Global citizenship education: A new ‘moral pedagogy’ for the 21st century?

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 506-524
Author(s):  
Sara Franch

In the past two decades global citizenship education (GCE) has become established in national and international education policy. This article focuses on the emergence of GCE in the educational discourse of the Province of Trento in northern Italy and outlines how policymakers and teachers construct GCE as a pedagogical framework for schooling in the 21st century. Combining the perspectives that emerge from the scholarly literature with the findings of a qualitative study based on Constructivist and Informed Grounded Theory, the article proposes a typology of GCE ideal-types. The typology illustrates two ‘mainstream ideal-types’ of GCE (neo-liberal human capitalism and cosmopolitan humanism) and two ‘critical ideal-types’ (social-justice activism and critical counter practice). In the province studied, the dominant perspective is cosmopolitan humanism. GCE is essentially conceptualised as a ‘new moral pedagogy’ that reflects adherence and commitment to a universal moral structure based on humanistic cosmopolitan values. The author believes that critical GCE perspectives in line with social-justice activism and critical counter practice should find expression in both policies, curricula and practices. However, this is recognised as a challenge which could be partially addressed through teacher education and an alliance between academia and practice.

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eleanor J Brown

This article engages with debates about transformative learning and social change, exploring practitioner perspectives on non-formal education activities run by non-governmental organisations. The research looked at how global citizenship education practitioners met their organisation’s goals of change for social justice through educational activities. This education is sometimes criticised for promoting small individual changes in behaviour, which do not ultimately lead to the social justice to which it pertains to aim. Findings suggest that this non-formal education aims to provide information from different perspectives and generate critical reflection, often resulting in shifts in attitudes and behaviour. While the focus is often on small actions, non-formal spaces opened up by such education allow for networks to develop, which are key for more collective action and making links to social movements. Although this was rarely the focus of these organisations, it was these steps, often resulting from reflection as a group on personal actions, which carried potentially for social change.


Societies ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 91
Author(s):  
Maayke de Vries

Global citizenship is a popular concept that was fully embraced by UNESCO in 2015 with a framework for Global Citizenship Education (GCE). This pedagogical guidance can be characterized as transformative since it aims to foster reflective citizens who contribute to building a more inclusive, just, and peaceful world. Thus, GCE allows educators to take a critical approach to their teaching, hereby articulating a clear social justice orientation towards citizenship education. However, recent studies indicate that most interpretations and thus implementations of GCE do not translate into a social action approach. Therefore, this article conceptualizes an intersectional approach to GCE, to make a critical approach of GCE more likely by practitioners. Intersectionality was developed by Black feminists in the US, to highlight structural oppressions and privileges on the basis of analytical categories. Intersectionality, furthermore, allows for opportunities to recognize resilience and resistance in marginalized communities. Therefore, an intersectional approach to GCE would develop sensibilities among students to understand global structures of oppression and domination on the basis of analytical categories like race, gender, and class. This knowledge would lead to an awareness of one’s own complicity and shared responsibility, resulting in deliberations and eventually political actions. The overall aim is to provide practitioners with a concrete suggestion of a critical interpretation of GCE, to show its potential as a social justice-orientated framework for educators in especially continental Europe.


2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 169-184
Author(s):  
Suraiya Hameed

PurposeThis paper reports a qualitative research study of comparative analysis of global citizenship education (GCE) in two primary schools, one international school in Singapore (Stamford International) and an independent school in Australia (Coastal College). The research focussed on how these two schools implemented GCE through the adoption of international education models, utilising the International Primary Curriculum (IPC) or the International Baccalaureate Programme (IB), creating hybrid curricula. Central to this research is the examination of educational practices, which address global citizenship education in each of the two schools.Design/methodology/approachQualitative data from interview transcripts, document analysis, website analysis as well as field notes were analysed both inductively and deductively, teasing out the key themes from interviews, various documents such as policy papers, curriculum materials, syllabuses, the websites and other forms of documents that shed more light on the issues presented. The analysis of each case study began with a brief overview of the global citizenship education policies in the two schools and of their international curricula models, followed by a separate interpretation and juxtaposition of interview data (Phillips and Schweisfurth, 2014).FindingsThe key focus is examining the interplay between the global and national, which both schools have acknowledged in their design of the curricula. It is integral to note that globalization differs within different communities around the world with a unique and multifaceted interplay of global and national factors termed as a “global-local nexus”. A key overarching finding relates to the tensions between educational domains and neo-liberal market rationales, which had affected the schools' decisions in curricula and GCE enactment within both schools. Despite their commitment to GCE ideals, schools were mindful about being distinctive and remaining competitive within their educational markets.Research limitations/implicationsIn the study, the ideas of hybridity and “mixture and fusion” of curricula elements to generate new practices in local contexts against global influences have been explored. These ideas form the key features of the curriculum design in both schools and of the contexts in which the schools were situated. Even though the selected case study schools were international and independent and were not expected to fully adhere to government guidelines from their respective country’s policies, they were staged against these policies, which in turn influenced the curriculum initiatives and pedagogical approaches of these schools. Thus studying the landscape in which these two schools are situated provided a better understanding of the various influences – geo-political, formal policy, school-specific factors – which contributed to the knowledge base of global citizenship education studies for multi-ethnic nations such as Singapore and Australia.Practical implicationsAs more national school systems embrace diversity, an international education approach has been adopted. This study affirms the idea proposed by Hayden, Thompson and Bunnell (2016), that the use of “international” is less relevant in categorising schools that seek to embrace GCE. It is more appropriate to use “cosmopolitan,” as proposed by Rizvi (2008), where the focus is more broadly on acquiring knowledge about cultural trajectories and social identities and reinforcing the idea of global connectivity as is evident in both case study schools. The focus is on understanding and acting on local issues within the “broader context of the global shifts that are reshaping the very nature of localities” (Rizvi, 2008, p. 21). One of the key things to note is that the global and international approaches are seldom enacted in their pure form. Schools that have adopted international education are usually unique and heterogeneous in nature, and what they have done is very much dependent on their histories, their geographical locations and the economic and political statuses. This is evident in both case study schools.Social implicationsThis study has added to the existing literature by providing a rich comparative investigation of global citizenship education in two countries, Australia and Singapore. The research provided the opportunity to study different models of internationally minded schools, with similar GCE ambitions. As the study explored two types of schools in two different countries, there is no claim of generalisability of findings to all the schools in these two countries. However, educators and researchers who are interested in this field could reflect on the themes that have emerged from this study and make an informed decision on the possible transferability to their own contexts.Originality/valueBesides its contribution to existing literature, the study has also shown that for effective integration of GCE in schools, either in a national or international education system, it is necessary for a comprehensive understanding of the GCE principles. The results drawn from the study indicate that the ambiguity of the concept of GCE can result in different interpretations by school leaders, teachers and students, thus affecting its enactment in schools. In order to better understand and apply GCE, an effective conceptual model would provide a critical understanding of the multi-faceted nature of global citizenship education. A critical GCE requires schools to reflect on the entire curriculum, ensuring a seamless integration of GCE into curricula and practices.


Author(s):  
Marcella Milana ◽  
Massimiliano Tarozzi

This article provides a conceptual analysis of the two domains of global citizenship education and adult education and learning, along with their similarities and differences. It begins by unpacking the ambiguous and contested concept of global citizenship education and proposing a critical vision of it, within a global social justice framework. Against this backdrop, the article argues for re-conceptualizing adult education and learning as global citizenship education, instead of considering the latter to be one of the key issues of the former. Their structural link is grounded in their common epistemological nature. The domains are interlocked to the extent that both (1) promote active citizenship skills, (2) strive towards equality and social justice on a global level and (3) adopt a values-based approach and promote transformative learning. In conclusion, an original ‘Four-dimensions approach to adult education and learning as global citizenship education’ conceptual model is advanced potentially to inform policymakers, practitioners and researchers. The model is made up of four basic components of adult education and learning as global citizenship education, namely: aims and scope (what for), contents and skills (what), processes and pedagogies (how), actors and learning environments (who).


2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 537-552
Author(s):  
Yuqing Hou

Abstract Over the past two decades, a wide range of research literature emerged in the field of Comparative and International Education (cie) engaging in comparing Global Citizenship Education between nations. However, there is scant analysis that explores the research trends and findings in those comparative inquiries focusing on the theorizing and implementation of gce in different national contexts. Through a systematic review of 12 research papers drawing from major cie journals and relevant databases, the current inquiry will assist the international community of cie in understanding the contribution and limitation of this important body of research, and its implications for future comparative studies on gce. The analysis shows that the comparison reference in the existing literature on comparative gce tends to be curriculum documents and frameworks while underrating the experiences and perceptions of individuals involved in the teaching and learning process. Moreover, the national settings where the comparative inquiries of gce were conducted are highly limited in scope, mostly the developed countries in West Europe, East Asia, or North America. This trend limits the possibility to decolonize and transform cie scholarship, which could be reversed with inclusion of new and diverse perspectives and knowledge in future gce research.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document