuals from diverse
backgrounds, interests and cultures (Gibson, 2008) and it is this concept of world
citizen that is promoted in this pre-service teaching course.
In the pre-service teacher work sample Dying to Go to School (Figure 2) the
power of image manipulation and the compression of global issues is intensified
through the empathic overlaying of the makers’ life experiences of going to school
with those of school in war torn countries. The pre-service teachers contrast their
own photograph of a prosaic suburban railway station and message to construct a
powerful image that comments of the politics and consequences of war through an
affective image for the viewer. As the viewer moves around the images they pick
up signs of capitalist, technological or western privilege, trains, bikes, and
computers. In the centre of the image the viewer is drawn to a war scene, people
fleeing from violence and death and the ironic tag, ‘dying to go to school’. The
tearful eye emphasises the tragedy of the innocents caught in a dangerous time and
place. The protective gesture of the boy on the right shielding his sister as they go
to school highlights the bonds of humanity drawing a powerful empathic connect
between the children in the photograph to the ones on the billboard. This image
skilfully connects the danger and violence of war to the privilege comfort of the
western society and the deeply human need for security, love and education.
Figure 2. Student work sample Dying to Go to School, Pheobe Rioden and Lauren Sullivan,
digital image (2010)
179
It is an excellent example of how the course values personal experience, the

imaginal and an ethics of integration in learning (Semetsky, 2010). The pre-service
teachers iteratively explore meanings as they merge the personal photograph with
the online image using the conceit of a billboard. This finds them able to use the
digital imaging process to link a recent historically imaged event to their own real
and affective experiences. It demonstrates how pre-service teachers can come to
understand that globalisation brings with it an increasing need for empathy for
others. Dying to Go to School is an example of outrospection which extends the
individuals’ knowledge of self beyond his/her own ego and self-interest, by
empathising with other people as one seeks to understand how they think, feel and
experience the world (Krznaric, 2011). Through re-representing multiple digital
images the pre-service teacher can explore being a world citizen able to engage
with trans-national concerns and can comment on global issues such as the
environment, peace, trade, inequality, cultural imperialism and educational access
(Gibson, 2008).
In Figure 3, Aboriginal Vision (below) the pre-service teacher has consciously
decided to deal directly with identity and how history has actively shaped his
agency and that of an Aboriginal community that has experienced oppression,
exploitation, alienation, rejection and displacement since European occupation of
Australia. Selecting a child, an innocent inheritor of history, provides an affectively
powerful connect to the audience. In addition, the pre-service teacher has worked
with the extreme close-up as a tool to direct closer observation. As the viewers are
drawn into the eye of the child, they can identify symbols that carry strong cultural,
social and historical connotations. The reflection of the cross and rainbow serpent
Figure 3. Student work sample Aboriginal Vision, Nathan Te Rangi, digital image (2011)
180
in the eye symbolises the tensions of opposing cultural and spiritual traditions and
the positioning of the cross on top of the serpents serves to reinforce the tragedy of
political, cultural and economic imperialism for indigenous identity and culture.
The juxtapositioning of these powerful symbols highlight the uneasy relationship
between past paternalistic policies and the present realities of disadvantage and
alienation in contemporary Aboriginal society. This narrative connects the
audience directly to the world of the child through their own affective experiences
and offers up opportunities for multiple narratives to coexist through interpretive
possibilities.
Imaging acts see the pre-service teacher as creator testing their ideas about self
with those of others as a communicative act (Habermas, 1979). Communicative
knowing in the contexts of image production and exhibition focuses on how this
learning carries technical, interpretive and emancipatory knowledge and works to
represent society, perform self and offer up new possibilities that reveal life events
in ways that often confront social justice and human rights issues. In this context
the pre-service teachers are encouraged to communicate the notion of relationality,
where they can create a space that sits between self and other. This learning space
is embodied and links feelings, the imagination and aesthetic responses in ways
that connect the producer to the world of experience and experimentation for
personal agency (Semetsky, 2003, 2010). Employing such an embodied pedagogy
(O’Loughlin, 2006), sees the pre-service teacher producing images that are
informed by his inner and outer worlds of experience. Aboriginal Vision
effectively addresses issues of identity, conformity and racial stereotyping
enhancing a disposition of critical citizenry in its creator and in the viewer.
This visual pedagogy is grounded in life events and acknowledges that the
identification of self often resides in the visual clues of one’s life world and that it
is increasingly necessary to explore images in the global context as they embed
both personal and global identities (Jones, 2007).
INHABITING THE PROBLEMATISED GLOBAL SPACE
Current definitions of global citizenship focus on being active members of

community as political, social, environmental and economic agents and the
potential for new connectedness and interdependence to the broader society. While
our visual global world may facilitate cultural diversity and the promise of the
development of dispositions that are more open, tolerant and flexible, it also
presents the contradictory position. This position speaks of a world of rapid
movement across traditional boundaries, the emergence of new borders, the
homogenising of cultures, a world of social and economic inequality, religious
intolerance, social and political instability. Robertson (1992) has offered a useful
definition of globalisation as involving not only what people do but the way they
view the world. He proposes that globalisation has brought about a vision of ‘the
compression of the world and the intensification of consciousness of the world as a
whole’ (p. 8). Contemporary citizens are saturated with images and impressions
from all over the world. This chapter argues that if classrooms are to build
181
informed global citizens, the pre-service teachers must be equipped with the skills
to navigate the visual transnational commodity society and its rapid
communication context and have the pedagogical skills to provide problematised
encounters in learning.
Figure 4. Student work sample Equal Pay, Troy Hepple, digital image (2011)
Pike (2000) claims that ‘if the meaning of global education is to be understood
at a profound level, the challenge is to find creative ways to assist practitioners in
the removal of national borders, not just in their curriculums but also in their
thinking’ (p. 71). The pre-service teacher work sample Equal Pay provides
evidence of how the performative act of creating a digital image is able to break
down national boarders through the overlay of images. The digital poster collapses
the spaces between the global, the national and the personal compressing time and
space to comment on gender inequity in an Australian context. Fragmentary
photographic images of women from the 1950s and 60s fighting for equal rights
and pay is first echoed in the watermark background image of the domestic woman.
The reader’s eye then shifts to the Australian dollar note, a symbol of power and
inequality. The fore-grounded image of a grey scale US woman factory worker
with a bright red headscarf internationalises women’s work and stresses the
newfound confidence of the women’s movement in the post-war period. The
montage speaks of the economic and social freedoms experienced by many women
undertaking non-traditional work during World War II and the subsequent loss of
182
these after the war with the return of the men to the workforce. The 1950s saw a
new awareness of the power of women in society and the repeated ‘taken for
granted’ that headlines the work reinforces the notion of fighting back against the
re-imposition of inequality and sexism.
CONCLUSION
The arts-studio pedagogy builds an acceptance of dissonance, life world

connectivity, and interdisciplinary knowledge as the pre-service teachers engage in
the appropriation and re-mixing of global iconic imagery from, the art-world,
culture and the media. Using iconography or the application of visual conventions,
rather than simply presenting the world illustratively, the affective is harnessed to
deepen understanding of how images work to construct meanings and to carry
aesthetic and empathic insights.
In addition the pre-service teachers also explore their multimodal dispositions
and access a range of semiotic systems. Through critical thinking and the
exploration of interpretive possibilities, learners come to experience authentic and
self-managed learning. The independent self-directed learning structure in the arts
digital studio environment provides a powerful learning experience, which attests
to the transformative capacities of arts learning. The learners have been
empowered by the freedom to explore their discipline in a new way through the
image and text as digital montage. These works are innovative representations that
are designed to build a deeper understanding of their discipline issues and create
tension and irony for the viewer, not just to retell or narrate.
The examples presented in this chapter provide evidence that pre-service
teachers can move beyond the confines of their varied discipline fields and the self,
to the exploration of unequal global relationships across temporal, social,
geographic and semiotic domains using images. Developing visual communicative
competencies lies at the heart of arts-studio pedagogy and it can equip the next
generation of youth to deal with the ambiguity, contradictions and dissonance of
their increasingly visual media world. With today’s unprecedented challenges,
including inequity and global injustices, critically minded teachers need to inspire
their charges to envisage, propose and act to bring about the imaginative human
responses that the future will need. Deep understanding of global issues can be
nurtured in pre-service teachers through the development of critical conceptual and
productive imaging skills. Arts-pedagogies teach the skills to imagine the
possibilities of new understandings that surround personal experience while
crossing global boundaries.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to acknowledge the contribution of all the pre-service
teachers who ventured into this new area of learning. In particular, the following
pre-service teachers who gave permission for their images to be used in this paper:
Troy Hepple, Nathan Te Rangi, Pheobe Rioden and Lauren Sullivan.
183
REFERENCES
Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological & methodological issues for the conceptualisation,
development and assessment of ICT-TPACK: Advances in technological pedagogical content
knowledge. Computers and Education, 52, 154–168.
Anstey, M., & Bull, G. (2006). Teaching and learning multiliteracies: Changing times, changing
literacies. Kensington Gardens, SA: Australian Literacy Educators.
Barone, T., & Eisner, E. (2012). Arts-based research. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Buckingham, D. (2007). Digital media literacies: Rethinking media education in the age of the internet.
Research, Comparative and International Education, 2(1), 43–55.
Buckingham, D. (2012). Schooling the digital generation: New media, popular culture and the future of
education. London: Institute of Education Press.
Case, R. (1993). Key elements of a global perspective. Social Education, 57, 318–325.
Collins, J. (1995). Architectures of excess: Cultural life in the information age. New York: Routledge.
Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2008). Ubiquitous learning: An agenda for educational transformation.
In V. Hodgson et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Networked
Learning (pp. 576–582). Lancaster: Lancaster University. Retrieved from
http://www.networkedlearningconference.org.uk/past/nlc2008/abstracts/PDF /Cope_576-582.pdf
Davidson, J. (2011). The journal project: Research at the boundaries between social sciences and the
arts. Qualitative Inquiry, 18(1), 86–99.
Dewey, J. (2005). Art as experience. New York, NY: Perigee Books.
Donnelly, D., & Grushka, K. (in press). Global consciousness in the arts-studio: Digital imaging to
enhance cultural sensitivities in pre-service education. In M. C. Manifold, S. Willis, & E.
Zimmermann, (Eds.), Cultural sensitivity in a global world: A handbook for the teacher. Place of
Publication: National Art Education Association.
Dykes, G., Furdyk, M., Hassan, S., & Corriero, J. (2013). From learner voice to emerging leaders
(Promethean Thinking Deeper Research Paper No. 6). Alpharetta, GA: Promethean Education
Strategy Group. Retrieved from http://www.prometheanplanet.com/documents/uk-us/pdf/
professional-development/education-fast-forward/learner-voice-whitepaper.pdf
Eisner, E. (2002). Arts and the creation of mind. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Finley, S. (2005). Arts-based inquiry: Performing revolutionary pedagogy. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S.
Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 681–693). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Gibson, I. (2008). Evolving processes of global citizenship. Ritsumeika International Affairs, 6, 53–
75.
Gibson, R. E. (2011). Transforming the curriculum through the arts. South Yarra: Palgrave, Macmillan.
Global Education Project NSW. (2014). Global Perspectives: A framework for the development of
active global citizenship in NSW schools. Sydney, NSW: Author.
Habermas, J. (1979). Communication and the evolution of society (T. McCarthy, Trans.). Boston, MA:
Beacon Press. (Original work published 1976)
Harding, D., & Ingraham, B. (2013). The art of design. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe (Eds.), Rethinking
pedagogy for a digital age: Designing for 21st century learning (pp. 368–389). Hoboken: Taylor
and Francis.
Hetland, L. W., Veenema, S., & Sheridan, K. M. (2007). Studio thinking: The real benefits of Arts
Education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Estrada, V., Freeman, A. (2014). New Media Consortium, Horizon
Report: 2014 Higher Education Edition. Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved from
http://redarchive.nmc.org/publications/2014-horizon-report-higher-ed
Jones, A. (2007, June). 1970/2007: Why does feminism still matter in the visual arts? Paper presented at
Taking a Hard Look: Gender and Visual Culture Conference, Institute for Women’s and Gender
Studies, University of Pretoria, Pretoria.
184
Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. (2005). Learning by design. Melbourne: Victorian Schools Innovation
Commission.
Kemmis, S. (2011). A self-reflective practitioner and a new definition. In N. Mockler & J. Sachs (Eds.),
Rethinking educational practice through reflexive inquiry: Essays in honour of Susan Groundwater-
Smith (pp. 11-29). London/New York/ Dordrecht/Heidelberg: Springer
Kress, G., & Van Leeuween, T. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design (2nd ed.). New
York: Routledge.
Krznaric, R. (2011). The wonderbox: Curious histories of how to live. London: Profile Books.
Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J., & Cammack, D. W. (2004). Toward a theory of new literacies
emerging from the Internet and other information and communication technologies. In R. B. Ruddell
& N. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., pp. 1570–1613). Newark:
International Reading Association.
Lloyd, M. (2013). Something’s coming, something good: Identifying TPACK competence in pre-
service teachers’ analyses of learning objects. Australian Educational Computing, 28(1). Retrieved
from http://journal.acce.edu.au/index.php/AEC/article/view/12/PDF
Maguth, B. (2013). New directions in social education research: The influence of technology and
globalization on the lives of students. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Press.
McLoughlin, C., & Lee. M. J. (2008). The 3 P’s of pedagogy for the networked society: Personalisation,
participation and productivity. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education
20(1), 10–27. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ895221.pdf
Merryfield, M. M. (2000). Using electronic technologies to promote equity and cultural diversity in
social studies and global education. Theory and Practice in Social Education, 26, 342–369.
Mishra, P. (2012). Rethinking technology and creativity in the 21st century: Crayons are the future.
TechTrends, 56(5), 13–16.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for
teacher knowing. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.
Mishra, P., & Yadav, A. (2013). Rethinking technology and creativity in the 21st century. TechTrends,
57(3), 10–14.
O’Loughlin, M. (2006). Embodiment and education: Exploring creatural existence. Dordrecht, The
Netherlands: Springer.
Osler, A. V. K. (2002). Citizenship and the challenge of global education. Staffordshire: Trentham
Books.
Pike, G. (2000). Global education and national identity: In pursuit of meaning. Theory into Practice,
39(2), 64–74.
Provenzo, E. F., Goodwin, A., & Lipsk, M. (2011). Multiliteracies: Beyond text and the written word.
Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.
Robertson, R. (1992). Globalization: Social theory and global culture. Sage: London.
Rose, G. (2007). Visual methodologies: An introduction to the interpretation of visual materials (2nd
ed.). London/Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Semetsky, I. (2003). The problematics of human subjectivity: Gilles Deleuze and the Deweyan Legacy.
Studies in Philosophy and Education, 22, 221–225.
Semetsky, I. (2010). Semiotics education experience. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Walsh, C. (2007). Creativity as capital in the literacy classroom: Youth as multimodal designers.
Literacy, 41(2), 79–85.
Winner, E., Goldstein. T., & Vincent-Lancrin, S. (2013). Art for art’s sake?: The impact of Arts
Education. Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/9789264180789-
en
Zammit, K., & Downes, T. (2002). New learning environments and the multiliterate individual: A
framework for educators. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 25(2), 24–36.
185
Zong, G. (2005). Increasing preservice teachers’ cross cultural understanding and global awareness
via computer-mediated communication. Paper presented at the National Association of Multicultural
Education Annual Conference: Renewing the Dream Through Multicultural Education: Sharing
Power, Valuing Culture, and Achieving Social Justice, National Association for Multicultural
Education. Atlanta, GA.
Debra Donnelly
School of Education
Kathryn Grushka
School of Education
186
MURRAY PRINT
15. A GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP PERSPECTIVE

THROUGH A SCHOOL CURRICULUM
INTRODUCTION
Global citizenship is not a natural condition for people. For many it is the contrary
position to the commonly understood construct of national citizenship. Yet it may
be argued that for the world to survive the 21st century individuals will need to
think and act more globally and less nationally. If global citizenship is not natural
how do people become global citizens?
There are many ways an individual may learn about global citizenship, all of
which are problematic in their influences and biases, so that widely differing
perspectives of global citizenship may arise. The field of education, and in
particular, schooling, provides significant opportunities for the individual to learn a
more uniform, less biased, more consistent understanding of global citizenship
through experiencing forms of global education. This chapter takes a formal school
curriculum perspective of global education for global citizenship arguing that this
approach is likely to have the most positive impact on the largest number of young
people and in a non-partisan, unbiased approach. The informal school curriculum
(Niemi & Chapman, 1999; Nussbaum, 1997; Print, 2007; Saha & Print, 2010;
Schattle, 2007) may also offer significant opportunities to develop global
citizenship amongst students but that is for another time.
Global education is rarely found in the formal school curriculum as a separate
school subject or learning area. Invariably it is integrated, where it is taught at all,
into a subject/learning area such as Studies of Society or Social Studies or a similar
school subject. Learning to be a global citizen through a subject that might be
called global citizenship is even less likely to be located as a separate subject or
learning area within the school curriculum. That does not mean that global
education is not taught or that students ignore global citizenship in their school
education but it is far more difficult to identify.
But what of global citizenship for the 21st century? Does being an active
democratic citizen, the current favoured approach to citizenship education, include
global citizenship? While a long tradition of some form of global education exists,
more than 40 years it is claimed (Davies, 2006), it can be argued that education for
global citizenship has lagged behind in schools. A key reason for this situation has
been the role of the school curriculum that, in most countries, has barely addressed
global issues or global citizenship. Despite deliberate attempts to stimulate global
citizenship in some countries, such as through the Oxfam curriculum for global
citizenship in 1997, little success occurred until more recently.

MURRAY PRINT
This chapter contends that a new wave of curricula, focussed on citizenship

education, have expanded notions of citizenship to include global citizenship in an
integrated and comprehensive manner. It draws upon recent curricula, notably the
Australian Curriculum: Civics and Citizenship, the revised English national
curriculum and the new Scottish school curriculum and identifies curricula
directions for global citizenship. In the process it considers the limited research
available and raises key issues and challenges in global citizenship deriving from
an increasingly interconnected, yet politically divided, world. Despite Davies’
(2006) concern that the notion of global citizenship may be too abstract to be
valuable in driving curriculum policy and active citizenship for students, this paper
discusses the concept of what might be, through a school curriculum, a ‘good’
global citizen for the future. First we must clarify what we mean by global
citizenship.
GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP: DEFINITIONS
If global education is a contested concept or, as Walter Parker (2008) succinctly

states, global education ‘solves a variety of problems, serves as an array of masters,
and expresses diverse and sometimes conflicting values’ (p. 202), then global
citizenship is equally contentious. For Lynn Davies (2006) the relationship
between global, citizenship and education produced further permutations and
complications. Is global citizenship education:
a) global citizenship+education (definitions of the global citizen, and the
implied educational framework to provide or promote this), or
b) global+citizenship education (making citizenship education more
globally or internationally relevant; think global, act local), or
c) global education+citizenship (international awareness plus rights and
responsibilities), or
d) education+citizenship+global (introducing dimensions of citizenship and
of international understanding into the school curriculum, but not
necessarily connected)? (Davies, 2006)
Ibrahim (2010), writing in the context of the English National Curriculum, argues
that the
meaning of the term global citizenship varies from a vague sense of
belonging to a global community to a more specific global polity that
collectively enforces legal and human rights and responsibilities enshrined in
international law. … It means understanding and being able to influence
decision-making processes at the global level and their effects on people’s
lives to secure common interests. … [It] is about understanding the nature of
global issues as well as the range of ways in which those with power and
resources can be influenced to act in a globally responsible way. (p. 178)
A UNESCO view of global citizenship focuses on supporting human rights and
relieving human suffering. It supports that ‘the values of tolerance, universality,
188
PERSPECTIVE THROUGH SCHOOL CURRICULUM
mutual understanding, respect for cultural diversity and the promotion of a

culture of peace, which are central to UNESCO’s mission, have acquired new
relevance for inspiring action by international organisations, States, civil society
and individual citizens’ (Pigozzi, 2006, p. 2). Meanwhile, Oxfam has taken an
activist approach to global citizenship as seen on their website
(www.oxfam.org.uk/education/global-citizenship). Earlier, Oxfam (1997) had
developed a Curriculum for Global Citizenship where the organisation defined a
global citizen as someone who:
– is aware of the wider world and has a sense of their own role as a world
citizen, respects and values diversity,
– has an understanding of how the world works economically, politically,
socially, culturally, technologically and environmentally,
– is outraged by social injustice,
– is willing to act to make the world a more equitable and sustainable place,
– participates in and contributes to the community at a range of levels from
the local to the global. (p. 1)
The English National Curriculum – Citizenship takes a similar perspective of
awareness and knowledge as well as contributing to a more equitable world
(Department of Education, 2013). Despite the influences of sources such as Oxfam
(1997), the Crick report (Advisory Group on Citizenship, 1998), UNESCO’s
position (Pigozzi, 2006) and authors such as Davies, Evans and Reid (2005),
Davies (2006), and the research-based work of Cogan and Derricott (1998), the
revised English National Curriculum takes a remarkably subdued position on
global citizenship by essentially ignoring it or integrating global citizenship in such
a way as to make it unidentifiable. For example, Key Stage 3 ignores global
citizenship, while Key Stage 4 makes mention of local, regional and international
governance and the United Kingdom’s relations with the rest of Europe, and the
wider world (Department of Education, 2013).
Education Scotland makes special mention of global citizenship on its website,
arguing that global citizenship is a key context for learning across the curriculum.
And then promptly ignores global citizenship in the subjects that constitute the
curriculum. Education for citizenship more broadly addresses the exercising of
rights and responsibilities within communities at local, national and global levels,
though this task is left to teachers and schools. Meanwhile the formal curriculum
refers to social studies as a subject area for schools to study, with global citizenship
as well as citizenship education deeply embedded within the subject of social
studies.
Most recently the Australian Curriculum: Civics and Citizenship (Australian
Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA], 2014) defined global
citizens as:
Those who understand their rights and responsibilities at a global level; that
is, one’s identity transcends geography or political borders, and
responsibilities and rights are derived from being human. However, these
189
MURRAY PRINT
rights and responsibilities do not have the legal authority or sanctions that
those conferred by a nation have. (p. 48)
New thinking, as well as practice, about citizenship has become evident over the
past decade reflecting the impact of globalisation. While being a citizen is still
grounded in a political and geographical identity, and to some extent a cultural
identity as well, globalisation has forced us to consider citizenship more broadly.
Most importantly the concept of citizenship is understood to be far broader than
technical, legal definitions linked with membership of a nation and the issuing of a
passport. Legal citizenship, those recognised by the state as a citizen of that
country, may be considered to be a minimal position, though many nations now
allow at least dual citizenship or more. The minimalist position includes certain
rights and responsibilities required of citizens in a democracy, such as voting, jury
duty or military duty.
Many citizens, however, meaningfully consider themselves to be citizens in
multiple contexts, where the concept of citizen is less legal and more about
association, identity and participation. For example, one may consider oneself
to be a:
– citizen of a local community (village, town, suburb, neighbourhood),
– citizen of a city,
– citizen of a state/ province/ administrative region within a country,
– citizen of a nation (or more than one),
– citizen of an international region (e.g., the EU),
– citizen of the world or a global citizen.
The meaning of citizenship in an era of globalisation is a created and imagined
understanding of oneself in relation to multiple communities. Research has found
that multiple concepts of citizenship are not only held in a multidimensional
manner, but may be held simultaneously and applied when deemed appropriate by
an individual (Cogan & Derricott, 1998). I might consider myself a citizen of
Balmain for local matters such as parks and roads, Sydney for the Olympic Games
or sports, NSW for voting and political events, Australia for a passport, South East
Asia for economic issues and a global citizen for environmental issues such as
climate change. All these positions may be held simultaneously though I might
emphasise one rather than another at a particular time depending on the
circumstances. I may move between these forms depending upon circumstances
while still retaining my basic, legal citizenship.
So what does all this mean? For me global citizenship is a component of a
broader concept of citizenship where I may identify with multiple citizenships in a
personal, not legal sense. Global citizenship is conceptual in nature but with
practical elements. Not legal, or as Lynn Davies (2006) contends ‘it could be
argued that the notion of “global citizenship” is simply a metaphor, a linguistic
fancy which deliberately transposes a national political reality to a wider world
order. We cannot be citizens of the world in the way that we are of a country’ (p. 5).
So, a summary of the definitions and explanations of global citizenship indicates
that the concept relates to people who:
190
1. are global in perspective rather than national.

2. allow for multiple perspectives, i.e., multiple citizenships.
3. consider others beyond one’s own country.
4. are active along a scale from passive action (reading news, being informed) to
highly active (boycotting, buycotting and demonstrations on issues, joining
active global organisations and participating in their activities).
5. understand that global citizenship is not legal in the sense of rights afforded by
national citizenship but nevertheless is conceptually strong and resolute in
addressing global problems.
6. locate school learning within citizenship education or a broader curriculum area
such as Studies of Society and Environment (SOSE) or social studies.
GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP AND THE SCHOOL CURRICULUM
Can a school curriculum encourage and build a sense of global citizenship amongst
students? Given the caveat above, namely the lack of exposure to global citizenship
in current school curricula, it is highly unlikely. For example, Scottish education,
often at the forefront in educational innovations, claims to have a focus on
citizenship generally and global citizenship specifically.
Global citizenship brings together education for citizenship, international
education and sustainable development education and recognises the
common outcomes and principles of these three areas. All curriculum areas
can contribute to developing the skills, attributes and knowledge that will
create global citizens. (Education Scotland, n.d., para. 1)
However, Education Scotland, like so many educational authorities, takes the
‘copout’ approach, by not allocating citizenship education individual subject status,
arguing that education for citizenship is the shared responsibility of all. In other
words, the responsibility of none!
By contrast citizenship was introduced as a statutory subject into the English
National Curriculum in 2002 following the recommendations of the Crick report
(1998). It was designed to be taught to all students aged 11–16 years in England
and contributes to the overall aims of the national curriculum, namely that children
should develop as successful learners, confident individuals and responsible
citizens who make a positive contribution to society. The English National
Curriculum in its recent version (2013) has continued with Citizenship as a
separate subject, although only in Key Stages 3 (students aged 11–14 years) and 4
(students aged 14–16) in the secondary school curriculum in a compulsory form.
Many primary schools teach citizenship as part of their curriculum and the 2013
version maintained this situation. However, the English Citizenship curriculum
largely ignores global citizenship with only minor references in Key Stage 4
(students aged 14-16) such as international law, democracy and forms of
government in the UK and beyond.
Earlier Oxfam (1997) had created a suggested global citizenship curriculum
consisting of three components:
191
MURRAY PRINT
– knowledge and understanding of the background to global problems (such as

conceptual understanding of social justice, peace/conflict, diversity, sustainable
development and globalisation/interdependence);
– skills (such as critical thinking, argumentation, cooperation/conflict resolution
and the ability to challenge injustice); and
– values and attitudes (such as commitment to equality, respecting diversity,
concern for the environment and a sense of identity and self-esteem).
However, there is no evidence that the curriculum was used outside of Oxfam and
the subsequent English National Curriculum (Qualifications & Curriculum Agency,
1999) resulting from the Crick review (1998) made little mention of global
citizenship. Indeed, in an earlier study (Whitty, Rowe, & Appleton, 1994) the
broader problem of teacher support for citizenship had been identified by the extent
to which teachers ignored citizenship in its guise of a cross-curricular theme and
teachers further explained the formidable pedagogical problems, such as
availability of time and resources, that are associated with effective implementation.
AUSTRALIAN CURRICULUM: CIVICS AND CITIZENSHIP
A more promising possibility for building a sense of global citizenship within

students is the recently completed Australian Curriculum: Civics and Citizenship
(ACARA, 2014). Driven by the acceptance of the Melbourne Declaration
(Ministerial Council for Education, Employment, Training and Youth
[MCEETYA], 2008) to create the Australian Curriculum as a ‘national’ curriculum
accepted by all Australian jurisdictions,1 a strongly influential force was the
Declaration’s second goal, namely that schools should produce active and informed
citizens (Goal 2) who are ‘committed to national values of democracy, equity and
justice, and participate in Australia’s civic life as well as be responsible global and
local citizens’ (italics added) (MCEETYA, 2008, p. 9). However, the Australian
Curriculum is currently under review even though it was only completed at the end
of 2013. The politically inspired review may produce changes so the comments and
quotes mentioned here refer to the final draft curriculum that was ‘approved’ in
2013 and published in 2014 (ACARA, 2014).
Intention
There is clear evidence that a global perspective and global citizenship is intended
within this new curriculum (Print, 2013a, 2013b) designed and developed for
Australia’s 9,600 schools, that is, all primary schools (from Year 3 upwards), all
secondary schools and all other schools that might combine both. The evidence
begins with the aims as stated in the curriculum document. The Australian
Curriculum: Civics and Citizenship intends that students should develop ‘the
capacities and dispositions to participate in the civic life of their nation at a local,
regional and global level’ (ACARA, 2014, p. 4). This intention is then represented
in many ways, including requiring the Australian Curriculum: Civics and
Citizenship to be a compulsory subject within the Australian Curriculum and as
192
such is intended for all students. Further, global citizenship is evident in the
curriculum organisation and content.
Curriculum organisation
The curriculum organisation of the Australian Curriculum: Civics and Citizenship
divides the subject into two interrelated strands – Civics and Citizenship
Knowledge and Understanding, and, Civics and Citizenship Skills. Within both
strands elements of global citizenship can be identified. For example, one of the
three key focus areas within the strand Civics and Citizenship Knowledge and
Understanding is Citizenship, Diversity and Identity within which is located global
citizenship (ACARA, 2014). Similarly the Australian Curriculum: Civics and
Citizenship identifies significant skills that contribute to informed, active
citizenship. These sets of skills – questioning and research; analysis, synthesis and
interpretation; problem solving and decision-making; and communication and
reflection – may be applied equally to issues related to global citizenship.
Curriculum content
The sequence of learning for the Australian Curriculum: Civics and Citizenship
commences from the early years of schooling, namely Year 3 through to Year 10.
Issues such as the interconnected world, global pollution, climate change, are
introduced slowly and at appropriate levels for learners. The Australian Curriculum:
Civics and Citizenship provides curriculum guidelines for teachers and schools.
These are organised in terms of the subject areas of the curriculum as content
descriptions and elaborations.
Content descriptions for the Australian Curriculum: Civics and Citizenship are
included at each year level.
These describe the knowledge, understanding and skills that teachers are
expected to teach and students are expected to learn. However, they do not
prescribe approaches to teaching. The content descriptions have been written
to ensure that learning is appropriately ordered and that unnecessary
repetition is avoided. However, a concept or skill introduced at one year level
may be revisited, strengthened and extended at later year levels as needed.
(ACARA, 2014, p. 6)
Similarly, content elaborations are provided for each year level to ‘illustrate and
exemplify content and to assist teachers in developing a common understanding of
the content descriptions. They are not intended to be comprehensive content points
that all students need to be taught’ (ACARA, 2014, p. 6). Examples of content
descriptions and elaborations illustrate how global citizenship is addressed in the
curriculum content of the Australian Curriculum: Civics and Citizenship.
Two examples are provided to demonstrate the curriculum’s engagement with
global citizenship. One is from the primary school years and the second from
middle years of secondary schooling. At this stage the curriculum does not include
193
MURRAY PRINT
the final 2 years of secondary education. At Year 6, which is at or near the end of
compulsory primary school education for students about 12 years of age, the
Australian Curriculum: Civics and Citizenship states: ‘The obligations citizens may
consider they have beyond their own national borders as active and informed
global citizens (ACHCK039)’ (Australian Curriculum, n.d., para. Year 6 Content
Descriptions).
Elaborations to elaborate and exemplify the content description for teachers are:
– identifying the obligations people may consider they have as global citizens,
such as an awareness of human rights issues, concern for the environment and
sustainability, and being active and informed about global issues;
– describing dual citizenship and its implications for identity and belonging;
– using a current global issue, such as immigration across borders and clearing
native forests to establish palm oil plantations, to discuss the concept of global
citizenship.
At Year 9, where students are about 14 years of age, the Australian Curriculum:
Civics and Citizenship states:
Content description: How ideas about and experiences of Australian identity
are influenced by global connectedness and mobility (ACHCK081)
Elaborations to amplify and exemplify the content description for teachers are:
– examining stories of how Australian citizens’ perspectives on their role in the
global community have been influenced by their experiences of living and
working in other countries,
– examining forms of global connectedness such as digital technology, arts, trade,
language learning, employment, travel and immigration,
– debating the concepts of global identity and global citizenship and their
implications for Australian citizens.
In addition to content descriptions and elaborations, all subject curricula in the
Australian Curriculum are expected to include eight General Capabilities and three
Cross-Curricular Priorities. Of the General Capabilities, a key for global
citizenship is intercultural understanding, or as defined by ACARA (2014), ‘the
capability involves students in learning about and engaging with diverse cultures in
ways that recognise commonalities and differences, create connections with others
and cultivate mutual respect’ (p. 10).
Similarly of the curriculum’s three Cross-Curricular Priorities, one is directly
related to global citizenship, namely sustainability. ACARA (2014) explains that
‘education for sustainability enables individuals and communities to reflect on
ways of interpreting and engaging with the world’ (p. 12). In conclusion, there is
clear evidence that the Australian Curriculum: Civics and Citizenship brings a
global perspective to this subject area. There is deliberate and specific content on
global citizenship occurring across the years of schooling, highlighted by the
examples from years six and nine and further reinforced by the curriculum
requirements through General Capabilities and Cross-Curricular Priorities.
194
CHALLENGES AND FUTURE
There are multiple key challenges facing global citizenship in schools and
education more generally. However, as research shows (Davies, 2006; Niemi &
Junn, 1998; McFarland & Thomas, 2006; Saha & Print, 2010) there seems to be
agreement that the two best school-based predictors of whether people become
active citizens, such as engaged in voluntary work or forms of political/civic
activism, are: (a) involvement in school democracy and (b) experience of doing
some form of community service. As Saha and Print (2010) contend,
In the end, our study has clearly demonstrated the importance of school
elections and office-holding for student propensity for political
engagement. … Thus, school elections and student government office-
holding are valuable elements of school practice regarding democratic
political orientations and actions. (p. 31)
But this itself presents a challenge namely that citizenship education, including
global citizenship, tends to be poorly regarded by curriculum decision-makers and
educational policy makers. This results in limited exposure to citizenship education
in schools and rarely do we find citizenship education as a separate, and therefore
valued, school subject. In most countries citizenship education, as well as global
citizenship, are incorporated within a broader field subject such as social studies or
studies of society, there to be treated at the whim or interest of the teacher.
Perhaps the second most challenging issue facing global citizenship, and one to
be addressed in the future, is the lack of a research base to justify the significance
of global citizenship in the school curriculum. For example, how does research
identify what caused people to act as global citizens, or not, after leaving school,
and therefore what was the effect of exposure to a global citizenship curriculum in
school? More specifically, Lynn Davies’ (2006) comments are well worth quoting
in full.
Where the research is sorely lacking is in what predisposes people to take
part in issues related to their role as global citizens, a role which might almost
bypass the local to go straight to the global. What influences young people to
take part in rallies or demonstrations about global events? Why do they join
global social movements, whether environmental groups such as Greenpeace
or economic forums such as the European Social Forum? What in their
schooling on the other hand predisposes young people to join fundamentalist
groups, or even extremist groups such as Al-Qaeda? (p. 18)
Yet in recent research, Saha and Print (2010) found that part of the informal
curriculum in Australian schools could contribute significantly to building active
citizenship which included global citizenship.
We have provided evidence to support the notion that school elections may
be the ‘cradle’ of democracy, since it is here that students experience a
fundamental democratic practice. We have demonstrated empirically that
students who do vote or run for office, are also more prone to feel prepared to
195
MURRAY PRINT
vote as adults, to actually intend to vote, to know more about politics, and to
have already experienced some form of political activism, such as attending
rallies or letter writing. … These findings are strong and clear. They show
that school elections play an important role in the political socialisation of
young people. Rather than begin the analysis of habitual voting behaviour
and other forms of political activity with the attainment of legal voting age,
our findings demonstrate that part of the path to adult political engagement
already begins in high school. Student school elections are an important
related factor to this process. (p. 31)
A third key challenge to global citizenship actually being taught in schools lies
with the role of the teacher. Not only does the curriculum need to directly specify
that global citizenship be taught, and that the school be supportive, but individual
teachers will need to be able (knowledge and skills) and motivated to teach this
subject matter as Ibrahim (2010) identified. This may be a significant challenge as
found in a recent Australian study of pre-service teacher perspectives on the
importance of teaching global education (Ferguson-Patrick et al., 2014). While
students were interested in global education, they were more focused on the
practicalities of their initial teaching (Ferguson-Patrick et al., 2014). In an earlier
study in the United Kingdom, Robbins, Francis and Elliott (2003) carried out an
interesting research study on the attitudes toward education for global citizenship
among trainee teachers in a Welsh university. A sample of students at the end of
their initial teacher education course completed an attitudinal survey on education
for global citizenship. The data demonstrated that the majority of students had a
positive attitude toward education for global citizenship but lacked the confidence
to implement it within the classroom. The most positive attitude towards teaching
global citizenship was expressed by geography student teachers (major field of
study), while the least positive attitude was mathematics, physical education and,
perhaps surprisingly, history student teachers.
There are many other challenges facing the teaching of global citizenship
including assessment and monitoring school students, initial teacher education
programmes, and epistemological issues about what might be a good global citizen.
If the intended outcome of a global citizenship programme is a collection of global
citizens who will act concertedly in particular ways, presumably for good, to
challenge injustice and promote rights, how will we know if the curriculum has
been successful? If the present is any indication, the future will provide immense
challenges to global citizenship. At stake is THE future for our planet. What will
our grandchildren inherit if we, as the best educated, wealthiest, healthiest,
interconnected generations continue to view issues parochially and nationally?
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I wish to thank the editors and reviewers for their helpful comments. As the author,
I accept full responsibility for the chapter.
196
NOTE
1
Australia is a federation of six states and two territories with power over education constitutionally
vested with the states. Creating a ‘national’ curriculum within a federal political structure by
consensus is a significant achievement.
REFERENCES
Advisory Group on Citizenship. (1998). Education for citizenship and the teaching of democracy in
schools. London: Qualifications & Curriculum Agency.
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA]. (2014). The Australian
curriculum humanities and social sciences – Civics and citizenship. ACARA: Sydney.
Cogan, J., & Derricott, R. (Eds.). (1998). Citizenship for the twenty first century: An international
perspective on education. London: Kogan Page.
Davies I., Evans, M., & Reid, A. (2005). Globalizing citizenship education? A critique of ‘global
education’ and ‘citizenship education’. British Journal of Educational Studies, 53(10), 66–89.
Davies, L. (2006). Global citizenship; abstraction or framework for action? Educational Review, 58(1),
5–25.
Department of Education. (2013). English national curriculum Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/
government/collections/national-curriculum
Education Scotland. (n.d.). Global citizenship. Retrieved from http://www.educationscotland.gov.uk/
learningteachingandassessment/learningacrossthecurriculum/themesacrosslearning/globalcitizenship
/index.asp
Practice, 20(4), 470–482.
Ibrahim, T. (2010). Global citizenship education: Mainstreaming the curriculum? Cambridge Journal of
Education, 35(2), 177–194.
Ministerial Council for Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs [MCEETYA]. (2008).
Melbourne declaration on educational goals for young Australians. Melbourne: MCEETYA.
Niemi, R., & Chapman, C., (1999). The civic development of 9th through 12th grade students in the
United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Niemi, R., & Junn, J. (1998). Civic education: What makes students learn. New Haven: Yale University
Press.
Nussbaum, M. (1997). Cultivating humanity: A classical defense of reform in liberal education.
Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press.
Oxfam. (1997). A curriculum for global citizenship. Oxford: Oxfam.
McFarland, D. A., & Thomas, R. (2006). Bowling young: How youth voluntary associations influence
adult political participation. American Sociological Review, 71, 401–425.
Parker, W. (2008). International education: What’s in a name? Phi Delta Kappa, 90(3), 196–202.
Pigozzi, M. (2006). A UNESCO view of global citizenship education. Education Review, 58(1), 1–4.
Print, M. (2003, July). Teaching for global citizenship. Keynote address for Teaching & Learning
Scotland, Glasgow
Print, M. (2007). Citizenship education and youth participation in democracy. British Journal of
Educational Studies, 55(3), 325–345.
Print, M. (2013a, December). The Australian curriculum: civics and citizenship. Invited keynote
presentation at Parliamentary Educators of Australasia Conference, Canberra.
Print, M. (2013b, July). Civics and citizenship curriculum: The Australian experience. Invited keynote
presentation at Thai Civic Education Consortium, Bangkok.
Qualifications and Curriculum Agency. (1999). Citizenship: The national curriculum for England, key
stages 3–4. London: Qualifications & Curriculum Agency.
197
MURRAY PRINT
Robbins, M., Francis, L., & Elliott, E. (2003). Attitudes toward education for global citizenship among
trainee teachers. Research in Education, 69, 93–98.
Saha, L., & Print, M. (2010). Schools, student elections and political engagement: The cradle of
democracy? International Journal of Educational Research, 49(1), 22–32.
Schattle, H. (2007). The practices of global citizenship. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.
Whitty, G., Rowe, G., & Appleton, P. (1994). Subjects and themes in the secondary school curriculum.
Research Papers in Education, 9, 159–181.
Murray Print
School of Education
University of Sydney
198
KAY CARROLL
16. IT TAKES A GLOBAL VILLAGE

Re-conceptualising Global Education within Current Frameworks of
School and Curricula
THE GLOBAL VILLAGE
Globally 775 million adults (15 and over) are illiterate, with women being over-
represented. Over 100 million children across secondary and primary years
worldwide are excluded from participation in school education (57 million primary
age and 69 secondary age children) (UNESCO, 2014a). Global Education is the
key to unlocking social stratification, inequality and social injustice, access to
quality education that enables young people to become skilled, aware and flexible
citizens to deal with current and future issues of globalisation, increased
competition for resources, sustainability and conflict (Wang, Lin, Spalding, Odell,
& Klecka, 2011). However, many countries including developed nations like
Australia are still debating who should hold the keys and what curriculum
frameworks will be enacted.
THE AUSTRALIAN CONTEXT
The push for Global Education is increasingly undermined by neo-liberalist

discourses about commoditisation, individual gain and standardisation (Butt, 2011).
Australian Education has been hi-jacked by the neo-liberalist agenda that reduces
schools and curricula to simplistic market-driven formulas. The profound gap
between the collective goals of Global Education and current international, highly
competitive and individualistic approaches to curricula and schooling is evident
(Standish, 2014). In this chapter the need to develop deep global knowledge and
understanding in present Australian school structures and curriculum will be
explored. The Australian preoccupation with siloing knowledge, returning to
traditional basics, uncoupling global perspectives from the national curricula and
the creation of vertical streaming and benchmarking will be interrogated. This
chapter will conclude with an approach to negotiate and reduce the profound gap
between present schooling and curricula offerings and what is truly needed for
young Australians to participate in their global village.

KAY CARROLL
PUSH AND PULL FACTORS
Standardisation of teaching quality, education and curriculum dominates the

hegemonic discourse of successive Australian Federal Governments. Since 2000
there have been numerous attempts to nationalise curricula, standardise teacher
quality and improve student literacy and numeracy outcomes through high stakes
testing. In a neo-liberalist context Australian Education has been re-defined to
consider the opportunities and challenges of globalisation.
The Melbourne Declaration of Goals for Young Australians (Ministerial
Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs [MCEETYA],
2008) heralds a brave new world where forces for globalisation are pull factors for
a reform of the curriculum and push factors to standardise assessment and
achievement. The Declaration recognises that globalisation has converged and
flattened the temporal and spatial dimensions of daily life and resulted in increased
mobility, flexibility and portability of knowledge, ideas and capital. Globalisation
was conceptualised as an opportunity and a challenge for young people. Global
citizenship for young Australians was the lofty goal of this new curriculum. This
goal included the need for young people to recognise their place in the global
village and have appreciation for social, cultural, religious and civic diversity. It
was about developing in all students a ‘sense of global citizenship’ (MCEETYA,
2008, p. 3). Global citizenship was seen as a geo-political and technological
response to the rapid changes of society. Young Australians were to become Asian
literate, flexible users of new technologies and skilled and creative knowledge
workers filled with deep intercultural and ethic understanding.
The Declaration created a blueprint for schooling and standards of achievement
in Australia that aimed for consistency, comparability and clarity in response to
global challenges. While, the blueprint acknowledged the collective need of the
village to raise young people with cultural appreciation, flexible thinking and a
sense of social justice and human dignity, the neo-liberalist fascination with the
measuring, quantifying and commodifying the individual child as a form of
economic and social capital was glaringly evident. Tied to the rhetoric of
globalisation and collective benefits of education has been this seismic shift to the
individual acquisition and universal attainment of pre-determined standards and
knowledge.
Since 2008 there has been a significant flux and policy reform, with successive
Federal Ministers for Education, Workplace and Employment Relations continuing
the push towards ‘cooperative federalism’ to ensure state governments share in
national curricula, standards and testing. The Australian Curriculum , Assessment
and Reporting Authority (ACARA) has been the first prodigy of the cooperative
federalism, with a mandate agreed to by the states and territories via The Council
of Australian Governments (COAG) to deliver an innovative world class 21st
century Australian Curriculum.
200
IT TAKES A GLOBAL VILLAGE
DREAMS AND REALITIES
The Australian Curriculum is a long anticipated educational dream. This dream

talked up the need for cultural, cognitive and critical capabilities needed for the
globalised technologically rich and diverse world. The waking reality however was
grounded in the governments’ economic imperatives to deliver Australia as a
global and competitive developed nation in an Asian-Pacific region. Consequently,
it has been shaped, framed and implemented over 7 years to varying degrees by
different states and territories over time. The curriculum, like a child has been
infrequently praised for its attention to global citizenship and cross curriculum
perspectives and more often than not subjected to taunting and admonition for its
irrelevance, tokenism, failure to produce high standards and aptness for distraction
by technology and critical thinking.
Internationally and within Australia, policy-makers appear increasingly to
subscribe to technical, rationalist views concerning curriculum development that
focus on prescription and centralisation (Apple, 2001; Teese, 2000). Current
international trends and local policy-making and curriculum development reflect
this pre-occupation with economic rationalism. Economic rationalism is based on
increasing productivity to justify ongoing expenses, through higher levels of
accountability for workers (Apple, 2001; McLaren & Farahmandpur, 2001). This
paradigm shift in policy and curriculum-making in Australia silences the Global
Education discourse that schools and their curricula need to develop social justice,
diversity, human rights, active citizenship, sustainable futures and collective
benefits for the global community. Presently, in the neo-liberalist discourse the
forces of globalisation are seen to drive economy and the competition for market
rather than create a legitimate need for collective goods and sharing of resources
for the community. Economic rationalism is situated within the curriculum text and
is intended to produce students with defined skills or key capabilities who add
value to the economy through their work (Apple, 2001; Becker & Murphy, 2000).
Schools compete in this world for attention and deliver students who gain high
scores on examinations and climb the vertical system to reach tertiary places of
learning and production (Teese, 2000). The curriculum is seen as a vehicle to
deliver the key capabilities and high standards of education that can be quantified,
reported on and lead to employment and economic outcomes for the individual and
for the state. Therefore, policy-makers have aligned the curricula to produce human
capital that delivers tangible economic outcomes (Becker & Murphy, 2000) and
see globalisation as a lever for this approach.
INTENTIONS AND ENACTMENTS
Regardless of the approach, all states and territories are enacting the cross
curriculum priorities and general capabilities. These relate to the fundamental
mandate of the Australian Curriculum to ensure that all children develop capacity
in literacy, numeracy, information communication technology, critical and creative
thinking, personal and social capability, ethical understanding and intercultural
201
KAY CARROLL
understanding. These capabilities as represented below in Figure 1 develop an

active learner and citizen. These construct a schema for global citizenship.
Figure 1. General capabilities: http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/

generalcapabilities/overview/general-capabilities-in-the-australian-curriculum
Additionally, the curriculum identifies cross curriculum priorities that include

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories and cultures, Asia and Australia’s
engagement with Asia and sustainability. These are identified in Figure 2.
These constructs create a body of knowledge, skills and understanding that
enable young people to participate in a globalised world and engage with global
citizenship.
UNPACKING GLOBAL EDUCATION AND GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP
Global Education is not about universal approach but comprises a lens to view,
reflect and understand the world. Global Education reflects an understanding of
global phenomena and empathy with others across a diverse yet conflated space. It
is characterised within Australia as a recognition of cultural identity and diversity,
approaches to interdependence and peace building and conflict resolution and
engagement with sustainability (Quittner & Sturak, 2008). Internationally, Global
Education comprises a range of characteristics and dimensions. It crosses national
202
Figure 1. Cross curriculum priorities

http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/CrossCurriculumPriorities
boundaries and interests and is concerned with a humanistic space. In this space
young people can articulate and advocate for changes that oppress, restrict,
disadvantage or for greater opportunities and collaboration for all people globally.
According to Meyer and Sandy (2009), it is becoming an inherent privilege and
responsibility for all of us by ‘virtue of living on this planet’ (p. 59). In 2014
according to United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (U
NESCO), the vision for education included a sense of global citizenship,
knowledge and understanding:
UNESCO reaffirms a humanistic and holistic vision of education as a
fundamental human right and essential to personal and socio-economic
development. The objective of such education must be envisaged in a broad
lifelong learning perspective that aims at enabling and empowering people to
realise their rights to education, fulfil their personal expectations for a decent
life and work, and contribute to the achievement of their societies’ socio-
economic development objectives. In addition to the acquisition of basic
knowledge and cognitive skills, the content of learning must promote
problem solving and creative thinking; understanding and respect for human
rights; inclusion and equity; cultural diversity; and foster a desire and
capacity for lifelong learning and learning to live together, all of which are
203
KAY CARROLL
essential to the betterment of the world and the realisation of peace,

responsible citizenship and sustainable development. (UNESCO, 2014b, p. 1)
The similarity with UNESCO’S conception of global education with the stated
goals, outcomes and content of the Australian Curriculum is evident. Both texts
suggest that Global Education and the authentic practice of global citizenship build
collective capacity to address future problems and challenges of our community. In
a sense it is a village mentality of interdependence that enables issues and
challenges to be shared and solved. These aims of Global Education are complex,
over-arching and fundamentally essential for national and transnational growth,
development and sustainability.
However, more recently the profound gap between the idealised view of the
curriculum and its enactment and primary push factor has emerged. This
disenchantment has been responded to with review of the curriculum by the
Federal Minister for Education, Christopher Pyne.
The Review of the Australian Curriculum (Donnelly & Wiltshire, 2014) is in
response to the variability of the states’ desire for a national curriculum. The
review suggests that this desire has waxed and waned over the preceding 7 years
and that implementation has been hampered by inefficiencies of scale, mutual
distrust of the objectives for senior years, the lack of conceptual frame for the
future of education in this nation, over-crowding of the primary years and concern
with cross curriculum priorities and capabilities. The following snapshot across
Australia shows how curricular implementation is unique to jurisdictions across
Australia.
Within the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) teachers have choice to use the
Australian Curriculum to inform their teaching. Conversely in New South Wales
(NSW), a new body comprising the prescribed curriculum and teaching standards
authority Board of Studies and Teaching Education Standards (BOSTES) regulate
and mediate the Australian curriculum via syllabuses. Within the Northern
Territory (NT) the looseness of the Australian Curriculum has been tightened with
a scope and sequence framework for teachers. In Queensland (Qld) the Australian
Curriculum has been complemented by Curriculum into the Classroom (C2C)
resources. South Australia (SA), like the ACT, allows teachers autonomy to plan
from the Australian curriculum yet ensures that curriculum standards meet South
Australian requirements. Similarly, Tasmania enables teacher choice with using the
curriculum. Finally, Victoria has developed a frame for learning – AusVELS from
the first year of schooling to year 10. AusVELS integrates the Australian
Curriculum with Victorian Essential Learning Standards (VELS).
The Review of The Australian Curriculum (Donnelly & Wiltshire, 2014)
addresses a range of apparent shortcomings with the direction and enactment of the
curriculum. It suggests that the over-crowded curriculum in primary years be fixed,
parents should have greater access and engagement with the curriculum, that key
priorities be rebalanced, that the role of ACARA be clarified and that greater
inclusivity for disadvantaged students be realised.
204
Yet while these reforms seem sensible, logical and perhaps address some
deficiencies with the roll out of the Australian Curriculum in various states and
territories there is cause for alarm. When all children study the same content and
learn the same skills, use phonics, focus on the basics and avoid cross curriculum
priorities such as Indigenous and Asian understanding and dare not think too
critically about world issues such as sustainability, equity and inclusiveness could
be reduced to en masse commoditisation.
Commoditisation is an outdated 20th century model which delivers the same
parts to all at a low cost basis. It is the end result of a Taylor or Fordian mode of
factory production. The Fordian view of the world has passed. Yet national
curriculum reinstates the concept of one model, one colour or one experience,
purchased at a low cost basis and rolled out onto the factory floor for the
consumers. The colour of Fordian models of production was monotone, lacking
individual details and customisation. The review of the Australian Curriculum may
be conceptualised in this way, if opportunities for localised content, global
perspectives and values are not made available. More critical discussion about the
purpose and form review and the changes to the Australian Curriculum is needed to
ensure that customisation is preferenced over commoditisation.
The political fixing of the enacted curriculum extends further into issues over
student testing, A-E reporting and students’ performances in literacy and numeracy.
This political tinkering may be seen as a form of curriculum alignment.
Curriculum alignment and vertical mapping is a process of mapping the curriculum
to external, recognised standards of achievement (Teese, 2000). Traditionally,
curriculum was developed (front-loaded) and appropriate modes of assessment
were devised or sought at a later stage. Current trends in curriculum making
involve the technocratic policy of back-loading, whereby the curriculum is
developed after the standards have been established. In this back-loaded model, the
standards expected from students are made explicit, and the teacher systematically
prepares students to meet the standards. In this current context, these standards are
based on traditional approaches to learning. Teaching students to pass tests based
on basic knowledge, phonics and traditional historical narratives does little to
develop global and critical citizenship.
Finally, the reductionist critique of the Australian Curriculum suggests that the
cross curriculum priorities that highlight the contribution of non-western,
Indigenous peoples and cultures towards current and future sustainable practices
and knowledge undermines the intent of Global Education and the realisation of
Global Citizenship for young Australians. Within the history area K-10 of the
Australian Curriculum it has been suggested that the focus on Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander cultures and the inclusion of study of China, Japan and India
ignores the Judeo-Christian heritage and contribution to society (Donelly &
Wiltshire, 2014). Similarly, the importance of cultural diversity of the general
capabilities is undermined by the representation of these views. The Australian
Curriculum has been attacked over its apparent failure to represent Christian
traditions, values and morals (Donelly & Wiltshire, 2014). These views privilege
205
KAY CARROLL
Christianity over cultural and religious diversity and tear at the inclusivity of the
general capabilities and the key aims of Global Education.
CONCLUSION
These privileged discourses challenge the intent of the curriculum and impact on
the potential of curricula to address global concerns, challenges and opportunities.
The neo-liberalist agenda is conflating consistency with quality and success for
students with attainment of the dominant nationalist culture. This is short-sighted
and disingenuous. Global Education and Global Citizenship are fundamental tools,
skills and knowledge that enable young Australians to see and interpret their world
from multiple view points. With this knowledge and understanding young people
come to be part of a wider, more diverse and complex village community and share
the resources, skills and successes with others. This collectively benefits society
and future generations. The current deconstruction of the Australian Curriculum
and the attempt to throw off the importance and localised delivery of cross
curriculum priorities and general capabilities is destabilising. The attempt to return
to the basics, make the curriculum less crowded and re-assert a singular version of
history and culture separates us from the larger community, makes the vision and
the dream of the Australian Curriculum somewhat recalcitrant and reactive.
Global Education is an important resource for young people in contemporary
times, a virtual backpack that enables them to see and locate themselves in time,
space and culture. It takes the global village to construct and maintain this resource.
Within an Australian context the Australian Curriculum had started to build this
resource for the future, albeit within competing political discourses and
government agendas. Yet more recent developments and introspective review has
undermined this; the village worldview is under threat.
REFERENCES
Apple, M. W. (2001). Markets, standards, teaching, and teacher education. Journal of Teacher
Education, 52(3), 182–196.
Becker, S., & Murphy, K. M. (2000). Social economics: Market behavior in a social environ-
ment. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Butt, G. (2011). Globalisation, geography education and curriculum: What are the challenges for
geography makers in geography? The Curriculum Journal, 22(3), 423–438.
Donnelly, K., & Wiltshire, K. (2014). Review of the Australian Curriculum: Final report. Canberra:
Australian Government Department of Education. Retrieved from http://docs.education.gov.au/
system/files/doc/other/review_of_the_national_curriculum_final_report.pdf
McLaren, P., & Farahmandpur, R. ( 2001). Teaching against globalisation and the new imperialism:
Towards a revolutionary pedagogy. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(2), 136–150.
Meyer, R. M., & Sandy, L. R. (2009). Education for global citizenship in the new millennium.
International Journal of Diversity in Organizations, Communities, and Nations, 9(1), 59–64.
Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs. (2008). Melbourne
Declaration of Goals for Young Australians. Melbourne: Author. Retrived from:
http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_resources/National_Declaration_on_the_Educational_Goals_f
or_Young_Australians.pdf
206
Quittner, K., & Sturak, K. (Eds.). (2008). Global perspectives: A framework for global education in
Australian schools. Carlton South Victoria: Education Services Australia. Retrieved from
http://www.globaleducation.edu.au/verve/_resources/GPS_web.pdf
Standish, A. (2014). What is global education and where is it taking us? The Curriculum Journal, 25(2),
166–186.
Teese, R. (2000). Academic success and social power: Examinations and inequality.
Carlton, Victoria: Melbourne University Press.
UNESCO. (2014a). 2013/4 Education for All global monitoring report: Teaching and learning:
Achieving quality for all. Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/
0022/002256/225660e.pdf
UNESCO. (2014b). Education beyond 2015 (Executive Board minutes). Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved
from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0022/002266/226628e.pdf
Wang, J., Lin, E., Spalding, E., Odell S. J., & Klecka, C. L. (2011). Quality teaching and teacher
education: A kaleidoscope of notions. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(2), 115–120.
Kay Carroll
Global Literacy
Catholic Education, Diocese of Parramatta
207
TOH SWEE-HIN (S.H. TOH)
17. EDUCATING FOR GLOBAL AND LOCAL PEACE

Emerging Visions, Hopeful Practices
INTRODUCTION: CRISES, CONTRADICTIONS & TRANSFORMATIONS
Humanity and planet Earth today faces a plethora of monumental crises spanning
political, economic, social, cultural and environmental dimensions of existence and
life. These crises need to be resolved and transformed urgently and mindfully to
ensure the very survival of humanity. A helpful starting point to discern the causes
and dynamics of the crises lies in questioning the deep contradictions of
contemporary planetary ‘civilisation’. Nowadays, spaceships are able to explore
the distant planets while submersibles are probing the hidden depths of oceans. The
exponential growth of industrialisation and globalisation of the economy has
generated a culture of advanced mass consumption deemed essential for the good
life. Information and communication technology (ICT) revolutions have also
created super-rapid communication and transaction systems which are vital to the
globalised economy and also inexorably shaping human culture towards a cyborg
identity. Yet despites such economic and technological advances, the world is
entrapped in massive contradictions and crises, including continual episodes of
wars or armed conflicts, billions of people lacking basic needs, gross human rights
violations, diverse forms of cultural discrimination, environmental unsustainability
and a lack of inner peace as manifested by alienation, despair, addictions and
suicides.
Globally, one common response to these crises and contradictions has been
expressed as a sense of despair, apathy or indifference. The good news, however, is
that an increasing number of people, communities, institutions and organisations
have chosen not be feel overwhelmed by all the problems, conflicts and violence.
Rather, through active nonviolence, they have taken on the struggles and
challenges of transforming these conflicts toward alternative relationships and
structures encompassed by the umbrella concept of a culture of peace.
AN EMERGENT GLOBAL PEACE MOVEMENT &

THE PRAXIS OF PEACE EDUCATION
In the post-World War II era, diverse regions and countries have witnessed a
growing opposition among citizens against the resort of their governments or non-
state groups to resolve conflicts and disputes or to pursue geostrategic interests
through wars and other strategies of direct violence. Such anti-war actions have in

TOH SWEE-HIN
the popular consciousness often been labelled the peace movement and their
practitioners as peace activists. Increasingly, however, advocates for world peace
no longer view peace as only the absence of war or direct violence. Rather, peace
necessarily encompasses multiple and diverse dimensions and components, each
with its own dynamics and autonomy while at the same time deeply intertwined
and interdependent within a holistic framework. Hence, even if a society is not
experiencing wars or armed conflicts, can it claim to be peaceful if its citizens are
still affected by hunger, ill health, homelessness, discrimination, environmental
destruction or other human rights violations?
Furthermore, it is now widely recognised that this massive and challenging
project of promoting global peace requires the indispensable contribution of peace
education or educating for a culture of peace (Bajaj, 2008; Burns & Aspeslagh,
1996; Harris, 2013).
Essentially, peace education affirms two goals: first, it seeks to contribute to a
critical understanding of the root causes of conflicts, violence and peacelessness at
the personal, interpersonal, community, national, regional and global levels; and
secondly, it endeavours to simultaneously cultivate values and attitudes that will
encourage individual and social action for building more peaceful selves, families,
communities, societies and ultimately a more peaceful world (Toh & Floresca-
Cawagas, 1990). In societies where it has been initiated, peace education can be
found within formal educational institutions from early childhood to university
levels as well as in non-formal educational contexts. A few countries (for example,
the Philippines and Kenya), have instituted official government policies to
mainstream peace education curricula in all levels of schooling, while globally,
peace education has expanded due to the efforts of individual educators, schools,
non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and other civil society organisations or
intergovernmental agencies (for example United Nations Economic, Social and
Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and United Nations International Children’s
Emergency Fund (UNICEF) (Adams, 1995; Cawagas, 2003; Fountain, 1999).
Another vital dimension of peace education lies in the need to consistently
integrate critical pedagogical principles and processes. Within the global
community of peace educators, educating for a culture of peace cannot be reduced
to cognitive knowledge and understanding about the various problems and themes
of conflicts, violence and peacelessness. The teaching-learning process should also
be consistent with the goals, purposes and values of peace education. Following the
inspirational vision and praxis of the Brazilian adult educator, Paulo Freire, this
avoids a ‘banking’ mode of teaching and learning and entrenching the educator as
the expert transmitting knowledge to passive learners (Darder, Baltodano, &
Torres, 2008; Freire, 1998). More specifically, a peaceful pedagogy needs to be
holistic, dialogical, affirm values formation and catalyse critical empowerment of a
learner (and educator) to translate his/her critical understanding of realities and root
causes of a problem into personal and social action toward a peaceful world.
Holism recognises the inter-relationships between and among different problems
of peacelessness, conflict and violence in terms of root causes and resolutions.
Holism also acknowledges the relevant contributions of various levels and modes
210
EDUCATING FOR GLOBAL & LOCAL PEACE
of peace education (e.g., formal, non-formal, informal socialisation, media). For

instance, formal peace education is strengthened by linking students’
understanding to concrete realities and practices of peacelessness and peace
building in the community and non-formal sectors. Alternatively, non-formal peace
education is facilitated if students in schools are empowered to show solidarity for
societal transformation, while in the longer term, the present children and youth
graduate from formal institutions to assume positions of influence in society with
attitudes, knowledge and skills supportive of peace building.
Secondly, peace education emphasises the crucial role of values formation
through its pedagogical processes. Recognising that all knowledge is never free of
values, the peace educator constantly encourages learners to surface innermost
values that shape their understanding of realities and their actions in the world.
Clearly, peace education needs to be very explicit about its preferred values, such
as nonviolence, compassion, justice, gender-equity, sustainability, sharing,
reconciliation, integrity, hope and active nonviolence.
A third important pedagogical principle of peace education rests on the value
and strategy of dialogue. As earlier stated, peace education cannot be based on
banking. In dialogical pedagogy, teacher-learner relationship is more horizontal,
and students’ realities and experiences are welcomed for mutual learning. Hence a
wide range of creative teaching-learning strategies is used by peace educators,
including brain-storming, analysis, role playing, simulation, theatre, singing,
painting, dancing, poetry and mime.
A fourth vital principle for practising peace education is critical empowerment
or in Freirean language, conscientisation. While dialogical, participatory and non-
banking pedagogies and methodologies are crucial, they are not sufficient. Thus if
peace education is not able or willing to try to move not just minds but also hearts
and spirits into personal and social action for peace building, it will remain an
academic and abstract exercise. In short, peaceful pedagogy seeks to develop a
critical consciousness that actively seeks to transform the realities of a culture of
war and violence into a culture of peace and nonviolence
VISIONS AND POSSIBILITIES
Through various concrete exemplars of crises and conflicts in the contemporary

world, this section will endeavour to clarify and explore a number of visions,
possibilities and challenges for the theory and practice of peace education in
catalysing the global education movement.
Footsteps toward a demilitarised world

While the terrible scourge of the two world wars appear unlikely to be easily
repeated due to changes in the global political security system, millions of human
beings are still experiencing the pain and suffering of bloody armed conflicts, civil
wars, military interventions and the seemingly endless cycle of terrorism and war
on terrorism (Ahmed, 2003; Chomsky, 2003;). Afghanistan, the Democratic
211
TOH SWEE-HIN
Republic of Congo, Ukraine, Israel-Palestine and Syria are grim reminders of

protracted internal armed conflicts which have inflicted death and injuries on
millions of people, a majority of whom are civilian children, women and men.
Gender-based violence (e.g., rape as a weapon of war) highlights the patriarchal
underpinnings of militarisation.
In a number of societies, the rise of organised drug violence (for example,
Mexico, Colombia) has, apart from the social impact of heightened drug
addictions, added to the deadly statistics on homicides, while proliferation of guns
in numerous countries has accentuated a culture of militarisation including
organised gang violence. Physical violence in schools among students or via
corporal punishment clearly also contributes to the experience of militarisation
from an early age. Much concern has also been raised about the deepening of a
culture of violence through media, including very violent video games and graphic
‘entertainment’ violence (DeGaetano & Grossman, 2014). Last but not least, the
proliferation of nuclear weaponry and other weapons of mass destruction promises
the possibility of a nuclear holocaust and other unimaginable weapon of mass
destruction (WMD) based conflicts (Caldicott, 2002).
Yet, in the face of such terrible processes of militarisation, it is hopeful to see
movements and initiatives seeking or struggling to dismantle a culture of war,
including: peace talks and negotiated settlements to armed conflicts (for instance
Acheh in Indonesia; Nepal; Moro Islamic Liberation Front – Government of the
Republic of the Philippines peace accord in Mindanao, Philippines); truth and
reconciliation commissions; efforts at the establishment of an arms trade treaty
(albeit still flawed in need of much improvement); the disarmament,
demobilisation n and reintegration of ex-combatants (adults, children); preventing
gender-based violence in armed conflicts or domestic contexts; campaigns to stop a
new military base undergoing building (such as Gangjeong Village on Jeju Island
in South Korea); actions to abolish nuclear weapons (for example a United Nations
convention; and individual anti-nuclear activists entering nuclear facilities);
creating safe and caring schools (e.g., non-bullying).
Clearly in all these initiatives and movements to build a demilitarised world,
disarmament education plays an indispensable role (Andrzejewski, 2009;
Ballantine & Hill, 2001; Reardon, 2002). The raising of critical awareness of
ordinary citizens and civic and political leaders to question militarisation policies
and replace them with alternative policies and ways of resolving conflicts
nonviolently is a vital dimension of disarmament education. The sustainable steps
out of an armed conflict do not stop with the signing of peace accords. Most
importantly, citizens need to be engaged in reconsidering dominant conceptions
and ideologies of security and fear as well as regime change which are used to
justify militarised interventions. Global and peace education to move citizens to
question the endless spiral and cycle of terrorism and the war on terrorism is
clearly urgent. From an early age, children also need to cultivate values and
capacities for nonviolent resolution of conflicts in order to strengthen their roles as
future adult citizens committed to peace building (Carter, 2012; Lantieri & Patti,
1996; Schell-Faucon, 2001).
212
Promoting a culture of human rights

After some 66 years of the proclamation of the Universal Declaration on Human
Rights, followed by numerous human rights covenants, conventions, declarations
and treaties, it can be argued that a culture of human rights is slowly being weaved
worldwide. Diverse civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, when
adopted by governments internationally as well as implemented effectively at
national and local levels, have helped to enhance the quality of life of millions of
citizens. Not only are the rights of individuals recognised, but so also are group
rights. Likewise, the rights of especially marginalised or vulnerable sectors,
including women, children, indigenous peoples, ethnic groups, persons with
disabilities, migrant workers and Lesbian/Bisexual/Gay/Transgendered (LBGTs)
are increasingly recognised after decades of patient struggle and advocacy.
But while acknowledging these steps forward, the realities in many countries
and regions undoubtedly demonstrate that large gaps still exist between theory and
practice in human rights legislation and implementation. Violations of individuals
and groups continue to be visible, even if their governments may have already
ratified the human rights instruments. In the name of national security, some nation
states have also even rationalised the use of torture by their own personnel or
through ‘friendly’ allies (e.g., rendition programmes). Increasingly, there are
disturbing signs that concepts such as humanitarian intervention and R2P
(responsibility to protect), which were designed to protect civilians during armed
conflicts, have been manipulated by powerful states to bring about regime change,
namely to depose ‘unfriendly’ governments and leaders.
In recent years, the struggle for civil and political rights and democracy in
diverse regions have come to the fore in people-power uprisings and revolutions,
such as the EDSA revolution that toppled the Marcos dictatorship in the
Philippines, the movements that finally dismantled apartheid in South Africa and
the Arab Spring in the Middle East and North Africa. Where successful, such
people power movements clearly showed the crucial role of education in
mobilising the energies and courage of ordinary citizens to challenge powerful
authoritarian regimes. However, as demonstrated by the Arab Spring, notably in
Egypt, unless peace and human rights education is systematic and integrated into
the movement, powerful elite forces can manipulate and coopt people power to
eventually retain power with a resumption of human rights violations .
Despite the slow but steady progress made by educators and peace builders
active in building a culture of human rights, the challenges for human rights
education are therefore substantive. Nevertheless, innumerable hopeful signposts
can be discerned (Andreopoulos & Claude, 1997; Peoples’ Movement for Human
Rights Education, 2006).
In many school systems, human rights principles and strategies can now be
found within curricula, textbooks and classroom pedagogies. Via a whole school
approach, human rights education seeks to mainstream a culture of human rights
through all relationships and parts of a school institution. Grassroots human rights
education has also facilitated the mobilising and organising of certain marginalised
213
TOH SWEE-HIN
groups to protect and improve their human rights (e.g., women, children,
indigenous peoples, LGBT, persons with disabilities) (Inclusion International,
2010; Loutzenhiser & Moore, 2009; Stromquist, 2007; UNICEF, 2013). The very
important work of human rights NGOs in monitoring and critiquing the human
rights record of their countries and the role of their governments at the Universal
Periodic Review sessions of the UN Human Rights Council is at its foundations a
vital peace educational project in holding their governments to universal standards
of human rights.
Toward economies of compassion and justice

In the contemporary world order, the very powerful forces of corporate led
globalisation or globalisation from above have resulted in a dominant economic
paradigm based on the logic of unlimited growth, maximising profits and
unfettered free market access to cheap labour and resources. Given such
assumptions, it is not surprising that the planet has never seen such disparities
between the rich and the poor (Anderson, 2000; Bello, 2009; Brecher, 2003; Shiva,
2005).
With the support, implicit or explicit, of their governments giant transnational
corporations (TNCs) cast their nets wide and far across all regions and countries.
Through agribusiness mining, logging and fishing to global manufacturing
assembly lines, the TNCs gain highly profitable access to essential minerals and
other natural resources, land and super-cheap labour. The Global North consumers,
including the middle classes and elites in Global South contexts, benefit from such
export-oriented economic activities. Governments which adopt such neoliberal
economic policies are often also heavily dependent on aid and loans from Global
North governments and the international financial institutions (IFIs) (e.g.,
International Monetary Fund [IMF], World Bank). In turn, such dependency is
often accompanied with IMF dictated policies of structural adjustment, which
accentuate rich-poor disparities, poverty of the marginalised classes and reduced
social welfare services. Graft and corruption also affects many Global South
economies, diverting resources away from equitable and relevant distribution of
funds for social goods and services. Poor farmers struggle to survive on their small
plots while the fisher folk in their small, low-technology boats barely catch enough
fish in the face of incursions by foreign or local trawlers and polluted coastal
waters. In the urban sector, the poor live in overcrowded slums or shanties lacking
clean water, sanitation and other basic amenities, while millions of children survive
as street kids or exploited child labour.
In responding to this dimension of a culture of peace, peace educators recognise
the long-standing work of those who established the field called development
education. For people who belong to marginalised sectors (e.g., rural poor, urban
poor), development education serves to help raise their critical consciousness of
their own realities and catalyses their commitment to engage in societal
transformation. One outcome could be the creation of alternative small-scale
appropriate technology social enterprises that excludes middlemen exploitation and
214
motivates individuals to cooperate in community-level economic activities. Among

urban poor communities, such development education can empower them to
demand equitable access to state resources. Globally, the good news is that
critically aware and organised marginalised communities are mobilising and
cooperating across national boundaries to share resources, ideas and fruitful
experiences, such as during the regular World Social Forum (Feffer, 2002; Fisher
& Ponniah, 2003).
At the same time, development education also focuses on the education of the
non-poor, whereby peoples in the Global North (in North or South contexts) whose
economic levels are already middle class and above are conscientised to consider
their responsibilities in also challenging and transforming structural violence in the
world (Development Education.ie, n.d.. For example, the Fair Trade movement has
grown to provide a pathway for Global North people to promote the local
economies of Global South communities based on principles of social and
economic justice and ecological sustainability. Another emergent field of
development education lies in catalysing businesses or the private sector to engage
in ethical business ventures, social enterprises and corporate social responsibility
practices that help to promote justice and sustainability for marginalised sectors.
Last but not least, over the past two years, the Occupy Movement has demonstrated
an increased concern and critique of the concentration of wealth and economic
power in the hands of the top one percent of very rich elites worldwide.
Active harmony and understanding among cultures

While members of the human species share many common characteristics,
regardless of region or nation, such commonalities are found amidst the vast
cultural diversity still present in the world today (UNESCO, 2010). From
languages, music and other art forms to rituals and practices of daily life and
religious or faith beliefs and doctrines, it is this rich mosaic of cultures and
civilisations that gives humanity its beauty and depth. Yet, as earlier noted, the
world is still beset with conflicts between members belonging to different cultures,
ethnicities and/or civilisations. Instead of an inclusive attitude of understanding,
respect and active harmony, there are exclusivist and extremist expressions of
various discriminations, prejudices, intolerances, hatred and racism.
Hence there is a vital need for education that encourages intercultural or
multicultural understanding, communication and solidarity. Rather than the flawed
thesis of a clash of civilisations, members of diverse cultures and ethnicities
approach each other in a spirit known as the dialogue of civilisations that the UN
body The United Nations Alliance of Civilizations (UNAOC) established in 2005
advocates. Worldwide, in societies which affirm cultural diversity and intercultural
understanding, the role of intercultural education or multicultural education hence
opens doors for mutual understanding and learning from each culture’s knowledge
and wisdom.
In many multicultural societies that affirm their cultural diversity in an equitable
and inclusive way, the role of schools and universities in promoting intercultural
215
TOH SWEE-HIN
and multicultural education has often yielded positive outcomes (Lowman, 2013;
Nieto & Bode, 2012). In enhancing the capacity of students to understand their
own cultural identity in a non-centric and complex manner, they are better
motivated to understand others in a respectful way. They also become aware of
possible prejudices and stereotyping that they may hold of others and learn to
overcome such tendencies (Toh, 2005). Most importantly, when envisioned under
the name of anti-racist education, learners not only appreciate diversity and
discover shared values, they also are empowered to overcome to challenge racism
and other forms and levels of discrimination (Au, 2009; James, 2003).
The specific case of indigenous peoples and their struggles against economic,
political, social and cultural forces released by contemporary globalisation also
presents a vital challenge to multicultural or intercultural education. Not only does
this indigenous education respond to their needs for cultural survival that were
invariably suppressed during colonisation, it also empowers them to demystify
promises of development, growth and profit, to build on their indigenous
knowledge and to demand their ancestral domain or land rights (King &
Schielmann, 2004; Synott, 2004; Tauli-Corpuz, 2005). Such indigenous education
also helps in the healing of deep traumas and violence experienced during
colonisation.
Another emergent dimension in intercultural education lies in interfaith
dialogue, whereby the diversity of the world’s religions, faiths and spirituality
traditions is affirmed and respected (Abu-Nimer, 2002; Mays, 2008). Through
dialogue, members of different religions or faiths gain a deeper understanding of
each other’s beliefs and practices. In this process, they not only develop a respect
for each other’s differences, but also discover that they share many common values
and principles. This common ground in turn motivates them to join hands, minds,
hearts and spirit in collaborative or faith-based action to build a culture of peace
(Philippine Council for Islam and Democracy, 2004; Toh & Cawagas, 2007).
Based on the experiences of global interfaith movements such as Religions for
Peace and Parliament of the World’s Religions, and grassroots local interfaith
groups or Civil Society Organisations (CSOs), interfaith dialogue and education
has catalysed faiths and religions to work together or within their faith-based
communities on various dimensions of peace building (e.g., local/global justice,
addressing climate change, rights of refugees, challenging Islamphobia) (Religions
for Peace, 2008; Toh & Cawagas, 2010; van Tongeren, Brenk, Hellema, &
Verhoeven, 2006; Zine, 2004). At the same time, interfaith dialogue also faces a
challenge when issues of human rights are raised, since there are tensions between
religious beliefs and universal human rights (Witte & Green, 2012). Hence
interfaith education also needs to encourage faith communities to dialogue with
secular human rights advocates to try to resolve such tensions
Sharing and living in our one planet

In a holistic framework of peace education, all individuals, communities,
institutions, organisations, societies and the global order have to urgently address
216
the problems, conflicts and peacelessness that have arisen and deepened due to
unsustainable economic, social and cultural paradigms and practices. The depletion
of non-renewable resources; loss of biodiversity; soil degradation; desertification;
pollutions; ozone layer destruction; deforestation; depletion of fisheries; carbon
emissions and all other symptoms of climate change, including increased intensity
of weather extremes; competition for natural resources and cultural and lifestyle
habits of waste and over-consumption all need to be reversed or resolved if
humanity and our one planet is to survive (Klare, 2012; Renner, French, &
Assadourian, 2005). Hence building on the earlier movements in environmental
education focusing on protection and conservation of species and other elements of
the environment, schools and other educational institutions are integrating
education for sustainable development or sustainable futures into formal and non-
formal curricula (Fein, 2010; Huckle, 2010; Kagawa & Selby, 2010; UNESCO,
2012).
It is also clear now that technological fixes alone will not resolve the ecological
crisis facing humanity and our planet. Alternative energies and technologies can
and do contribute to reducing the depletion of fossil fuels, increasing energy
efficiencies, lowering pollution levels, enhancing recycling and reducing
ecological footprints. However, the root cause of the crisis must be healed, namely
an addiction to over and endless consumption of products or affluenza in which
engineered obsolescence is built into their frames and the advertising juggernaut
moulds our consciousness the belief that we must want and have the latest elite
brands (Hamilton & Denniss, 2005; Klein, 1999). Such healing necessarily
depends on a deep educational process, since with the rise of the hi-tech revolution,
each consuming citizen will need not only to rethink the need for an actual
commodity (e.g., a cell phone, the latest model) but also question the necessity for
the innumerable apps enticing him/her to keep up with the crowd. For peace
educators, the contributions that social media can make to building a peaceful
world needs to be balanced by a moderate and sustainable consumption of the tool
itself.
The escalation of the ecological crises facing humanity has sometimes also
presented episodes that can serve as a potential catharsis to awaken fear and
emotion and hopefully catalyse actions to urgently resolve the crises. In this part of
the world, the Fukushima nuclear plant disaster three years ago may be seen as one
such episode. No doubt, affected and concerned Japanese citizens, together with
international solidarity movements from neighbours such as Korea and many other
regions, have assertively drawn on the disaster to highlight the grave dangers posed
by the nuclear power industry. But even though the slow and highly delicate task of
removing the thousands of highly radioactive rods is ongoing and tons of
radioactive water are still contaminating the surrounding ocean, there is clearly a
need to further awaken the global consciousness of how dangerous the Fukushima
plant poses, not only to the Japanese people but to the world community (Zeese &
Flowers, 2013). Moreover, surely this massive disaster is a monumental wake up
sign about the unsustainability of nuclear power?
217
TOH SWEE-HIN
Journeying toward inner peace

Within the community of peace educators worldwide, there is a slowly growing
recognition that the dimension of inner peace needs more appreciation and
understanding. Despite the abundance of materialism, consumerism and ever
higher gross national product (GNP) levels in advanced industrial Global North
societies, there are worrying symptoms of alienation, psychological disorders such
as depression and anxieties, suicides and increasing drug addictions. The
increasing reliance on chemical medications to deal with such health problems,
even for young children, raises issues of dependency and side effects. A relevant
question from the perspective of peace education is whether the root causes of
those psychological illnesses have been understood and whether these medicines
are responding more to the symptoms.
For peace educators focusing especially on the cultivation of inner peace, the
preferred vision and strategy is to draw on long-standing cultural or civilisational
practices of maintaining a sense of inner calm, balance, equilibrium and
centredness, such as appropriate methods of meditation, contemplation or praying
(Boyce, 2011; Lin, 2006; Schoberlein & Sheth, 2009). In some communities and
cultures, the source for such methods is often derived from a religion or faith or
spirituality tradition. In the contemporary world, however, access to such inner
peace development strategies need not be tied to belief in a particular religion or
faith. There are hence countries where schools and teachers have integrated
meditation sessions into their daily lessons as a fruitful way to calm students prior
to their academic sessions (Machado, 2014; Westhead, 2010). In the context of
heavily and over-competitive school environments, such inner peace cultivation
will be relevant and worthy of consideration.
Envisioning inner peace as part of the goal of building a peaceful world
naturally begins with the self or inner being (Thich Nhat Hanh, 2003). A related
concept that is often deemed relevant in cultivating inner peace is spirituality.
Here, personal or individual development is not merely expressed in terms of outer
indicators such as career or work success, personality characteristics, cognitive
knowledge, physical health and other dimensions. Rather, there is a mindful focus
on careful growing of one’s spirituality, though it should not be defined as
necessarily requiring a religious or faith basis while for some people, there is an
integral link between their religion or faith and their spirituality. In this regard,
there is much wisdom in all faiths and spirituality traditions reminding people to
transcend attachments to material possessions and non-material desires (e.g., fame,
ego, etc.) and to practise voluntary simplicity or stepping lightly (Burch, 2000).
Last but not least, in peace education, inner peace cultivation cannot be pursued
in isolation from the search and praxis of outer or social peace. To avoid a self-
centred or narcissistic attachment to one’s inner peace, it is crucial to complement
its cultivation with a conscientious commitment to building a peaceful world.
Hence, although developing a sense of love and compassion for oneself is a part of
inner peace, likewise this love and compassion needs to be extended to all other
218
beings and our one planet. A search for personal happiness also catalyses energies
for social action that helps others to experience happiness and transform suffering.
A CONCLUDING REFLECTION
This chapter has sought to clarify and explore some visions, possibilities and
challenges in promoting the global education movement from the perspective of
peace education. The building of a culture of peace is clearly multi-dimensional
with the various dimensions interrelating with each other in complex and
challenging ways. If humanity is to survive, all peoples and societies will need to
begin by critically understanding the root causes of multiple conflicts, violence and
peacelessness from micro to macro levels of life. The role of peace education in
deepening such understanding and catalysing individuals, communities and citizens
to engage in transformative personal and social action is slowly being
acknowledged and practised in both formal and non-formal contexts, whether
schools and universities or wider societal contexts. There are inspirational lessons
and insights to be learned from programmes, projects and initiatives in both Global
South and Global North regions. Certainly, it is important to recognise the
significant challenges and barriers to implementing peace education, including the
dominant paradigm of formal education based on excessive competition, producing
human capital for economic growth, and often reproducing wider societal
inequalities and discrimination based on gender, class and ethno-cultural or
racialised identities. However, as peace educators emphasise, it is vital to continue
to practise the values and principles of peace building with a deep sense of patience
and hopefulness. As the engaged Buddhists, Joanna Macy and Molly Young
Brown (1998), have reminded us in these times of crises and nightmare scenarios
for the world’s and humanity’s future, we need to commit ourselves to the
great turning, … to choose life by building a life-sustaining society, which
encompass 1) actions to slow the damage to earth and its beings; 2) analysis
of structural causes and creation of structural alternatives; 3) a fundamental
shift in worldview and values. (p. 17)
REFERENCES
Abu-Nimer, M. (2002). The miracles of transformation through interfaith dialogue. In D. R. Smock

(Ed.), Interfaith dialogue and peace building (pp. 15–32). Washington D.C.: United States Institute
of Peace.
Adams, D. (Ed.). (1995). UNESCO and culture of peace. Paris: Culture of Peace Programme, UNESCO.
Ahmed, N. M. (2003). Behind the war on terror. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society.
Anderson, S. (Ed.). (2000). Views from the south. Chicago: Food First Books.
Andreopoulos, G. J., & Claude, R. P. (1997). Human rights education for the twenty-first century.
Philadelphia: University of Pennslyvania Press.
Andrzejewski, J. (2009). Education for peace and nonviolence. In J. Andrzejewski, M. P. Baltodano, &
L. Symcox (Eds.), Social justice, peace, and environmental education (pp. 99–120) New York:
Routledge,
219
TOH SWEE-HIN
Au, W. (2009). Rethinking multicultural education. Milwaukee: Rethinking Schools.

Bajaj, M. (Ed.). (2008). Encyclopedia of peace education. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.
Ballantine, E., & Hill, F. (2001). Lessons from past UN disarmament education efforts. Disarmament
Forum, 3, 13–17.
Bello, W. (2009). The food wars. London: Verso.
Boyce, B. (Ed.). (2011). The mindfulness revolution. Boston: Shambhala.
Brecher, J. (2003). Globalization today. In S. Aronowitz & H. Gautney (Eds.), Implicating empire.
Globalization & resistance in the 21st century world order (pp. 199–210. New York: Basic Books.
Burch, M. (2000). Stepping lightly: Simplicity for peace and the planet. Gabriola Island: New Society
Publishers.
Burns, R., & Aspeslagh, R. (Eds.). (1996). Three decades of education around the world. New York &
London: Garland Publishing.
Caldicott, H. (2002). The new nuclear danger. Carlton North, Vic: Scribe Publications.
Carter, C. (Ed.). (2010). Conflict resolution and peace education: Transformations across disciplines.
London: Palgrave MacMillan.
Cawagas, V. F. (Ed.). (2003). Education for international understanding toward a culture of peace.
Teachers Resource Book. Seoul: Asia-Pacific Centre of Education for International Understanding.
Chomsky, N. (2003). Hegemony or survival. Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin.
Darder, A., Baltodano, M. P., & Torres, R. D. (Eds.). (2008). The critical pedagogy reader (2nd ed.).
London: Taylor & Francis.
DeGaetano, G., & Grossman, D. (2014). Stop teaching our kids to kill: A call to action against TV,
movie, and video game violence. New York: Harmony Books/Random House.
Development Education. (n.d.). Teachers and educators. www.developmenteducation.ie/teachers-and-
educators/
Fein, J. (Ed.). (2010). Teaching and learning for a sustainable future. Paris: UNESCO
Fisher, W. F., & Ponniah, T. (Eds.). (2003). Another world is possible. London: Zed Books.
Freire, P. (1998). Pedagogy of freedom, ethics, democracy, and civic courage. Lanham, Maryland:
Rowman & Littlefield.
Fountain, S. (1999). Peace education in UNICEF. New York: UNICEF.
Hamilton, C., & Denniss, R. (2005). Affluenza. Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.
Harris, I. (Ed.). (2013). Peace education from the grassroots. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.
Huckle, J. (2010). ESD and the current crisis of capitalism: Teaching beyond green new deals. Journal
of Education for Sustainable Development, 4(1), 135–142. Retrieved from http://john.huckle.org.uk/
download/2947/JESDarticle 2010.pdf
Inclusion International. (2010). The implications of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities for education for all. London: Inclusion International.
James, C. E. (2003). Seeing ourselves: Exploring race, ethnicity and culture (3rd ed.). Toronto:
Thompson.
Kagawa, F., & Selby, D. (Eds.). (2010). Education and climate change. London: Routledge.
King, L., & Schielmann, S. (2004). The challenge of indigenous education: Practice and perspectives.
Paris: UNESCO.
Klare, M. T. (2012). The race for what is left. New York: Metropolitan Books.
Klein, N. (1999). No logo. New York: Picador USA.
Lantieri, P., & Patti, J. (1996). Waging peace in our schools. Boston, MA: Beacon.
Lin, J. (2006). Love, peace, and wisdom in education. Toronto: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
Loutzenhiser, L. W.. & Moore, S. D. M. (2009). Safe schools, sexualities and critical education. In M.
A. Apple, W. Au, & L. A. Gandin (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of critical
education (pp. 150–162). New York: Routledge.
Lowman, R. L. (Ed.). (2013). Internationalizing multiculturalism. Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
220
Machado, A. (2014, January 27). Should schools teach kids to meditate? The Atlantic. Retrieved
from http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/01/should-schools-teach-kids-to-meditate/
283229/
Macy, J. R., & Brown, M. Y. (1998). Coming back to life: Practices to reconnect our lives, our world.
Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers.
Mays, R. K. (Ed.). (2008). Interfaith dialogue at the grassroots. Philadelphia, PA: Ecumenical Press.
Nieto, S., & Bode, P. (2012). Affirming diversity (6th ed.). Boston MA: Pearson Education.
People’s Movement for Human Rights Education. (2006). Human rights learning: A people’s report.
New York: People’s Movement for Human Rights Education.
Philippine Council for Islam and Democracy. (2004). Interfaith dialogue and peace building in
Mindanao. Interfaith Approaches to peace and development in Mindanao. Retrieved from
http://www.muslimmindanao.ph/peace_process/Interfaith%20Dialogue%20and%20Peacebuilding%
20in%20Mindanao.pdf
Reardon, B. (2002).Tasks and directions for the global campaign for peace education. Disarmament
Forum, 3, 19–26.
Religions for Peace. (2008). We can cooperate for peace. New York: Religions for Peace.
Renner, M., French, H., & Assadourian, E. (Eds.). (2005). State of the world. New York: W.W. Norton
& Co.
Schell-Faucon, S. (2001). Conflict transformation through educational and youth programmes.
Tubingen: Berghof Handbook for Conflict Transformation.
Schoberlein, D., & Sheth, S. (2009). Mindful teaching and teaching mindfulness. Somerville, MA:
Wisdom Publications.
Seabrook, J. (2004). Consuming cultures: Globalization and local lives. Oxford: New Internationalist.
Shiva, V. (2005). Earth democracy, justice, sustainability and peace. Cambridge: South End.
Stromquist, N. P. (2007). Adult learning and the politics of change: Feminist organization and
educational action in Latin America. In S. Fennell & M. Arnot (Eds.), Equality in a global context:
Conceptual frameworks and policy perspectives (pp. 211–224). New York: Routledge.
Synott, J. (2004). Global and international studies. Transdisciplinary perspectives. Southbank, VIC:
Social Science Press.
Tauli-Corpuz, V. (2005). Rights of indigenous peoples. Key to the promotion of cultural diversity.
SangSaeng, 13(Summer), 11–15.
Thich Nhat Hanh. (2003). Creating true peace. London: Rider.
Toh, S. H. (2005). Learning to live together: ‘Fighting’ stereotypes from textbooks to the internet. In D.
Laqua & A. Salinas (Eds.), New ignorances, new literacies: Learning to live together in a
globalizing world. (pp. 146–159) Paris: UNESCO.
Toh, S. H., & Cawagas, V. (Eds.). (2005). Cultivating wisdom, harvesting peace. Brisbane, Queensland:
Multi-Faith Centre, Griffith University.
Toh, S. H., & Cawagas, V. F. (2010). Transforming the ecological crisis. Challenges for faith and
interfaith education in interesting times. In F. Kagawa & D. Selby (Eds.), Education and climate
change (pp. 175–196). New York: Routledge.
Toh, S. H., & Floresca-Cawagas, V. (1990). Peaceful theory and practice in values education. Quezon
City: Phoenix Publishing House.
UNESCO. (2010). UNESCO world report. Investing in cultural diversity and intercultural dialogue.
Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO (2012). Education for sustainable development. Sourcebook. www.learningteacher.eu/sites/
learningteacher.eu/files/esd_source.pdf
UNICEF. (2013). Know your rights! United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
for indigenous adolescents. New York: UNICEF. Retrieved from
http://www.unicef.org/policyanalysis/rights/files/HRBAP_UN_Rights_Indig_Peoples.pdf
van Tongeren, P., Brenk. M., Hellema, M., & Verhoeven, J. (Eds.). People building peace II. Successful
stories of civil society. London: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
221
TOH SWEE-HIN
Westhead, R. (2010, May 30). Bhutan ‘infusing’ happiness in math, science classes. thestar.com.
Retrieved from http://www.thestar.com/news/world/2010/05/30/bhutan_infusing_happiness_in_
math_science_classes.html
Witte, J., Jr., & Green, M. C. (Eds.). (2012). Religion and human rights. An introduction. Oxford:
Zeese, K., & Flowers, M. (2013, October 25–27). The global threat of Fukushima. Counterpunch.
Retrieved from http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/10/25/the-global-threat-of-fukushima/
Zine, J. (2004). Anti-Islamophobia education as transformative pedagogy: Reflections from the
educational front lines. American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences, 21(2), 110–119. Retrieved
from http://i-epistemology.net/attachments/847_Ajiss21-3%20-%20Zine%20-%20Anti%20
Islamophobia%20Education.pdf
Toh Swee-Hin (S.H. Toh)

Peace & Conflict Studies
University for Peace

222
AUTHOR BIOGRAPHIES
Debbie Bradbery (debbie.bradbery@newcastle.edu.au) is currently Deputy

Program Convenor for the Master of Teaching (Primary) at the University of
Newcastle, Australia. Her research interests and publications lie in the areas of
classroom applications of Global Education through literacy and teaching for a
sustainable future. She is currently studying for a PhD while teaching full time at
the University of Newcastle.
Joanna Brown (joanna.brown@newcastle.edu.au) is a member of the Global

Education Research & Teaching group, Course Coordinator & Lecturer, School of
Education, Faculty of Education & Arts, University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia.
She has authored book chapters and articles on global education, children’s
literature, university-school partnerships and K-6 Mathematics, English, HSIE and
Science. She is also an Australian Institute for Teaching Standards and Learning
Australia (AITSL) Initial Teacher Education Accreditation panel member.
Kay Carroll (kay.carroll@acu.edu.au) is currently a Team Leader in Catholic

schools in NSW supporting global literacy and professional learning. Dr Carroll’s
research interests are global education, ICT rich pedagogy, teacher efficacy and
curriculum. She has worked as a senior lecturer and Deputy Head of School at the
Australian Catholic University, and as a teacher educator at Macquarie and UTS,
Sydney. Previously, Dr Carroll has been a classroom teacher and Head of
Department in secondary state and Independent schools. Her current areas of focus
are critical literacy and global education.
Trevor Davies (t.c.davies@reading.ac.uk) is a Fellow of the University of

Reading, and previously Director of the International Centre for Studies in
Education and Training at the Institute of Education, University of Reading, UK.
His work at the University of Reading has included over time running training
programmes for teachers of science and technology, leading and partnering a wide
range of international projects on behalf of the European Commission including
Tempus, Grundtvig, Comenius, Erasmus and Erasmus Mundus. He has worked
with the Kazakhstan government and developed a new Masters Programme on
Global Futures for Education. His research work including supervising
postgraduate students features creativity, technology education, educational
leadership; global citizenship and education for sustainability.
Javier Calvo de Mora (jcalvode@ugr.es) is a Professor of School Organization in

the Department of Didactic and School Organization, University of Granada. His
main research interests lie in policy institutional collaboration and leadership
studies, though he is currently coordinator of European network on research of
Citizenship Education. He is author of a number of books and papers which
explore how to create a continuity learning process between schools and its
223
AUTHORS’ BIOGRAPHIES
context, and editor of books about citizenship culture applied to social relations
through school structure.
Debra Donnelly (debra.donnelly@newcastle.edu.au) is a history educator and

program convenor in the School of Education at the University of Newcastle,
Australia, working in both undergraduate and postgraduate programs. She has a
secondary school background with extensive classroom, school administration and
welfare experience across a range of educational settings in New South Wales and
overseas. Dr Donnelly’s research interests centre on the role of the visual and
media in the development of historical and global consciousness in an age of ever-
increasing access through modern technology. Her work seeks to explore and
clarify the relationship between teacher conceptual frameworks of historical and
cultural understanding and the pedagogical implications of new media, particularly
the digital image and film.
Henrik Åström Elmersjö (henrik.astrom.elmersjo@umu.se) is a postdoctoral

fellow in history and education at the Department of Historical, Philosophical and
Religious Studies, Umeå University, Sweden. His research is focused on both
didactical issues, mainly the negotiation of historical culture within education, as
well as on the history of education, especially the renegotiation of school subjects
as a consequence of perceived new cultural needs for education. He is a former
upper secondary school teacher in history, international relations, and geography,
and he earned his doctorate at Umeå University in 2013. He is also on the editorial
team for the peer-reviewed international journal Nordic Journal of Educational
History.
Eric Feldman (efeldman@fiu.edu) is the Coordinator in the Office of Global

Learning Initiatives at Florida International University (FIU). He holds a Bachelor
of Science degree in Criminal Justice and a Master of Science degree in Higher
Education Administration, both from FIU. Eric oversees the university’s globalized
co-curriculum by planning engaging outside-of-the-classroom activities and
advising student organizations. He also teaches the FIU Honors College first year
course on college success, research, writing, and leadership. Eric’s academic
interests include information literacy and democratic deliberation as vehicles for
global learning.
Kate Ferguson-Patrick (kate.fergusonpatrick@newcastle.edu.au) is a lecturer at

The University of Newcastle, Australia. She lectures in Primary Education with
Primary Maths, Social Studies and Integrated Curriculum her specialist areas. She
has recently completed a long term study of Cooperative Learning with early
career teachers with a focus on how this classroom approach leads to ‘democracy
classrooms’. Dr Ferguson-Patrick has publications in Australian and International
journals regarding this research, as well as in Global Education.
224
Kathryn Grushka (kath.grushka@newcastle.edu.au) is a Senior Lecturer in the

School of Education, Faculty of Education and Arts at the University of Newcastle.
She is a nationally recognized artist/ educator, curriculum writer and a mid-career
researcher in arts-based inquiry and narrative methods informed by critical and
social inquiry; subjectivity insights, embodied learning and visual performative
pedagogies with links to teacher education, health and well-being. Kathryn
currently sits on international and national editorial teams for visual art and teacher
education journals. She has been awarded the Beth Southwell Research Award for
her doctoral thesis. Her current research extends to international networks of arts-
based inquiry researchers in Canada, Australia and UK. She is currently on the
editorial boards for the International Journal of Education through Art and
Australian Art Education.
Udan Kusmawan (udan@ecampus.ut.ac.id) is a senior academic staff member at

the Faculty of Teacher Training and Education Science, Universitas Terbuka,
Indonesia, and currently is Dean of this Faculty for the period of 2013-2017. He
has been working at Universitas Terbuka since 1993 and has written, published and
presented several research papers on various science educational issues and on
open and distance learning theories and best practices in many academic journals
and international seminars. His research interests are mainly on classroom teaching
methods and management, as well as in curriculum development both in traditional
and distance education contexts.
Hilary Landorf (landorfh@fiu.edu) is the Director of Florida International

University’s (FIU) Office of Global Learning Initiatives where she oversees FIU’s
successful university-wide curriculum and co-curriculum internationalization
initiative, Global Learning for Global Citizenship. She is also an Associate
Professor of International and Intercultural Education in FIU’s College of
Education. Landorf has published over 30 articles and book chapters on
international education, has been an internationalization consultant to several
colleges and universities, and has given over a hundred presentations and
workshops on the development, implementation, leadership, and assessment of
international teaching and learning in K-20 settings. Hilary Landorf has a Ph.D. in
International Education from New York University, an M.A. in English from the
University of Virginia, and a B.A. in English with Honors from Stanford
University.
Mags Liddy (Mags.Liddy@ul.ie) is currently finalising her PhD thesis at the

University of Limerick, Ireland exploring the capacity of overseas volunteering as
a professional development experience for teachers, examining its impact on their
professional lives and identity. Additionally she is coordinator of the IDEA
Research Community, part of the Irish Development Education Association.
Formerly she was Research Associate with the Ubuntu Network, a teacher
education research project based at the University of Limerick from 2006 to 2010.
225
Suzanne Macqueen (suzanne.macqueen@newcastle.edu.au) is a lecturer in the

School of Education at the University of Newcastle, Australia. She is involved in a
number of research projects related to equity in education and Global Education
and has published a number of journal articles on these topics. Suzanne is currently
finalising a PhD on the experiences of non-traditional students in teacher
education.
Fran Martin (Fran.Martin@exeter.ac.uk) began her career as a primary school

teacher 1980-1993. Dr Martin secured her first post in Higher Education, working
on the preparation of primary teachers and specialising in primary geography and
environmental education. She has a long-standing interest in global education and,
between 2002-2005 co-led study visit courses for experienced teachers to West
Africa. Since taking up her current post in the University of Exeter, 2006, she has
researched global educational partnerships and intercultural learning. Between
October 2009 and January 2013 she was principal investigator for a research
council funded project on Global Partnerships as Sites for Mutual Learning:
teachers’ professional development through study visits.
Graham Pike (graham.pike@viu.ca) is Dean of International Education at

Vancouver Island University, where he has responsibility for VIU’s international
programs and services for 2000 international students. His previous positions
include Dean of Education at the University of Prince Edward Island and Co-
Director of the International Institute for Global Education at the University of
Toronto. He has worked as an education consultant in more than 20 countries and
directed many projects in environmental education, global education and human
rights education, in partnership with UN agencies, non-governmental
organizations, business corporations, and charitable foundations. He has written
extensively on global and international education, including ten books for teachers
and teacher educators; his books have been translated into eight languages. He is
the 2006 winner of the Award for Innovation in International Education, given by
the Canadian Bureau for International Education.
Fatima Pirbhai-Illich, PhD (fatima.pirbhai-illich@uregina.ca) works in Language

and Literacy Education at the University of Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada. Fatima
has taught initial and in-service teachers in various parts of the world including at
the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, US; Australian Catholic University in
Sydney, Australia; University of Waikato in Hamilton, New Zealand; University of
Central Asia in Tajikistan; Nanyang Technological University, National Institute of
Education in Singapore; the Riyadh Al-Kharj Military Hospital in Riyadh, Saudi
Arabia; and the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. She has
worked in tertiary level teacher education for over 15 years and her community-
based interest and research focuses on critical multicultural literacy education for
marginalized and disenfranchised youth. Currently, she is the President of the
International Chapter for the National Association for Multicultural Education
(NAME).
226
Murray Print, PhD (murray.print@sydney.edu.au) is recognized internationally as

a leader in Civics and Citizenship Education. He has directed many research
projects in civics and democratic education including Values, Policy and Civics
Education in the Asia-Pacific Region, the first phase of the IEA CivEd Study; and
most recently a major ARC-funded project on youth participation in democracy.
Professor Print has played a key role in stimulating citizenship education in many
countries and recently led the development of the Civics and Citizenship
Curriculum for the Australian Curriculum.
Ruth Reynolds, PhD (ruth.reynolds@newcastle.edu.au) is leader of the Global

Education Research and Teaching centre at School of Education at the University
of Newcastle in Australia. She is past President of the Social Educators Association
of Australia; author of 18 books for researchers, teacher education students and
school teachers; is editor of the International Assembly Journal of International
Social Studies; and was the recipient of a tertiary Australian citation for
Outstanding Teaching and Learning. Her latest book for Oxford University Press is
Teaching Humanities and Social Sciences in Primary school.
Patrick T. Sibaya, D.Ed (SibayaP@unizulu.ac.za), University of Stellenbosch,

South Africa (SA), was formerly Deputy Vice Chancellor, now retired from that
position and is currently Senior Research Professor at the University of Zululand
(SA); and past president of the Psychological Association of South Africa
(PSYSSA); registered Educational, Counselling and Research Psychologist with
The Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA). He can be reached at
SibayaP@unizulu.ac.za.
Toh Swee-Hin (S.H. Toh) (tohsweehin@yahoo.com.au) of the UN-mandated

University for Peace in Costa Rica, Toh was also the founding Director of the
Multi-Faith Centre of Griffith University in Australia. Born in Malaysia, he has
taught in universities in Australia and Canada in the fields of
international/intercultural education, peace education and global education. Prof.
Toh has been extensively involved since the 70s in education, research and action
for a culture of peace, human rights, local/global justice, multiculturalism,
sustainability and interfaith dialogue in both North and South contexts. He has
contributed to several international networks and organizations including
UNESCO, the International Institute on Peace Education, World Council for
Curriculum & Instruction, the UNESCO-affiliated Asia-Pacific Centre of
Education for International Understanding, Parliament of the World’s Religions
and Religions for Peace. In 2000, he was awarded the UNESCO Prize for Peace
Education.
227
EDITORIAL COMMITTEE BIOGRAPHIES
Many thanks for the support of our editorial committee who helped us review and
clarify key issues in this text.
Peter Brett (University of Tasmania, Australia) is a lecturer in Humanities and

Social Sciences education and the Bachelor of Education (Primary) course co-
ordinator. He is on the steering committee of the Social and Citizenship Education
Association of Australia and is currently the co-editor of the association's
professional and academic journal, The Social Educator.
Julie Dyer (Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia) is a senior lecturer in

Humanities and curriculum education in the Faculty of Arts and Education. She
was awarded the Faculty of Arts and Education Teaching Award for the Innovative
Intercultural Curriculum Project, Learning across Latitudes.
Janine Forbes-Rolfe (Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne,

Australia) is currently the Master of Teaching (Primary) coordinator. She has an
outstanding background as a freelance curriculum writer she has worked for a
range of organisations including Education Services Australia, Australian
Children’s Television Foundation and Australian Curriculum Assessment and
Reporting Authority.
Deborah Henderson (Queensland University of Technology, Australia) has a

background in History and Social Sciences Curricula with a passionate
commitment to citizenship education. Her research interests include developing
intercultural understanding, Asia Literacy and values education in the curriculum
and she has published extensively on globalisation, history curriculum, Asia
literacy and pre-service teacher education.
Carolyn O’Mahony (University of Rochester, Michigan) teaches social studies

methods courses to undergraduates and graduate courses in comparative education
and international-mindedness in Oakland University’s International Baccalaureate
Faculty Development Program. She has research interests in elementary social
studies curriculum and instruction. Currently she serves as President of the
International Assembly of the National Council for the Social Studies. She can be
contacted at omahony@oakland.edu.
Heather Sharp (The University of Newcastle; Australia) is convenor of the

History Network for Teachers and Researchers (HNTR); and an Associate Editor
of Historical Encounters. Heather’s research has included analysis of the
representations of Indigenous Australians and British heritages in History
textbooks; and more recently, the exploration of competing representations of
Gallipoli in Australian and Turkish history textbooks.
229

Seven Practices

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Seven Practices

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Contesting and Constructing International Perspectives in

ISBN 978-94-6209-987-6 (paperback)

Published by: Sense Publishers,

Printed on acid-free paper

All rights reserved © 2015 Sense Publishers

Introduction: Interpreting Global Education 1

Section 1: Temporal and Spatial Views of Global Education

1. Re-Imagining Global Education in the Neoliberal Age:

2. One Size Fits All? Global Education for Different Educational

3. Global Perspectives on Global Citizenship 43

Section 2: Telling National Stories of Global Education

4. The Significance of Schooling, Teaching and Education: A South

5. Educating Diverse Teachers in a Diverse Country: An Issue

6. The Neglect of Politics and Power Analysis in Development

7. The Implications for Secondary Teacher Training of Large-scale

Section 3: Empowering Citizens for Global Education

8. Democratising Schools 107

9. Where’s the Action in Global Education? Employing Global

10. Teaching with a Values Stance for Global Citizenship: Integrating

Section 4: Deconstructing Global Education

11. Service Learning as Post-colonial Discourse: Active Global

12. Going Global 151

Section 5: Transforming Curricula for Global Education

14. The Digital Studio as a Global Education Site: Imaging to Examine

15. A Global Citizenship Perspective through a School Curriculum 187

16. It Takes a Global Village: Re-conceptualising Global Education

17. Educating for Global and Local Peace: Emerging Visions,

Authors’ Biographies 223

Editorial Committee Biographies 229

R. Reynolds et al. (Eds.), Contesting and Constructing International Perspectives in

Key themes and ideas

aspects of global citizenship in development education could be seen as

intercultural understanding and personal inner peaceful mindfulness. The

TEMPORAL AND SPATIAL VIEWS

1. RE-IMAGINING GLOBAL EDUCATION IN THE

In this chapter, I want to explore the lasting impact of neoliberalism on the

GLOBAL EDUCATION AND INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION:

R. Reynolds et al. (Eds.), Contesting and Constructing International Perspectives in

THE IMPACTS OF NEOLIBERALISM

commercialisation of education that views learning as a product to be acquired,

Innovative projects undertaken in collaboration with teachers’ unions, including

country or, in many cases, as a bridge to obtaining permanent residence in a more

RE-IMAGINING GLOBAL EDUCATION: THE NEED FOR

interconnectedness of all peoples and environments and to appreciate the full

MAPPING THE MOTIVATIONS FOR GLOBAL AND INTERNATIONAL

Quadrant 2: Shared Prosperity Quadrant 4: Global Community

– Strengthening – International research collaboration

Quadrant 1: Sustained Elitism Quadrant 3: Targeted Internationalism

– Recruiting fee-paying international – Study abroad opportunities for

incrementally but inexorably towards a higher concentration of activity in

Government of Canada. (2014). Canada’s international education strategy. Retrieved from

2. ONE SIZE FITS ALL? GLOBAL EDUCATION FOR

R. Reynolds et al. (Eds.), Contesting and Constructing International Perspectives in

understanding of the complexity of global issues, promote dialogue and

opportunities for rich and deep explorations on a range of topics relevant to

SCHOOL BASED APPROACHES TO GLOBAL EDUCATION: SCHOOL TEACHERS

intercultural awareness and to implement culturally relevant pedagogy in the

SCHOOL BASED APPROACHES TO GLOBAL EDUCATION: THE CLASSROOM

relevant or culturally responsive pedagogy (Morrison, Robbins, & Rose, 2008;

TEACHER EDUCATION AND GLOBAL EDUCATION

GENERAL TERTIARY EDUCATION

abroad have an obvious impact on students’ cognitive, affective, and behavioural

education increasingly appears to be about assisting students to be global players in

Subedi, B. (2010). Critical global perspectives. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.